Free Trade -vs- Protectionism

[slowerthenb4]

Strategy of imposing high tariffs or establishing quotas on foreign imports for the purposes of stemming the tide of foreign-made goods coming into the country and competing with domestic-made goods

-VS-

System that allows specialization (sunny places focus on agriculture - labor intensive industries divert to highly populated member states) of free trade areas, thereby lowering costs.

________________________________________
________________________________________
_____________

My question is whether protectionism, through stricter import tariffs, is a relevant answer to the question Americans are asking on how to deal with an increasingly constricted economy.

I must admit it is a appetizing case to install heavy taxes on imported goods that compete with local industry

*But*, i still feel that protectionism is a step twords permanently crippling an otherwise competitive but undeniable struggling (group of industries) and will exceptionally increase the cost of those goods.

_______SHOULD WE?_________
stack the deck for various homeland industries at the expense of free market trading to give support to our countries pained economy?

[Ravariel]

Protectionism is a useful tool for developing countries to encourage a stable agriculture and local economy. It looses its effectiveness and becomes a burden the more advanced the country becomes. A protectionist stance would only further cripple our economy as it has shifted from an industrial to a service economy, and shifting back in order to lower prices on goods would be unwise.

The market will right itself eventually, once the bad seeds are out and investors are more confident of that fact.

[marchohare]

Ravariel: "A protectionist stance would only further cripple our economy as it has shifted from an industrial to a service economy..."

Every time I hear someone repeat that chestnut I have to laugh. I'm not picking on you, Ravariel. You hear it a lot. Most people actually even believe it, but...

A service-based economy is not an economy. It produces nothing. It's a circle-jerk of servants serving each other; an empty excuse for Global Corporate Fatcats to farm out every job worth having to overpopulated third-world countries where labor is cheap. Those jobs they can't farm out, they've given to illegal immigrant labor that works for below minimum wage. You'll note that beyond building useless fences and proposing the declaration of blanket amnesty, the Sold-Out Whores® in government haven't done a fucking thing about it. They won't either. They know who buys their expensive tickets into office.

Americans have been sold a bill of goods. The economy is crashing. We're going down, and we're going down hard. And after the fall, everyone will blame everything except the factors that actually made it happen.

Maybe the gays, pagans and feminists did it.

[Tri-Nitro-Toluene]

As a general rule I'm in favour of a certain degree of Protectionism to get a country out of a sticky situation. Particulrly if that country has yet to industrialise affectively and take advantage of what ever production facilities they have. In the US' case however Protectionism is the last thing they shoud be doing.

Currently all your manufacturing busineses are abroad in lesser developed nations. They aint coming home cause the prices are too high in terms of wage rates. You aint got any companies producing stuff on american soil, then Protectionism isn't going to work. What you want to do is provide incentives to companies to move back to the US.

[Ravariel]

At 7/2/08 04:38 AM, marchohare wrote: A service-based economy is not an economy. It produces nothing. It's a circle-jerk of servants serving each other; an empty excuse for Global Corporate Fatcats to farm out every job worth having to overpopulated third-world countries where labor is cheap.

You're starting to sound like a NWO foil-hatter. In no way did I mean we were fully service-based. And no, a service-based economy is not one that produces nothing, it is one that focuses on services more than products. Financial services, global banking and trade, etc. We still produce (and quite a bit), but we're drifting away from it as we retain our financial and technological sway in the global community, but lose ground to the larger, developing countries in areas such as agriculture and textiles.

And anyway, why not farm out the labor jobs to those who can do it cheaper, while we up our profits and get to keep the more skilled, higher paying jobs for ourselves? That would mean a growing economy, no? Anyways, companies start to learn of the dangers of outsourcing labor to the lowest bidder when their widgets start showing up made out of GHB and lead... the market does a pretty good job of finding itself a balance.

Americans have been sold a bill of goods. The economy is crashing. We're going down, and we're going down hard. And after the fall, everyone will blame everything except the factors that actually made it happen.

The market, and the US, is not crashing. It'll take more than the blip of a housing bubble bursting and a mortgage scandal to do that. Not only that, if the US economy collapses, the entire world would follow in our wake, so it's in noones interest to allow that to happen. Countries like China, India, the EU and Russia know this and if anything really threatened global financial markets as much as an American crash would, they would step in and stop it from happening in an instant.

[marchohare]

Ravariel: "You're starting to sound like a NWO foil-hatter..."

That's a very useful epithet to sling at anyone who points out where the real threat lies and who the real enemies are, isn't it?

Those memes... so useful. If Machiavelli could see the level of expertise now he'd bow in admiration.

Ravariel: "...why not farm out the labor jobs to those who can do it cheaper, while we up our profits and get to keep the more skilled, higher paying jobs for ourselves?"

Because we're not. Indian programmers are perfectly acceptable, and work for peanuts. Are you out in the real world yet? I am, and have been for more than a quarter of a century. You'll find out.

Ravariel: "The market, and the US, is not crashing."

Yes, it is. Hide and watch, and remember you heard it here first.

Forget bailouts by other countries. The U.S. drives 30% of the global economy. It's not just going to be us, it's going to be everywhere. So was the last Depression (formally called the "Great" one) for that matter. People tend to forget that.

Last time however, people still had extended families and survival skills. This time they're isolated individuals who don't even know how to plant a potato or hold a family together, harder to herd than cats. They're going to die in droves.

The people who created this mess will be able to wait twenty years for the dust to settle, if that's what it takes. They're dug in and stocked up.

But of course, I wear a tinfoil hat. Take comfort in that knowledge when you're trying to figure out how to butcher a stray dog or wondering which parts of dandelions are edible.

[slowerthenb4]

im not sure that i would start calling the scale comparable to the great depression, as the banks are heavily fortified with principle in international hedges and all American banks are FDIC insured so its not possible to get as bad, but regardless i see a very bumpy road ahead for 90% of Americans.

The "retooling" of our economy over the next ten years is likely to create enormous strains on the already stretched service industry mixed in with issues like health care costs, you have a festering cauldron for us to figure out how to neutralize.

Ho Hum Ho Hum?!!?

[Der-Lowe]

At 7/2/08 04:38 AM, marchohare wrote: Ravariel: "A protectionist stance would only further cripple our economy as it has shifted from an industrial to a service economy..."

Every time I hear someone repeat that chestnut I have to laugh. I'm not picking on you, Ravariel. You hear it a lot. Most people actually even believe it, but...

A service-based economy is not an economy. It produces nothing

I stopped reading there. Actually, I stumbled when you laughed at Rav, cuz his ausom (marry me, Ravariel! :D).
Who are you, Adam Smith? Immaterial goods ARE goods. A good is defined as something that satisfies a necessity.

At 7/2/08 06:04 AM, marchohare wrote: Ravariel: "The market, and the US, is not crashing."

Yes, it is. Hide and watch, and remember you heard it here first.

I see a problem with foreign debt that is not really being taken care of. American consumption has to go down.

At 7/2/08 05:27 AM, Tri-Nitro-Toluene wrote:

You need to stop posting and get to finish the 3rd chapter of your story.

[marchohare]

Der-Lowe: "I stopped reading there. Actually, I stumbled when you laughed at Rav, cuz his ausom (marry me, Ravariel! :D). Who are you, Adam Smith? Immaterial goods ARE goods."

(Whistles softly.)

Good luck with that belief. Hey! I just invented a perpetual motion machine this afternoon, and now my whole house is running on it. Tomorrow I'm going to build MORE.

It's a box about the size of an air conditioner, and you just hook it into your mains and tell the power company to fuck off. I'm making them available to YOU, and you heard it here first! Only $4,500, and I'll ship out YOURS right away!

Who wants to be the first kid on the block to own one? Don't wait, buy now!

