Keith,
Well said!
The problem for
Bush is that the recession probably was no more than a shake-up in the economy
in which the less productive were thrown out.
We are now
producing as much as we did before but with fewer people. That’s why we
have the unemployment problem.
Of course when
we get rid of the free market and choose a controlled economy, those pockets of
inefficiency tend to build and solidify. So, when the shake-up happens hundreds
and perhaps thousands suffer.
In a free
market situation, a firm doesn’t easily gather fat. A few people here and
a few people there are released, but the firm has a chance to change things for
the better.
That doesn’t
happen in the severe fluctuations of a controlled economy.
Harry
********************************************
Henry George School of Social Science
of Los Angeles
Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042
Tel: 818 352-4141 -- Fax: 818 353-2242
http://haledward.home.comcast.net
********************************************
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Keith Hudson
Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2003
7:16 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW: <toc>-Free Trade Accord at 10:
Growing Pains Are Clear (NYTimes)
Yes, this is the problem (extracted from Tim Weiner below)
<<<<
"However, the gains are so thinly spread across the country that people
don't thank Nafta when they buy a mango or inexpensive auto parts," he
said.
>>>>
This is why it's so difficult to persuade those who seek job protection. The
gains that the rest of the population receive are almost imperceptible even
though, when totalled, they add up to real gains in living
standards/prosperity, call it what you will.
Objections to free trade nearly always take the form of selective anecdotes
about the sufferings (which are real) of particular pockets of people or
industries. However, the overall gain and thus the more flexibility in the
availability of new jobs are never computed or mentioned.
The more that jobs are protected the more motivation there is for somebody
somewhere to make themselves even more efficient to overcome the tariff wall.
And the higher that the walls of protectionism are built up the bigger the
crash will be ultimately be when you can no longer afford to buy your own
domestic goods or services because they're too expensive and inefficient.
KH
