Economic Freedom & Quality of Life

[Chris]

Some videos based on the Fraser Institute's "Annual Economic Freedom of the World Reports".

[Peter1469]

Good videos. Just don't confuse free trade with fair trade. It doesn't do you any good buying cheap Chinese crap that is poisonous to save a few bucks because the Chinese government subsidies its corporations.

[Chris]

I don't, free trade is what conservatives and libertarians seek, fair liberals. Protectionism only harms those it pretends to protect.

[Peter1469]

I don't, free trade is what conservatives and libertarians seek, fair liberals. Protectionism only harms those it pretends to protect.

The first point is not completely true - some conservatives and libertarians realize that free trade is not always fair trade and that government action may be necessary.

Protectionism does not necessarily harm a nation's people. It can even preserve critical industries.

[Chris]

The first point is not completely true - some conservatives and libertarians realize that free trade is not always fair trade and that government action may be necessary.

Protectionism does not necessarily harm a nation's people. It can even preserve critical industries.

I agree there are conservative central planners who believe they can manage the market, we call them neocons, generally, big government cons.

Yes, that is the purpose stated, to protect critical industries, but all that happens is wealth is redistributed from tax payers to what Eisenhower called the military-industrial complex in exchange for power.

[Peter1469]

I agree there are conservative central planners who believe they can manage the market, we call them neocons, generally, big government cons.

Yes, that is the purpose stated, to protect critical industries, but all that happens is wealth is redistributed from tax payers to what Eisenhower called the military-industrial complex in exchange for power.

Incorrect again. And a logical fallacy to boot. Remember, we have nation states. They aren't going away anytime soon.

[RollingWave]

not to meantion, Eisenhower oversaw by far the most progressive tax era in the US, where the upper limit of the Federal income tax was a mind blowing 90%.

Free trade is a great general guide, but there's going to be both public and private power involved that steer it away from it's original intent. subsidies is only one thing, private monopoly and the likes are also a issue.

At the end of the day, IMHO the greatest problem for total effecient market in practice is the impossibility of equal and total information. there is almost always going to be a huge difference in information between the suppliers and buyers, between large and small, between government and private sector . between companies and customors, between rich and poor. that gap can only be closed at the margins and not in total. which leaves very considerable room for certain entities to tip the game considerablly towards their advantage.

[URF8]

The Internal Revenue Code during the Eisenhower administration had high marginal rates, but so many loopholes that the effective rate was much lower.

[Chris]

Incorrect again. And a logical fallacy to boot. Remember, we have nation states. They aren't going away anytime soon.

How incorrect, what logical fallacy, how are nation states relevant to my point?