[slowerthenb4]

At 7/2/08 09:55 PM, marchohare wrote: Der-Lowe: "I stopped reading there. Actually, I stumbled when you laughed at Rav, cuz his ausom (marry me, Ravariel! :D). Who are you, Adam Smith? Immaterial goods ARE goods."

(Whistles softly.)

Good luck with that belief. Hey! I just invented a perpetual motion machine this afternoon, and now my whole house is running on it. Tomorrow I'm going to build MORE.

????

It's a box about the size of an air conditioner, and you just hook it into your mains and tell the power company to fuck off. I'm making them available to YOU, and you heard it here first! Only $4,500, and I'll ship out YOURS right away!

????

Facts:
GDP: n. (Abbr. GDP) The total market value of all the goods and services produced within the borders of a nation during a specified period.

GDP (Purchase power parity) : $13.84 trillion (2007 est.)

GDP - real growth rate : 2.2% (2007 est.)

GDP - composition by sector :
agriculture: 0.9%
industry: 20.5%
services: 78.5% (2007 est.)

Labor force - by occupation :
farming, forestry, and fishing 0.6%, manufacturing, extraction, transportation, and crafts 22.6%, managerial, professional, and technical 35.5%, sales and office 24.8%, other services 16.5%
note: figures exclude the unemployed (2007)

[JoS]

The US is already a protectionist economy. You have high subsidies for agricultural products, and many non-tariff barriers to trade, such as tight regulation of imported products to make it near impossible for foreign goods to enter if you do not want them to harm local producers.

The notion that you currently have an open market is absurd.

[marchohare]

slowerthenb4: Facts: Yadda yadda...

Fact: GDP is virtually worthless.

But thanks for playing! (I seriously have to wonder how many of the folks on this board are out of school and supporting themselves. Really, am I the only one here who is? Who owns a home? How many here doesn't live with his or her parents?)

You rarely saw Gross Domestic Product used as an indicator until a few years ago, when smoke and mirrors became essential to keep the sheeple from panicking. Gross National Product, a much more accurate yardstick, was used instead.

GDP has about as much relevance to the real world as the "unemployment rate" does, which is calculated by counting those actively drawing unemployment benefits. Once your benefits run out, the government counts you as magically employed.

In other words, you've been sold a bill of goods. The U.S. economy is smoke and mirrors: as I said, servants serving each other is not an economy. But of course, it's important to lie to the sheeple so they'll keep that Monopoly money circulating. They'll go on pretending that ever-slowing motion, without energy being injected into the system, is a sign that the U.S. economy is not collapsing for as long as they can. Spend, spend, little sheeple... spend like there is no tomorrow!

Because there isn't.

My analogy with perpetual motion was apt. Sorry if you didn't get it.

[marchohare]

Oops! JoS posted while I was writing the above.

JoS: "The notion that you currently have an open market is absurd."

You're right, it is. Completely unrestricted international trade would overspeed and tear itself apart like a machine without a governor. However, what the U.S. does have is less protectionism than it did in the past, obviously. That's what free trade agreements are all about.

We've actually had Congresscritters resign over the selling of the U.S. to the globalists. Like him or hate him, Fritz Hollings saw which way the wind was blowing and got the hell out while the gettin' was good. From his Farewell Speech of November 16, 2004:

...It is the same with trade. Everywhere in the land people cry: Free trade, free trade, free trade. There is no such thing; never has there been and never will there be free trade. I know about freer governmental restrictions, subsidies, and quotas, but that is not going to happen.

People ought to remember that we built this industrial giant and power, the United States of America, with protectionism....

What happens is your security is like a three-legged stool. You have the one leg, your values as a nation. Around the world we stand for individual freedom and democracy. We have the second leg, unquestioned, as a military superpower. The third leg -- the economy -- has been fractured intentionally and we are happy about it because capitalism has defeated communism in Europe, in the Soviet Union, and in the Pacific rim. And it is defeating it right now in China. Let's not disturb it and what have you, except to begin to compete. As Akio Morita says: "That world power that loses its manufacturing capacity will cease to be a world power." What we need to do is to rebuild.

