Alan said 'The point about free trade is that it provides the cheapest goods and services to the consumer. This may entail importing from countries that follow practices that we ourselves reject'.

I am sorry Alan, but time will show (I hope) why Western societies are not going to accept such sentiment about accepting our demise to many other nations with far different values and economic approaches.

As i have said previously, protection from the West will increase; it already has.

I think the IPA would be better off producing articles that can support freer trade, yet also address some of the realities undermining free trade (including the reality that the West will never compete with China based on current policy trends). That is why the EU is increasingly protectionist against China, notwithstanding it sown problems (debt

What a stupid comment Chris Lewis. Why don't you try to understand what you are trying to say before commenting?

David L,

I have been thinking about free trade issues for a while (difficult issue), but you may be right, i could be stupid.

Frankly can hardly believe such rot, you must live on another planet, OK for our industries to be put out of business when we need to compete with child labour, or workplace standards lower than ours, sure we can look after our society with princpals and standards but just let those who don't have any come on in...that sounds like the same old argument used to push free markets into china when they were forced to take cocane "because free markets require it" No logic at all mate, your in the wrong place, history has passed you....Nev...I thnk about 95% of us are stupid...China is Mercantilist at this time, we are stupid if we can not see it... Nev

You can not force people to by australian, unless they do it on their own accord, nothing will change.

What a convoluted article - hardly worth responding, but it is so obtuse I have to try.

Firstly, to take advantage of cheap imports you have to have cash, and that means income, a job, discretionary finances, and sufficient national GDP to ensure effective essential services. The prerequisites rely on a vibrant economy, and thus on competitive industry and production.

How does one ensure competitive industry and production in this level playing field anti-protectionist world? By working smarter, optimising natural advantage and resources, and exploiting niche markets - hence, by "specialising", value-adding as far as economically feasible, and developing mutually advantageous reciprocal trade agreements.

Have we been working smarter? Making mutually advantageous trade agreements? Not sufficiently, or our trade balance would be substantially better - and if it were not for mining exports our trade balance would be in a parlous state indeed.

Can Oz go on, business as usual, until the mining boom collapses? Maybe, in the short term - but what then?

Oz needs development in resource optimising, and this means private and public investment on an on-going basis. Protectionism has been, and is still being used in various countries to enable the development of competitive industry and to facilitate beneficial terms of trade. Has Oz followed this trend, or have we taken our eye off the ball? What ball!

To consolidate the future for Oz it is essential that our governments take advantage of the mining boom and our current agricultural competitiveness to invest in new industry, new value-adding, and a new economic vision. What do we get instead? A Carbon Tax which will benefit no-one, down-scaling of Qantas' on-shore employment, and a collapse of steel production.

So many jobs have gone off-shore, and many more looming. When are we going to wake up and demand that our governments start investing in our productivity future? School halls we didn't want or need, home insulation mangled, solar development shafted, submarine and ship manufacture submerged, and roads, public education and health services sub-standard.

Free trade? It is costing us a fortune.