Message from @Maximus Edgimus
Discord ID: 485809615876128803
@Matthew John (aka Coastermaker) problem is you'd need a very large group of people to make q difference now
Like for YouTube, there probably won't be any actual competition for a while, it's a monopoly
That is why I mentioned in the last part is "How would you do it if the company is already successfu back then as it is now?" There you go.
@L0GAN foreign companies should have no say in ones government or politics.
@Doctor Anon or the support of sjws...
It's a tool for trade wars
Can't let China win so it is necessary
Too much involvement from the state - interferes with the free market
Yes but what if China wins
We can't let China win
Then they win fair and square through the free market. Such is the nature of the free market
If China wins everybody loses
There's no free market in China
There's a market with a lot of government control
Correct, but China still competes in the free market globally
It does means state interference, but i'm happy to allow the state some power if it doesn't involve China winnning
Either the US market wins with moderate government intervention, or the chinese one wins with massive government intervention
I'm libertarian until I remember that China exists
The problem is that the chinese government subsidises everything remotly important that can be sold on the world stage.
And Protectionism is needed to stop China from controlling all the trade.
Protectionism is important depending on the market. If you are a huge producer of good quality goods and you don’t have a trade deficit, then be free market. If you have a huge trade deficit and no one buys your goods, then use protectionism
In my yet to be molded opinion, Protectionism is a good thing. However, I don't really know anything about the matter.
Protectionism is bad economic policy. However, it is a useful political tool to punish and bully other nations into submission.
^
Why be protectionist when you can be imperialist?
I mean
protectionism is objectively worse off for the market, especially between countries with similar labor/pollution laws
It should only be used to restrict the flow of goods created with slave/sweatshop labor
Sweatshop labor is good for those in sweatshops. They average higher wages than others in the same country. It helps raise families and nations out of poverty. Those working in sweatshops want to work there, so protectionism against sweatshop labor is punishing them for their own choices and pursuing their own best interest.
Ideally yes, because it does make the country wealthier and respects personal freedom to trade across borderlines just like private actors between states can, however, when you have third world nations that either restrict the rights of the people or are using tactics such as currency manipulation then tariffs can be used as a bargaining tool to make the country fall in line with economic policy that will make both that country and your country better off in the long run
To be clear, "it" in the beginning is free trade, and i was just going over some exceptions to the rule of free trade
The free market is a false idea. No one does this in practice. Look at the data from wto of ongoing protective measures and you will see every country always has them. China especially does not have a free market. To produce in china, you must accept a partnership with a local businessman, usually a chinese conglomerate before even opening. Then they steal all your trade secrets and open a competing factory across the street and undercut you using the backing of the chinese government subsidizing any losses. Its crazy to suggest china has a free market!!!!
@Jay1532 the free market has existed for short periods of time in localized areas. However, it is what we should be striving for as it is demonstrably the best system. The closer we get to it, the better
Free market is always best for a less developed country. It adds almost trivial growth to a developed nation
The global free market isnt the be and end all, the ethics of the state and how much they interfere in the free market domestically should be considered. If china use child labour, or near slave like conditions, why should that product get a free ride into the country with higher moral standards.
If a government use tax revenue to subsidise an industry, so its goods are dirt cheap, domestic producers need their livelihoods protecting. Id let goods in penalty free, if they were truly from another free market.
@grilomoto its just economics. A less developed country that just now engages in free trade will have huge growth numbers. Just look at the historical data for any of the "asian tigers". They had that sort of growth not because of anything remarkable about their economies or economics, but it was mostly due to their being less developed. In economics you can think of some unknown variable which represents an economies "natural" gdp path. If a country is undeveloped and just opens up, it will shoot towards that natural gdp path in a hurry and so you will see growth years of 25% and more until it gets there and settles into the 1%-3% that developed countries have, often decades later
or even face recession, like what happened to japan
i can try to look up some of the formulas and theories but i just sold a lot of my old textbooks to ebay lol