We can begin to immediately rebuild by changing the culture, the mindset, the legislation. Around here we passed, 4 weeks ago, a $50 billion tax cut bill that was supposed to represent foreign credit sales. Instead, it subsidized the export of jobs, the outsourcing of jobs overseas.

It was the best speech of his career. Why is it those guys never tell the truth until they get their asses out the door?

Rhetorical question.

[slowerthenb4]

At 7/2/08 11:40 PM, marchohare wrote:

Fact: GDP is virtually worthless.

really?

GDP! The right concept of economy-wide output, accurately measured. The U.S. and the world rely on it to tell where we are in the business cycle and to estimate long-run growth. It is the centerpiece of an elaborate and indispensable system of social accounting, the national income and product accounts. This is surely the signal innovative achievement of the Commerce Department in the 20th century. I was fortunate to become an economist in the 1930's when Kuznets, Nathan, Gilbert, and Jaszi were creating this most important set of economic time series. In economic theory, macroeconomics was just beginning at the same time. Complementary, these two innovations deserve much credit for the improved performance of the economy in the second half of the century.

James Tobin
Nobel laureate
Yale University Professor Emeritus of Economics

I seriously have to wonder how many of the folks on this board are out of school and supporting themselves. Really, am I the only one here who is? Who owns a home? How many here doesn't live with his or her parents

I am 23, i am a tradesman so unfortunately can not afford a home yet. However i do live 1800 miles from my parents if that gives me some irrelevant principle of ethos...

You rarely saw Gross Domestic Product used as an indicator until a few years ago, when smoke and mirrors became essential to keep the sheeple from panicking. Gross National Product, a much more accurate yardstick, was used instead.

Ahh "The old way was the better way!" argument. No disrespect intended. GDP remains an accounting flagship for bureaucracies all over the globe. It was developed or should i say evolved from the earlier attempts at digesting the expansive data of the national income and product accounts (NIPA's) . It simple is the modern version of the GNP.

GDP has about as much relevance to the real world as the "unemployment rate" does, which is calculated by counting those actively drawing unemployment benefits. Once your benefits run out, the government counts you as magically employed.

The rabbit hole gets deeper. These numbers as i will show you, do not just appear.

Persons are classified as unemployed if they do not have a job, have actively looked for work in the prior 4 weeks, and are currently available for work. Actively looking for work may consist of any of the following activities:

* Contacting:
An employer directly or having a job interview;
A public or private employment agency;
Friends or relatives;
A school or university employment center;
* Sending out resumes or filling out applications;
* Placing or answering advertisements;
* Checking union or professional registers; or
* Some other means of active job search.

The Government conducts a monthly sample survey called the Current Population Survey (CPS) to measure the extent of unemployment in the country. The CPS has been conducted in the United States every month since 1940 when it began as a Work Projects Administration project. It has been expanded and modified several times since then. As explained later, the CPS estimates, beginning in 1994, reflect the results of a major redesign of the survey.

There are about 60,000 households in the sample for this survey. The sample is selected so as to be representative of the entire population of the United States. In order to select the sample, first, the 3,141 counties and county-equivalent cities in the country are grouped into 1,973 geographic areas. The Bureau of the Census then designs and selects a sample consisting of 754 of these geographic areas to represent each State and the District of Columbia. The sample is a State-based design and reflects urban and rural areas, different types of industrial and farming areas, and the major geographic divisions of each State.

Each of the 754 areas in the sample is subdivided into enumeration districts of about 300 households. The enumeration districts, in turn, are divided into smaller clusters of about four dwelling units each, through the use of address lists, detailed maps, and other sources. Then, the clusters to be surveyed are chosen statistically, and the households in these clusters are interviewed.

Unemployment rates are relevant marker on the percentage of unemployed citizens.

In other words, you've been sold a bill of goods. The U.S. economy is smoke and mirrors: as I said, servants serving each other is not an economy. But of course, it's important to lie to the sheeple so they'll keep that Monopoly money circulating. They'll go on pretending that ever-slowing motion, without energy being injected into the system, is a sign that the U.S. economy is not collapsing for as long as they can. Spend, spend, little sheeple... spend like there is no tomorrow!

It is ever slowing but we have never lost our potential. This nation is not close to being lost. Even in the most bleak outlandish accounting scenarios point to only a couple of decades of damage to the economy.

Because there isn't.

And i strenuously disagree.

My analogy with perpetual motion was apt. Sorry if you didn't get it.

I understood your sarcasm. Witty as it may have seemed to you, I found it only a bland attempt at it and making no real relevant point as a rebuttal.

[Tri-Nitro-Toluene]

At 7/3/08 02:37 AM, slowerthenb4 wrote: really?

Essentially yes, though it depends on what exactly you're measuring. You can have one of the highest GDP's in the world, but that doesn't equate to a population that isn't living mainly in poverty as GDP doesn't take into consideration *who* makes all the money. If a foreign company is involved in a nations trade then at some point that money leaves the country and isn't put back into the system thus actually skewing the results to make them look better than they are, as whatever it is they produced is still counted. This is the main problem LEDC's have as a lot of their investment and business coems from foreign companies so all the money they make ends up in American and European bank accounts.

It also doesn't take into fact the distribution of wealth within the nation. Meaning you can have a wealthy nation and a healthy economy but have most the population living in poverty if only say the top 5% holds everything.

Unless you're solely concerned with how much stuff is produced then the GDP falls short of being a good indicator.

Though on the flip side you also have the problem that GDP could potentially under estimate what it's actually designed to estimate, stuff that is produced.

How do you define produced? Is a service a product? Does a fashion adviser give a service that counts as a product and therefore should be included in the calculations despite there being not angible evidence of the product itself? If we consider someone being hired as a nanny to be a part of the equations( as I believe they currently are) should we then not include house wives and make assumptions that they are essentially 'paying themselves' by saving on hiring costs, the same as a nanny they could have hired? They are doing the same ' service' are they not?

[marchohare]

slowerthenb4 quoted: "'GDP! The right concept of economy-wide output, accurately measured...' - James Tobin"

Where did you dig that up, and when did Tobin say it? Back in the 'forties when the system was first developed? It sure wasn't after '92 when the U.S. replaced the GNP with it (and when, coincidentally enough, the bubbles that have been repeatedly bursting over the last decade began to form).

If he continued to think that, why did he co-develop the MEW in 1972?

The MEW is the work of Yale University economists William Nordhaus and James Tobin. They developed their Measure of Economic Welfare back in1972 as one of the first attempts to address the shortcoming and mismeasures of GDP.

slowerthenb4 quoted: "I am 23, i am a tradesman so unfortunately can not afford a home yet...."

Consider yourself lucky. I do own one (for the time being anyway) and right now you wouldn't want to. You'd probably be better off investing in the money market... if you could bring yourself to evaluate your investment based on a pessimistic outlook on the U.S. dollar.

When the people around you start saying "Only a fool would invest in real estate," that's the time to think about buying a house.

slowerthenb4 quoted: "The rabbit hole gets deeper. These numbers as i will show you, do not just appear...."

I realize that. I also know that the U-3 estimate, the "official" estimate that's publicized and touted in the press, is derived as I previously stated:

U-1 Persons unemployed 15 weeks or longer, as a percent of the civilian labor force

U-2 Job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs, as a percent of the civilian labor force

U-3 Total unemployed, as a percent of the civilian labor force (official unemployment rate)

U-4 Total unemployed plus discouraged workers, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus discouraged workers

U-5 Total unemployed, plus discouraged workers, plus all other marginally attached workers, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers

U-6 Total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers

NOTE: Marginally attached workers are persons who currently are neither working nor looking for work but indicate that they want and are available for a job and have looked for work sometime in the recent past.

