Posted by: graemebird | November 14, 2011

Rational Trade Policy Is Not “MERCANTILISM.”

“Mercantilism sweeping through canberra it seems.”

No its got nothing to do with that. Its about facing reality, and being concerned for the nation over the long haul. To have a ‘NAURU STRATEGY” is to have no rational strategy at all.

Firstly, over the long haul, a nation must save, just as a family must. A smart nation will always try to export more than it imports, during peacetime. Now if everyone tries to do this, without tariffs, well then its impossible. But what this situation would constitute is INTERNATIONAL POLICY SUCCESS, and the cost of manufactured producer goods would fall right down, enhancing everyone’s living standards.

So supposing Australia alone tries to run trade surpluses net of its raw materials exports without even one tariff? Well if others aren’t trying to do this, we will succeed in this goal. But if others are trying hard to run trade surpluses by a variety of measures, as well, and we are trying to do so, with genuine force, but without tariffs ……. then what would be the big deal sometimes running trade DEFICITS, under those circumstances?

Again. There is a word for this scenario, and that word is SUCCESS.

Now in any competitive market margins are pretty small. Margins may have been high for lets say MICROSOFT, when they had all these internationally enforced patents. But this is not a forever thing, nor the normal way of things.

Competitive business runs with small margins. So given that how insane is it to just except year in year out, that we can have and survive on, a purchasing parity price level PERHAPS 25% OUT OF WHACK with our international trading partners??????

Clearly this expectation is straight irrationality that the economics profession doesn’t want to face up to.

There is nothing in the theory of comparative advantage to say this ought to be considered a normal thing, and that everything is alright.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Whereas tariffs are a pretty terrible idea, even with final products, they amount to something approaching straight irrationality when it comes to producer goods, since tariffs on producer goods would directly undermine the final products of our exporters.

But noting this before most of you were born, does not give me the right to go mentally blank at that point, and decide that putting up with a purchasing power parity disadvantage for our manufacturers is fine, okay, and according to Hoyles.

There is a right and wrong answer to all of this, but as usual it goes beyond the arguments that take place in public where it is the way of things that the two contending sides, each have grabbed a wrong leg of the tripod.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

And another thing. They don’t want our haircuts. They don’t care for us outsourcing each others laundry. There is little in tertiary industry that is worth trying to hawk overseas, without a strong manufacturing base to enable these various services industries. Essentially it is manufacturing capacity that is the sustainable way for us to save as a nation; to do better than merely living within our means.

Advertisements

Responses

  1. YOU ARE CONFUSED AND A SEXUAL SPASTIC.

  2. Mr Bird
    the shadow government is triumphant

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/analysis-and-features/what-price-the-new-democracy-goldman-sachs-conquers-europe-6264091.html

  3. Right. Well they’ve got to be taken down and imprisoned, simply for our survival. And if we cannot realistically imprison them we would have no choice but to hang them, or face our descendants being their slaves for eternity.

  4. right, Tillman.

    Good work.

    We need to sic the RICO act on this cabal. These bloodsucking vultures who have brought down the birthplace of democracy and installed a dozen Corzines throughout the Mediterranean. Imagine that. A dozen Cambrias. A dozen Ponzis. This cabal of synagogue-buddies and Goth-vandals has to go. Before the masses riots and that little Jewish girl in the corner stores pays for the rich banker on Wall Street with her blood. We must stop things ever coming to that.

  5. You’ve said everything I wanted to say. I’m the one out there where the real wind blows trying to save the Jewish battler and his daughters from ill-will, intimidation or worse.

    I must say I’m briefly very pleased with Sinclair at the moment. This is the first time in years he has given my economics ideas a fair run, and he only cut me this time for reasonably sound reasons. What I mean is that I didn’t feel the need to stomp him personally, since he wasn’t getting in the way of the more important mission.

  6. Check out this voodoo:

    “Even more intersting is that they think ‘empty space’ is expanding! How does ‘nothing’ expand?”

    “Try thinking of it like this: space is the medium in which matter is manifested, in the same way as a canvas is the medium on which a painting is painted. Just that the number of dimensions involved is greater. Now imagine that instead of a canvas, a painting was painted on a thin rubber sheet. The rubber sheet could be stretched out in just the same way as space is expanding. From the point of view of a blob of paint in the painting, all the other blobs of paint still look the same – same size, same direction, same colour, same shape. Similarly, everything in the universe continues to look the same to us even though space is expanding.”

    How about we don’t imagine this incredible nonsense, and just stick with science? Is that too much to ask?

  7. This is always the way with people pushing this science fraud. I remember Steve Edney (and he was typical) would react to any requests for evidence by saying something like:

    “Imagine there is a little man riding on the leading edge of a light-wave. He sees….”

    or

    “Imagine you are blowing up a balloon, and on the surface of the balloon there are stars …….”

    You know all nonsense. With the ludicrous idea that if you don’t believe in their science fraud, its just that you are having a little difficulty comprehending it. The reality is that when you really understand it, you can no longer possibly believe in it.

  8. Its not possible to separate science fraud, from fraud more generally. Tim Flannery is a man who lies all the time. If we were to follow the other global warming fraudsters around this is what we would discover.

    http://www.2gb.com/index2.php?option=com_newsmanager&task=view&id=10889

  9. More science fraud from warmers:

    http://junkscience.com/2011/11/22/climategate-2-0-is-here/


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: