ping
quote “18th Century Economists David Hume and Adam Smith each demonstrated flaws in the economic nationalism advocated by Mercantilists. Hume demonstrated that trade surpluses just cause an inflow of money”
um...
yeah... that’s kind of what we want... an INFLOW of money!
Mercantilism is popular in more than the White House. This article needs to address China.
Economics is not an exact science, and many of the conclusions are made on certain assumptions, which may, or may not, be valid, depending on the circumstances.
Free trade is like true love. If true love means you don’t have to say you’re sorry, then free trade means you don’t have to say you’re sorry (to the millions of your countrymen who lose their livelihoods to globalism).
A lot of folks go to a great deal of effort to compare the merits of Smithsonian Free Trade to Mercantilism.
However, Smithsonian Free Trade has never existed in the entire history of man. Never, not once.
And Mercantilism is universally practiced by all nations, and they always have. At least since the inception of the Nation-State.
I content that any nation that tries to practice Smithsonian free trade is THIS world, will shortly cease to exist.
Bump
To Read Later
Free market economics not only works, but works extremely well.
Communism is an abysmal and exceedingly dangerous failure.
Banks, while being a necessary evil, need to be kept on a short leash.
The natural state of governments is to evolve into monsters.
Dathblow to Mercantilism? Fake?
Mercantilism is alive and well and supported by some FReepers. Mercantilism is the opposition to free trade advocated by Adam Smith.
As with Socialism, no matter how many times it fails, wishful thinking keeps it alive.
1. If you pay people for not working they won’t work.
2. If you extort money earned by Peter to give to lazy Paul, Paul will always demand more and Peter will find ways to give less.
Neither have the Keynesians:
Well. Here’s what I think. There are plenty of theories and plenty of debates on what the ideal economic system should be. The reality of the world and the human beings representing each country involved in trade is far different. No system can survive widespread cheating, official lying and omission, and corruption, especially that aimed at taking down the strongest economic player from inside. If we need to be more authoritarian for a while, so be it.
If you let Big Agriculture import cheap labor, you’ll regret it.
It would be wonderful to have free trade.
It would be wonderful for everyone to love each other.
It would be wonderful to occasionally have a glass of ice in Hell.
The biggest thing we should have learned is that Economics isn’t a real science at all. It is akin to Astrology or reading chicken entrails.
When Paul Krugman is considered a respected economist, you know that it is phoney science.
“Ricardo proved that free trade will make everyone wealthier...”
Well that’s completely proved wrong.
Smith proved that free trade can make all nations wealthier by allowing each nation to specialize in areas of absolute productivity advantage.
Only if the trading partners are peaceful. If one partner develops an advantage in some strategic area, like rare earth minerals, it may spell trouble.
I like it when the goods I buy are less expensive. Taxes make them more expensive.
Economics in One Lesson:
Do what Calvin Coolidge and Ronald Reagan did; don’t do what any other president did.
Marx was a Free Trader, do you want to know why?
What the USA is doing now is rushing headlong towards socialism behind the banner of Free Trade. You couldn't devise a better way to drain wealth from the USA than what we are doing now; with offshoring and so called "Free Trade".