Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The protectionism the G-20 doesn't want you to know about
ForeignPolicy.com ^ | 04/03/2009 | Donald J. Boudreaux

Posted on 04/04/2009 6:57:06 AM PDT by LowCountryJoe

[Snip]Free trade has another, less appreciated benefit: It frees domestic resources for use in newer, more productive pursuits. Workers, land, steel, fuel, and other resources in the United States that were once used to make, say, shoes and television sets, are today used to design Web sites, to erect cellphone towers, to carry out research in pharmaceutical labs, to perform Lasik surgery, and to do countless other jobs that wouldn't exist if trade were less open.

Trade fuels economic change, precisely what many crisis-wracked countries desperately need. Resources must be reallocated from inefficient activities -- such as the bloated housing market in the United States, or its automaker behemoth -- to more viable pursuits, consistent with consumers' genuine desires and abilities to pay. Inevitably, some producers will go bankrupt while other new industries will soar.

This economic change, however, is rather inconvenient for leaders hoping to "stimulate" the global economy. Economic change is a painful adjustment, and not one that can be completed overnight. "Stimulus" only delays the necessity of undertaking this process. By adding massive amounts of government demand to the demands of consumers, stimulus -- like protectionism -- keeps resources employed in familiar yet wasteful ways. When the government bails out failing industries, sets up home-mortgage subsidies, and props up sagging companies that agree to keep employees on, it prevents those resources from moving to new, more promising sectors. Stimulus, like protectionism, prevents the economy from shedding inappropriate activities and taking on more appropriate ones.

Government stimulus shelters producers from the need to adjust today to the true state of consumer desires. As a result, the future becomes less robust and less prosperous.[snip]

(Excerpt) Read more at experts.foreignpolicy.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: economy; g20; g20summit; obama
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 221-223 next last

1 posted on 04/04/2009 6:57:06 AM PDT by LowCountryJoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: LowCountryJoe
Ya ya ya - ‘splain the 12% unemployment. (Catch ya later I o , I O so off to work I go)
2 posted on 04/04/2009 6:59:04 AM PDT by investigateworld ( Thank you Heavenly Host for Smoot - Hawley-again and again- ( from the Son of a D-Day Infantryman ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: investigateworld
Crowding out from the 'stimuloss', perhaps.

So, does this mean that you generally agree with bailouts and subsidies?

3 posted on 04/04/2009 7:08:07 AM PDT by LowCountryJoe (Do class-warfare and disdain of laissez-faire have their places in today's GOP?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LowCountryJoe
Lots of 'splaining needs to be done:

Recession Named The Reason For Worldwide Slump In Shark Attacks.

4 posted on 04/04/2009 7:10:37 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: LowCountryJoe

Protectionism is long overdue.

We have almost entirely given away the farm.

It’s past time to stop doing that.

AMERICA FIRST.


5 posted on 04/04/2009 7:10:39 AM PDT by Cringing Negativism Network (Palin / Limbaugh 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: investigateworld

Protectionism is the word they use like libtards use the word racism. It should be treated the same way for exactly the same reasons.


6 posted on 04/04/2009 7:11:36 AM PDT by cripplecreek (The poor bastards have us surrounded.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network

I call it self preservationism.


7 posted on 04/04/2009 7:13:32 AM PDT by cripplecreek (The poor bastards have us surrounded.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: LowCountryJoe

The only things we need this protectionism from is the TOTUS and congress.


8 posted on 04/04/2009 7:17:59 AM PDT by bgill (this is my happy face)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LowCountryJoe
Resources must be reallocated from inefficient activities -- such as the bloated housing market in the United States, or its automaker behemoth -- to more viable pursuits, consistent with consumers' genuine desires and abilities to pay.

Mostly nonsense. The bloated housing market was caused by stupid government interference in the market, not by "inefficient activities". And the slow correction and turnaround seems to already be underway.

The "automaker behemoth" was profitable only a couple of years ago, and was paying $2.00 per share dividends. The auto industries current problems are far more a function of gasoline prices that rose from less than $2.00 per gallon to $4.00+ in about a year. Then, that was followed by the financial crisis where most investors saw their holdings decrease in value by 40% or more, and understandably became less interested in major purchases. This 'analyst' also failed to mention that all major auto producers have experienced huge drops in sales and some losses.

This guy is just taking the recent government caused crises and trying to force them to support his narrow view of the US and world economies.

9 posted on 04/04/2009 7:29:11 AM PDT by Will88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Will88
This guy is just taking the recent government caused crises and trying to force them to support his narrow view of the US and world economies.

He's simply pointing out that it's rather ironic that, with the evidence we have of government medding contributing to this problem, your typical protectionist sees the solution to be more government meddling.

10 posted on 04/04/2009 7:31:35 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: LowCountryJoe
The article doesn't make much mention of foreign protectionism costing jobs in what would otherwise be profitable industries here at home.

Seems to follow the standard line - US Protectionism = Bad, Foreign (eg China, Japan, Korea etal) = Good.

11 posted on 04/04/2009 7:35:47 AM PDT by Last Dakotan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LowCountryJoe

They can call it protectionism or anything else, but if we don’t fix our own country first, we can’t fix or help fix other countries. The first thing we need to do is change our Congress, then we can go to work. Get rid of the lifers in Congress. Hold them accountable for what they do.


12 posted on 04/04/2009 7:39:09 AM PDT by RC2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
He's simply pointing out that it's rather ironic that, with the evidence we have of government medding contributing to this problem, your typical protectionist sees the solution to be more government meddling.

He doesn't make the case. Maybe the question is: when should government stop meddling, and what industries seriously damaged by previously government meddling should be saved to prosper in the absence of future government meddling?

And he definitely lives in the same fantasy world as most pretend free traders and pretend free marketers by failing to acknowledge that free trade and free market conditions do not now exist. And they are unlikely to ever exist because so many nations consider the maintenance of certain 'inefficient' industries to be in their national interest, and have not, and will not give up those industries in the name of free trade or free markets.

And the nations that pretend that free markets do exist will always run trade deficits and budget deficits as other, parasitic nations take advantage of the pretenders.

13 posted on 04/04/2009 7:50:56 AM PDT by Will88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Will88

I don’t think you understand the point he is making, frankly. If we want to maintain “inefficient” companies, whether one is named AIG or GM, we shouldn’t fool ourselves into thinking that there isn’t a cost.


14 posted on 04/04/2009 7:54:10 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Will88
And the nations that pretend that free markets do exist will always run trade deficits and budget deficits as other, parasitic nations take advantage of the pretenders.

Politicians spending more money than their government takes in has nothing to do with "free markets," however you choose to conflate the two.

15 posted on 04/04/2009 7:57:34 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network
Protectionism is long overdue.

So, more government interference in the marketplace is long overdue? Got it.

We have almost entirely given away the farm.

I'm an individual and haven't given up any farm that belong to me without getting something back in return. Who is this "we" you speak of. Or is that your inner nativist/collectivist showing through?

AMERICA FIRST.

As long as it is one that still has liberties, sure. I'm on board with that. Something tells me that a USA with economic liberty is something you just will not get onboard with, though. tell me where I'm wrong.

16 posted on 04/04/2009 8:02:20 AM PDT by LowCountryJoe (Do class-warfare and disdain of laissez-faire have their places in today's GOP?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

How about central-planning asshat. You can identify with those words, can you not?


17 posted on 04/04/2009 8:03:42 AM PDT by LowCountryJoe (Do class-warfare and disdain of laissez-faire have their places in today's GOP?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
I call it self preservationism.

If only you truly believed in the soveriegn-self as an entity; we would find some real commonb ground then.

18 posted on 04/04/2009 8:05:14 AM PDT by LowCountryJoe (Do class-warfare and disdain of laissez-faire have their places in today's GOP?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Will88
He's discussing the most recent foray by government into the economy by pointing out bailout, stimuloss, and subsidies.

This guy is just taking the recent government caused crises and trying to force them to support his narrow view of the US and world economies.

You should read the blog that he co-blogs from then you'd be in a better position to see just how 'narrow-minded' he is.

19 posted on 04/04/2009 8:08:12 AM PDT by LowCountryJoe (Do class-warfare and disdain of laissez-faire have their places in today's GOP?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
He's simply pointing out that it's rather ironic that, with the evidence we have of government medding contributing to this problem, your typical protectionist sees the solution to be more government meddling.

Bingo! I'm amazed at the legions of foolish supposedly limited-government 'conservatives' that do not understand this.

20 posted on 04/04/2009 8:09:54 AM PDT by LowCountryJoe (Do class-warfare and disdain of laissez-faire have their places in today's GOP?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 221-223 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson