Re: Economics in SF

On May 12, 1:12 pm, David Johnston <da...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tue, 12 May 2009 08:00:26 +0800, Robert Bannister





<robb...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
lal...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On May 11, 3:11 am, Mark_Reich...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On May 10, 1:12 pm, lal...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

I have become more interested in economics since the start of the
economics crisis.  In the future will we have more regulation of
business and protectionist economies?  I think that free trade is
important for economic growth.
Bubble Growth or Sustainable Growth?  'Free' Trade and ignoring
externalities were some of the contributors to the recent bubble
growth in which profits were/are concentrated into as few hands as
possible and costs were/are shoved onto the people least capable of
paying.  Lather, rinse, repeat until the least have finally paid off
with their lives.

Free trade is not a contributor to the economic crisis.  Economists
have proven that, in theory, free trade is economically beneficial to
all participating nations.  Free trade allows nations to specialize in
what they can best produce at lowest cost.

So why doesn't the USA go in for free trade instead of subsidising its
farmers?

Two reasons.  One is that relying on foreign sources for your food
means that they have a knife to your throat if you have a falling out.

Or at least, you know, enough people rather irrationally believe that
"unsubsidized agriculture" is the same thing as "having a knife to
your throat," as though paying much more for your food than it's
really worth is some enviable position, or no one would grow food in
the US if the price were much reduced, or that one other country would
control all the good, or that international cooperation and dependence
leads to beliigerance, rather than, you know, cooperation and
dependence, such that it's easy for farmers to organize and steal.

The other is that farmers are an identifiable political bloc.

And the amount they steal from any given person is small and goes
largely unnoticed and many of them even buy the bogus argument above,
compared to the large benefit to the thieving farmers who thus have an
incentive to lobby, as well as the sparsely populated agricultural
states are disproportionally represented in the electoral college and
the senate.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT: Electric cars and nuclear power plants
    ... >>>so as to pay for the food. ... Advocates of laissez faire economics and free trade have something ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Inflation? Thats not inflation....
    ... There were two attempts in October 1929 by consortia of leading private ... >> comparing current systems with historic systems why the historic systems ... Economic policy has a huge effect on day to day life and the intuitive understanding that most people have is seriously faulty in certain areas, such as protectionism, a decent grounding in economics would hopefully improve this. ... It is hard enough to convince the public of the benefits of a large regional free trade bloc like the EU or of further freeing large scale international trade through things like the WTO. ...
    (rec.arts.sf.fandom)
  • Re: do we need to nationalise free open source?
    ... attention to the "jobs gained" in other industries. ... The principle of comparative advantage shows that even if a country ... You may also find enlightening the "Economics of free trade": ... free trade leads to economic restructuring. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Economics in SF
    ... Bubble Growth or Sustainable Growth? ... Free trade is not a contributor to the economic crisis. ... enterprise main street economics where most of the growth and jobs are ...
    (rec.arts.sf.written)
  • Re: Economics in SF
    ... economics crisis. ... Bubble Growth or Sustainable Growth? ... Free trade is not a contributor to the economic crisis. ...
    (rec.arts.sf.written)
Loading