Discouraged workers, a subset of the marginally attached, have given a job-market related reason for not currently looking for a job. Persons employed part time for economic reasons are those who want and are available for full-time work but have had to settle for a part-time schedule.

The U.S. Department of Labor does possess figures based on the highly accurate CPS, which polls a sample 60 times larger than Gallup even uses. (That's actually wasteful--see this if you're interested). But the public never sees those.

As little as three years ago, the method of calculating the U3 was widely discussed online as described in my previous post. Now, except for calling it the "official unemployment rate," I can't find a blessed thing about it.

slowerthenb4 quoted: "...And i strenuously disagree.

Believe me, nothing would make me happier than for the next ten years to prove you right and me wrong.

[Der-Lowe]

At 7/2/08 11:40 PM, marchohare wrote: slowerthenb4: Facts: Yadda yadda...

Fact: GDP is virtually worthless.

That has nothing to do with services not being economics goods.
They are; there's not a single economist that doesn't consider them to be, and the last to say that services were not economic goods was Adam Smith.

But thanks for playing! (I seriously have to wonder how many of the folks on this board are out of school and supporting themselves. Really, am I the only one here who is? Who owns a home? How many here doesn't live with his or her parents?)

I have to wonder whether you have ever come across an economics textbook of some sort.

You rarely saw Gross Domestic Product used as an indicator until a few years ago,

Until a few 60 years ago, with our friend JMKeynes.

when smoke and mirrors became essential to keep the sheeple from panicking. Gross National Product, a much more accurate yardstick, was used instead.

The National considers what the businesses from one country produce, no matter if it's inside the borders of the country or outside of it. The Domestic one considers what is produced inside the borders of the country, no matter by whom.
Countries generally use the one that makes them look better; in the case of the US they have similar values.

GDP has about as much relevance to the real world as the "unemployment rate" does, which is calculated by counting those actively drawing unemployment benefits. Once your benefits run out, the government counts you as magically employed.

Then how it is measured in countries that have no unemployment benefits?

In other words, you've been sold a bill of goods. The U.S. economy is smoke and mirrors: as I said, servants serving each other is not an economy. But of course, it's important to lie to the sheeple so they'll keep that Monopoly money circulating. They'll go on pretending that ever-slowing motion, without energy being injected into the system, is a sign that the U.S. economy is not collapsing for as long as they can. Spend, spend, little sheeple... spend like there is no tomorrow!

oh noez, u has reeveled teh conspiracy D:

[Slizor]

System that allows specialization (sunny places focus on agriculture - labor intensive industries divert to highly populated member states) of free trade areas, thereby lowering costs.

Just to throw another relevant issue into the mix, what affect does the high price of energy have on this view? Are we talking about a world that will increasingly move towards a regional specialisation production system, or does the theory hold up above energy concerns?

[Der-Lowe]

At 7/3/08 08:22 PM, Slizor wrote:

System that allows specialization (sunny places focus on agriculture - labor intensive industries divert to highly populated member states) of free trade areas, thereby lowering costs.

Just to throw another relevant issue into the mix, what affect does the high price of energy have on this view? Are we talking about a world that will increasingly move towards a regional specialisation production system, or does the theory hold up above energy concerns?

Me no comprende what you're trying to signify.

Do you mean that increased oil prices will increase transport costs, and therefore impede specialization?

[slowerthenb4]

At 7/3/08 05:45 AM, marchohare wrote: slowerthenb4 quoted: "'GDP! The right concept of economy-wide output, accurately measured...' - James Tobin"

Where did you dig that up,

GDP: One of the Greatest Inventions of the 20th Century

and when did Tobin say it?

From the "January 2000 SURVEY OF CURRENT BUSINESS" Bureau of Economic Analysis U.S. Department of Commerce

(and when, coincidentally enough, the bubbles that have been repeatedly bursting over the last decade began to form).

