PDA

View Full Version : Economics is Fun, Part 19: Globalization



Chris
03-31-2012, 07:27 PM
It's always been global.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shepp7De_4o&list=PL06A6035D1EAF3D0E&index=19&feature=plpp_video

MMC
03-31-2012, 07:49 PM
What are the some of the dedriments of globalization? Chris did you see those guys the Prophets of Doom where that one guy was saying that maybe we need to come back to the community around us and not strive for the globalization. Taking out the need for transportation all across the country. I am sure he was talking about moreso for food products and supply. With the support of local markets and farmers rather than driving them out in order to make room for more people to live next to each other or on top of one another.

Chris
03-31-2012, 08:02 PM
I think there's two meanings to globalization. One is what the video is about, a broad meaning having the do with exchange and trade of goods and services which really knows no boundaries, much as governments try to manage it. The other meaning is more contemporary and narrow, having to do with outsourcing and businesses moving overseas and so on. The latter is detrimental to the job market of course and to government revenue (arguably a good thing). But what is causing that? Is it not government regulations and taxes? Studies like the Index of Economic Freedom show companies look to those countries who offer tax havens, and not surprisingly, those countries' revenues go up. One other detrimental aspect to outsourcing and moving offshore or overseas it is leave America high and dry defensively, you can't fight a major war without the industry to build the machines of war. I don't have a ready argument on this front other than globalization, of the broader meaning, tends to bring about prosperity and with it peace.

MMC
03-31-2012, 08:05 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSpLUpiMkj0&feature=results_video&playnext =1&list=PL3740C9EEAECE3374

Here ya go Chris. I tried to find it broken down into segments but they didnt have listed that way. So you can take your time watching it in whatever segments you like. It's been awhile since i saw it. But the part on what I am talking about is in there at the end starting at the 1:10 mark on the solution of relocalization and decentralization. Also the beginning is on starting with the Economy.

Chris
03-31-2012, 09:06 PM
I recall seeing part of that. Those guys sound to me like climate change alarmists, peak oil alarmists, etc. What I see us on the verge of in terms of collapsing is popping the government bubble, that I don't think we can continue to sustain, as we're seeing in Europe. I include in that crony capitalism, the collusion of big government and big government. So in that sense I see relocalization and decentralization as solutions.

Peter1469
03-31-2012, 10:01 PM
The video forgot to mention how to deal with other nations that subsidies their exports to the US. That sort of f's up the free market. Tariffs are the logical answer. Even the playing field so that a free market can exist.

Chris
04-01-2012, 12:36 AM
"That sort of f's up the free market."

It does. So what's our recourse, to f it up some more?

And who does their f'ing it up harm? Why only their own citizens who are the ones paying for the subsidies through taxes, all the while we get cheaper products. Why should we do that to ourselves?

Peter1469
04-01-2012, 12:44 AM
"That sort of f's up the free market."

It does. So what's our recourse, to f it up some more?

And who does their f'ing it up harm? Why only their own citizens who are the ones paying for the subsidies through taxes, all the while we get cheaper products. Why should we do that to ourselves?

You protect your own industry with tariffs.

Chris
04-01-2012, 12:52 PM
The US doesn't own any business, well, except a few banks and Government Motors.

Peter1469
04-01-2012, 01:41 PM
And China does own businesses. They subsidies them so that they can sell the same thing American companies sell but at a much lower price. That isn't free trade.

Chris
04-01-2012, 02:50 PM
Source for China owning business, please.

And so we should do the same? To repeat, so what's our recourse, to f it up some more? And who does their f'ing it up harm? Why only their own citizens who are the ones paying for the subsidies through taxes, all the while we get cheaper products. Why should we do that to ourselves?

Peter1469
04-01-2012, 03:32 PM
http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Reassessing_Chinas_state-owned_enterprises_2149

It isn't the state ownership that causes the problem. It is the flooding of our markets with goods that have artificially low prices. And no we don't respond in kind. We do what I said earlier. Use tariffs to even the playing field. We do that to ensure that our people don't lose jobs to the Chinese and to give Americans the chance to buy American and let our money benefit our companies.

Chris
04-01-2012, 03:50 PM
Peter, your source says "Both views, however, fail to recognize that as the Chinese economy evolves, it is no longer so easy or desirable to pigeonhole state-owned enterprises. The line between them and private-sector companies has blurred considerably."

And if "It isn't the state ownership that causes the problem" then why raise it?

"It is the flooding of our markets with goods that have artificially low prices." To our gain and their loss as I explained earlier.

"And no we don't respond in kind. We do what I said earlier. Use tariffs to even the playing field." That's responding in kind, harming only US consumers who must pay more for those goods and services, and in addition allows US companies to raise their prices and make consumers pay more as well.

Economics is global, not national.

Peter1469
04-01-2012, 03:56 PM
I disagree with you. And I think that the American voters do as well.

Chris
04-01-2012, 07:20 PM
That's not an argument but an appeal to popularity.

Peter1469
04-01-2012, 08:31 PM
I know that. I wasn't attempting to craft an argument. We both have made our positions clear and I don't think that either of us plan on changing our minds any time soon.