The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Free trade: offering the best value to consumers and producers > Comments

Free trade: offering the best value to consumers and producers : Comments

By Alan Moran, published 16/9/2011

There is no example of a developed country increasing its relative success while de-liberalising its import markets.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. All
I look forward to your article Chris, but I wish there was more media attention given to this looming impasse that mainstream economists refuse to recognise, there being for them no constraints and nothing that market-driven innovation cannot overcome, not even physical limits--presumably we'll just build another planet!
Such talk falls on the deaf ears of economists, but even academics, intellectuals, religious leaders and the media in general refuse to broach the subject. "It's academic", they say tacitly, "since this is our immutable reality", and the populace goes along with them, it being left to the "lunatic fringe"--environmentalists, maverick scientists and sundry "eccentrics" to flail there arms about or retreat into cynicism, thence to be ridiculed as hand-wringers and alarmists.
Yet since no one can plausibly deny the reality of our already severely degraded physical limits (though the Matt Ridley's of the world are agog with indifferent optimism), or that we are rapidly approaching them, it is in fact the obverse that is academic: whether we support free markets or protectionism and welfare. Same deal. Of course few on either side is objective about micro or macro economic reform, but supports whichever system suits their perceived best interests and ideological persuasion; but it's academic in any case since both are predicated on constant economic growth and must hit the wall.
By continuing to ignore that wall in favour endless ideological debate that is academic (while the neoliberal trend continues unabated), both sides are guilty of propagating popular ignorance, along with their own educated ignorance, and maintaining the status quo and our doomed materialism.
Posted by Squeers, Saturday, 17 September 2011 10:02:26 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Squeers, I agree with much of what you say.

However, you may also be disappointed with my argument, given the heavy emphasis i place on national economic interest.

Nevertheless, one of the points i will raise about the rise of China is the model it applies, much less tolerant of national and international environmental considerations given its own needs, its mercantile approach, and lack of regard for an open pluralist society where power is more dispersed.

While my argument is not intended to save the world, obviously because economic growth is also a near obsession for Western societies, I am concerned that we (Western and other societies) will move further away from a more balanced policy mix. We are now seeing an almost laughable reliance on mining, including searching for gas in our cities.
Posted by Chris Lewis, Saturday, 17 September 2011 11:19:28 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
China is certainly the elephant in the room, politically as well as economically (India's more a Rhino, a much less shrewd beast), and I suspect the Cold War is alive and well, having morphed into an economic war of attrition. Given that the realist paradigm I'm critical of, that the West has successfully made uncontested and global, does seem irretrievably bent on playing itself out to the bitter end, attrition would seem to be the only strategy for an opposing ideology to follow. If you can't beat 'em join 'em. Help to bring on the global catastrophe and beat them at their own game. Indeed, 'tis probably better for the environment that the inevitable collapse is sooner rather than later, and for China that "it" is in the best shape to take over in the aftermath. China has a track record of long campaigns, and throwing the sheer weight of numbers at what look to most like insurmountable obstacles. Capitalism could well be a temporary detour, for China, on the road to communism. This is of course the US's abiding fear--and I don't think they're paranoid!
I think your argument, if I may pre-empt it, is naive; "open pluralist society" is nothing but patronage to keep the masses in harness, a cohesive ideology starkly contradicted by material and economic reality. Indeed I often marvel at the way social progressives actually think humanist society is the raison d'etre of capitalist materialism. It's not, of course. Economic growth is. All the rest is byproduct--feeding the chooks. And if you think that's nonsense, how do you explain the fact that our enlightened governments are knowingly and enthusiastically growing the human herd beyond any hope of sustainability, or anything other than dying en masse?
Indeed the West is just as ruthless as China could ever be, in its exploitation of boundless human credulity--at least the neoliberals make no such pretence, or pay no more than lip-service to delusion, witness this article. Besides, when crises set-in, the West will be just as authoritarian and cold-blooded, perhaps worse.
We're only the good-guys in our wonderful imaginations.
Posted by Squeers, Saturday, 17 September 2011 12:48:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Squeers, fair enough, but that is probably where will disagree.

I do not deny the West's past, but i do believe the West is the best option for the world; i may be wrong (or naive) but see little to be optimistic from greater influence by any authoritarian nation.
Posted by Chris Lewis, Saturday, 17 September 2011 12:53:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Chris,

But the West is authoritarian in a global sense - or do believe that the IMF and World Bank haven't morphed into henchmen for the global corporate agenda?

China has simply trumped the U.S. at its own game - and cheap Chinese imports are helping to keep the American economy buoyant at present (and even with that, it's struggling to keep its head above water).
Posted by Poirot, Saturday, 17 September 2011 1:11:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This discussion is quite irrelevant, free trade and its stablemate
globalisation are already starting their decline.
Bunker fuel costs which are what oils the wheels of gloabisation are
imposing greater burdens on shipping costs.
The cost is made worse because often the bunker fuel has to be mixed
with diesel to make up the quantity.
Ships designed for 25 knots are running at 15 knots to save fuel.

Anyone who thinks globalisation has a future should read this;

http://www.energybulletin.net/stories/2011-09-16/odac-newsletter-sept-16

This a quote from the linked article;
This in turn poses a terrifying question: Would this higher price
tolerance mean developing economies could keep developed economies in
growthless stagnation by paying oil prices that were just above those
that bring developed economies to an economic halt?
End quote:

Additionally we should stop the purchase of farming land by foreign
companies and governments.
Saudi Arabia has abandoned it plan to grow wheat.
We should take the opportunity to offer wheat in exchange for oil.
That is where international trade is going quite soon.
Posted by Bazz, Saturday, 17 September 2011 1:23:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy