...Cm’on cumudgion; The markets that fail are those that are NOT manipulated. One steel for example, finally given a $100m golden handshake from Julia. What you need to acknowledge is the need for equality in your arguement, is it OK to supress wages?. The wool industry was renowned for tax rorts and peopled with “Pitt Street” farmers (Sir William Gunn) with political connections. Unfortunately for those here that have hope in the industry to project themselves past their accountant, as China produces more of its own wool, it imports less from overseas.

Oh Yabby, Yabby, Yabby

The world is not as neat and tidy as you may think.

Markets rise and fall for many reasons, not just protectionism.

Floods, draught and disease in another country can regularly affect prices for agricultural products in this country.

Most of the time, Brazil converts its sugar cane into ethanol. If they have a bumper year, they dump excess sugar onto the world market, and sugar prices fall. Many mills and cane farmers in this country will not make a profit, perhaps for a number of years.

If Brazil has a draught year, they dump very little sugar onto the world market, and the sugar price increases, and the mills and cane farmers can make a substantial profit.

That’s an example of the uncertainty of commodity markets that few in the cities realise.

They think the world is as neat and tidy as skipping on down to the local shop each morning to buy the milk and have a chat to the store owner about the weather and football results, before skipping on home to make the breakfast, and then feed the cat before catching the train for a day at the office, and maybe a few beers at the pub during lunch hour, and maybe opening that bottle of port tonight while watching a DVD.

@Bugsy: Mark, you are much better on economics. I agree with this perspective on protectionism.

I was thinking the same thing. When Mark writes about an area he knows a bit about, and I find myself thinking he has done a good job. Both those things are rare, yet they happened at the same time. What a coincidence.

Mark Lawson here

rstuart/bugsy - I thank you for complementing the article guys, but you need not worry, I will be back to confront your dearly held beliefs with more reality.. but maybe not for the next few weeks. Not sure on that point.

Diver Dan - your argument verges into incoherence but what I believe you're thinking of is the market boom-bust cycle. Sure, a free market booms and busts - the market goes temporarily out of whack, and it might be a year and more until it corrects. In the great depression, because the Yanks and others stuffed up their banking and protection policies, it took more than four to correct. The idea is to minimise the busts. Getting rid of the market itself by disguising price signals causes failures that are far more damaging. In the long run, its markets by seveal laps of the field.
Sir William Gunn as a Pitt Street farmer? He was nothing of the kind. The 'Sir' may have confused you. The old Imperial titles were handed out to all sorts of people.

Curmudgeon:

...Life is pretty much a “set piece” as opinions go. The point to be made was this; the wool pricing scheme was introduced for why? I say it was introduced to “save” wealthy woolgrowers from themselves and help continue their life of power and influence, fast fading.

... My comparison was with the treatment of the farm workers over a long period that reflected the hypocrisy of their stand by using political clout to supress wages and conditions as historical. Obviously the point you gallantly resisted to the end.

Diver Dan - you need to read the book.

The problem is that what you say in that last post - which is different from the theme of the previous post - is almost entirely beyond the scope of anything I've written, and you have trouble seeing that.. the wool scheme was set up for wool growers large and small, but whether it was at the instigation of the squatocracy is entirely beside the point I was making..

Treatment of farm workers? Not with you at all. If you have something to say about the treatment of farm workers then you should write an article and not drag me into it. Neither the book I reviewed, or my review, says anything about the treatment of farm workers one way or another.