 |
| |
|
|
shawnmmcc
|
|
Maybe somebody should listen to UR. "Free markets" are a myth, an ideal if you grant that premise. THERE ARE NO FREE MARKETS IN THE WORLD. Freeing up immigration to "relieve wage pressures" if you do not leave businesses in a similar state will create an unequal power dynamic, resulting in artificially lower salaries while the businesses themselves to not suffer any kind of similar reduction in their economic well-beingas a result of the free markets.
One of the reasons the US is doing so poorly on the Global Marketplace is due to the fantasy of free markets. I stopped believing in free markets in the 1980's, when the Japanese refused to buy 80 or so F16's from the US and instead insisted on technology transfer and domestic manufacturing. Note, under the so-called Free Markets - Japan wanted a product, the US made the best one in the world for the price and capabilities, and Japan had the money to purchase it from it's asymetric trade with the US.
At the time the US trade deficit with Japan would have paid for all the aircraft in one, at most two months. We finally had a quality product they wanted, and the trade balance was heavily in their favor. For a contextual note, at the time even French aerospace experts would admit, off the record, the F16 was the best military aviation bargain in the world, given cost and capabilities.
Similiar disparaties continue today. Whether it is Chinese currency manipulation and interest free loans to businesses, European government interventions in Aerospace (Eurocopter and Airbus) with massive subsidies, both direct and indirect, and US and European agricultural subsidies - there are no free markets.
Now some markets in some goods are largely free. But to talk about sticking labor into a world wide free market, while businesses get their various government interventions, is absurd. One is talking about such a massively asymetric power relationship as to produce - the US job market. 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Seeker
|
 |
London Ontario
Jan 1970
time: 00:20
|
|
Since these are liberal wet dreams, I had assumed the government interventions were being kept down?
Japan under the MITI regime (sort of corporatist thing where everyone was hand in glove) was NOT the liberal land of milk and honey in its (actual not just said)policies.
So I would share your outrage about people talking the liberal talk but not walking the walk....kinda how canadians feel about many US trade policies....'free trade' is 'whatever benefits us now short term'. But the solution is not more protectionism but more liberalization.*
Also, I differ from Imran and most people in that I see trade, labour, legal, and currency harmonization and liberalization as a necessary part of greater political harmonization and supra-nationalism.
It's got to be a TOTAL package: regs, labour, goods, and even policy in general or one of the out of balance portions of the equation will irritate the other portions.
If you don't have the death of the nation-state as sovereign as your end goal, then you are not really interested in creating wealth and creating REAL equality of opportunity (over the long-term).
PA:
umm....I think I might be dumb....but all I'm seeing are red herrings. What exactly are you on about??
*note: I'm not totally rabid here, I'd agree that we have seen plenty of historical examples of temporary protectionist policy regimes serving as an 'incubator' for 'native industries'....but that doesn't change the fact that the long-term goal of even an 'incubated' (babied?) company/industry/region should be level competition in the open market as soon as possible. How soon is a matter for 'smart people' to decide.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lawrence of Arabia
|
 |
of the Gulag Archipelago
Apr 2001
time: 06:20
|
|
quote:
Third world countries actually invest too much in (tertiary) education they would get far better economic returns by plouging the cash wasted subsidising on the politically influential urban elite's children through university into primary and seconday education for the rural poor (women especially).
But PA's argument speaks to the contradiction at the heart of the Nation State.
The nation state originally came into existance due to the pressures to provide property rights and rule of law - however as it does this only over a specific geographic area then it is becoming increasingly hard to reconcile the sovereignty of the nation-state with the desire of it's citizens to have freedom of trade globally. |
yes, this is correct. Nancy Birsdsall and Psacharopoulous both argue that giving woman at least four years of education decreases family size, increases efficieny, reduces child labor, and reduces children born as 'insurance policy'
furthermore, you can compare how education in East Asia and Latin American differed, and how their growth rates were different. East Asia concentrated the majority of their budget on primary and secondary education, while LA spent a large percent of theirs (24%) on tertiary, which has very little returns to society, and very large returns to the individual.
East Asia has been closing the gap with the first world, LA has stagnated, with growth rates close to 0.0%.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:20.
Apolyton Time is 00:20. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
15-05-2005 02:08
|