Hi Kieth:
I took the time to look up the word "free". Contrary to my previously held
view, and in the light of the new definition, which is exclusive and not
inclusive, I am not in favour of "free" Trade. 

[Freedom =
The Old English root of the word "free" is "freo," a word that brings out
the communal basis of liberty very clearly. It means dear, chosen, fully
accepted within the circle. Its Germanic and Celtic sense reflects its use
as the distinctive epithet of those members of the household who were
connected by ties of kindred (i.e. not slaves or bondsmen or women).]

"Free" trade therefore is for the benefit of, not of all, but of the elect.
I oppose that!

Unfortunately, the modern definition more closely equates with anarchy.
Another good word gone down the drain. 

I have found that those who advocarte the "free" market system also have in
mind something akin to allowing the law of the jungle rule. 

Experience has shown that competition only works when there is a surplus.
With the advent of "supply management", there is no longer a meaningful
surplus in the market, except when used as flooding the market to drive out
competition. 

Regards
Ed G

==========================

Kieth said:
"Free trade is absolutely basic to human nature and human beings. Early man
could not have migrated to the furthest ends of the earth and into the most
inhospitable habitats lacking some basic resourcess unless he had also
established trade ties with the locality he was migrating from. It's really
as simple as that." 




Reply via email to