Posted on 12/04/2003 10:00:39 AM PST by Pikamax
I'd be inclined to agree with that, if you were simply making a numerical assessment. But some of the more powerful constituencies in favor of this - and I'm referring to the left end of the spectrum - have longer-term goals in mind. The aforementioned Mr. Moore is an interesting case study. This particular address by him to the WTO Ministerial shows his nature. I recommend reading it if you have the spare time, but here I'll pull out a couple of noteworthy excerpts:
As President Clinton said, globalization is not a policy choice, it's a fact. Globalization is being driven above all by the power of technology - by faster and cheaper transportation, by new communications, by the increasing weightlessness of our economies - the financial services, telecommunications, entertainment, and e-commerce that make up a growing share of global trade....What he's saying here (whether or not he chooses to admit it) is that the purpose of the WTO isn't to knock down trade barriers, since they've already been knocked down, but to "manage" the resultant situation. This of course is after he tells us that the WTO isn't anything like a government. His address is full of contradictions like that. Here's another:The real question we should ask ourselves is whether globalization is best left unfettered - dominated by the strongest and most powerful, the rule of the jungle - or managed by an agreed system of international rules, ratified by sovereign governments.
Those who oppose and protest are not all bad or mad. Many want to improve the WTO. Others want to capture it to reflect their interests - which is a form of flattery I suppose. Most seek honest engagement. The World Wide Fund for Nature - to take just one example - has made several constructive suggestions about improving the interface between trade and the environment. We should listen, reflect, then act.But of course, the WTO "has no intention of becoming a government." Right...
But that's the modus operandi of many of these globocrats: Swear up and down that you're not in favor of world government, and then go right on to describe your plans for world government. That's what makes it so difficult to make a case for many of these characters. If you simply glance over Moore's address, for example, it'll read like anything out of Hayek or Mises: increased trade reduces poverty, it leads to peace between nations, it opens up opportunities as never before - you know the drill. But sandwiched between all these innocent-sounding classical liberal sentiments, in random locations, are these stark contradictions like the ones I pointed out. It'd be like reading a chapter from Milton Friedman and seeing "workers of the world unite!" scribbled in between the lines in very small writing. Rather bizarre, but very effective.
What? Reminds me of an old SNL commercial for a company that makes change for people. When asked how they make a profit doing it, the man replies, "volume". Volume merely multiplies per unit profit, which is what I thought we were talking about. In many cases, increased volume actually raises the price of manufacture, yet customers expect a volume discount. Again we have no connection between cost of production and price. Take a look at overstock.com. Tons of stuff sold at less than the price of manufacture, how is this possible in your world? How about CDs, which were supposed to get cheaper as production costs went down? Still $15 or more. How about blank DVD's? According to your theory, they should cost the same as blank CDs yet they are many times more expensive. The reality is that free trade benefits large corporations and multinationals. Consumers believe they are also beneficiaries because of the availability of cheap goods. But upon further inspection, consumers find they have less money to spend (because their jobs are gone), and the cheaper goods are actually of lesser quality. Zero sum game.
So, you don't support the embargo against Cuba? The government has no right to inspect cargo for weapons, drugs, disease, or illegal immigrants as it comes into the country and charge a reasonable duty? Let's go dig Paine out of his grave and see what he thinks.
The price of autos is actually less expensive now than a decade ago.
I never once said that the cost of manufacture solely determines the price of an object.
In fact, I very clearly said exactly the opposite:
the cost of manufacturing is certainly a factor (though obviously not the only one) in pricing.
You stated that it has zero effect on the cost of an object:
Price is determined by supply and demand. Cost of manufacture has nothing to do with it.
If somebody can't make a profit, based on the amount a good sells over the cost of production, they will not continue to make that product.
Forget advanced economics. You haven't even grasped elementary economics, basic common sense, or even the English language.
BTW, "in my world" the cost of producing a movie or an album is part of the production costs of the tape, CD, or DVD. That's how those fancy actors and movie stars get paid. I don't know how things work in your bizarro world.
*hit, we might as well declare the USA a provernce of France, surrender now to the EU and Red China and get it over with.
I hope the chains of economic slavery don't rest to heavy on the backs of our children and grandchildren who will curse the free traitors who sold them out.
So, you don't support the embargo against Cuba?
'So', you admit you dont have a clue on the difference between an embargo & a tariff?
The government has no right to inspect cargo for weapons, drugs, disease, or illegal immigrants as it comes into the country and charge a reasonable duty? Let's go dig Paine out of his grave and see what he thinks.
Feel free, hotshot.
And next time you post, try to get straight who is taking what position, on which issue. You might avoid looking like a fool.
Neither did I, but I am glad you qualified your statement. Even better would be to requalify everything else you believe that is based on that statement.
In fact, I very clearly said exactly the opposite: the cost of manufacturing is certainly a factor (though obviously not the only one) in pricing.
How much of a factor, care to qualify that statement as well?
You stated that it has zero effect on the cost of an object: Price is determined by supply and demand. Cost of manufacture has nothing to do with it.
Yes, that is what I said, and you can't seem to disprove it.
If somebody can't make a profit, based on the amount a good sells over the cost of production, they will not continue to make that product.
That's how it is supposed to work, yet many companies are willing to do just that in order to gain market share, sometimes even a monopoly. Is this good economics?
Forget advanced economics. You haven't even grasped elementary economics, basic common sense, or even the English language.
BTW, "in my world" the cost of producing a movie or an album is part of the production costs of the tape, CD, or DVD. That's how those fancy actors and movie stars get paid. I don't know how things work in your bizarro world.
Speaking of learning English, go back and read that I said BLANK DVD's.
Are you suggesting that, all things considered, the cost of producing a CD (with music on it) is the same as it was when CD's came out? I'd love to see that statement backed by fact. If the costs associated with producing a CD is fixed, then why don't they get cheaper as they go platinum? Are the greedy record companies not passing on the savings, or is it simply supply and demand?
No, but it sounds like Paine makes no distinction. Why do you?
Feel free, hotshot.
And next time you post, try to get straight who is taking what position, on which issue. You might avoid looking like a fool.
I wasn't having trouble distinguishing between you and Paine, but now I am having trouble understanding why you quoted someone you don't seem to agree with. Or is it Prof Galles you disagree with? You're not taking WillieG's side are you?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.