I really really love that analogy.

If he continued to think that, why did he co-develop the MEW in 1972?

Because of his occupation as an brilliant American economist.

The MEW is the work of Yale University economists William Nordhaus and James Tobin. They developed their Measure of Economic Welfare back in1972 as one of the first attempts to address the shortcoming and mismeasures of GDP.

Without minimizing the MEW it remains only another algorithm by which the markers of our economy are digested and compiled to time stamped data. What happened to the GNP anyway.

Consider yourself lucky. I do own one (for the time being anyway) and right now you wouldn't want to. You'd probably be better off investing in the money market... if you could bring yourself to evaluate your investment based on a pessimistic outlook on the U.S. dollar.

When the people around you start saying "Only a fool would invest in real estate," that's the time to think about buying a house.

Im still blowing money on rent every month for a mortgage that is not mine... so nope not lucky.

I realize that. I also know that the U-3 estimate, the "official" estimate that's publicized and touted in the press, is derived as I previously stated:

U-1 Persons unemployed 15 weeks or longer, as a percent of the civilian labor force

U-2 Job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs, as a percent of the civilian labor force

U-3 Total unemployed, as a percent of the civilian labor force (official unemployment rate)

U-4 Total unemployed plus discouraged workers, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus discouraged workers

U-5 Total unemployed, plus discouraged workers, plus all other marginally attached workers, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers

U-6 Total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers

NOTE: Marginally attached workers are persons who currently are neither working nor looking for work but indicate that they want and are available for a job and have looked for work sometime in the recent past.

Discouraged workers, a subset of the marginally attached, have given a job-market related reason for not currently looking for a job. Persons employed part time for economic reasons are those who want and are available for full-time work but have had to settle for a part-time schedule.

The U.S. Department of Labor does possess figures based on the highly accurate CPS, which polls a sample 60 times larger than Gallup even uses. (That's actually wasteful--see this if you're interested). But the public never sees those.

As little as three years ago, the method of calculating the U3 was widely discussed online as described in my previous post. Now, except for calling it the "official unemployment rate," I can't find a blessed thing about it.

That was a weak part of my argument. I will agree that Labor statistics can be skewed with a slightly higher margin.

slowerthenb4 quoted: "...And i strenuously disagree.

Believe me, nothing would make me happier than for the next ten years to prove you right and me wrong.

thats good.

[Slizor]

Just to throw another relevant issue into the mix, what affect does the high price of energy have on this view? Are we talking about a world that will increasingly move towards a regional specialisation production system, or does the theory hold up above energy concerns?

Me no comprende what you're trying to signify.

Do you mean that increased oil prices will increase transport costs, and therefore impede specialization?

Yup. Cheap oil is one of the main premises of the current global capitalist order. Altering that premise will have significant effects on the current system and could lead to a reappraisal of economic theory (it's not very likely considering the abstractness of economic theory, but it could do.)

[Der-Lowe]

At 7/4/08 09:03 AM, Slizor wrote: Yup. Cheap oil is one of the main premises of the current global capitalist order. Altering that premise will have significant effects on the current system and could lead to a reappraisal of economic theory (it's not very likely considering the abstractness of economic theory, but it could do.)

Meh, I don't think oil costs will grow so much as to have a significant effect on world trade; govt barriers are a much stronger problem.
What economic theories are you talking about?

[slowerthenb4]

America currently levies these tariffs on imports...

SECTION I: LIVE ANIMALS; ANIMAL PRODUCTS
Chapter 1 Live animals
Chapter 2 Meat and edible meat offal
Chapter 3 Fish and crustaceans, molluscs and other aquatic invertebrates
Chapter 4 Dairy produce; birds eggs; natural honey; edible products of animal origin, not elsewhere specified or included
Chapter 5 Products of animal origin, not elsewhere specified or included

SECTION II: VEGETABLE PRODUCTS
Chapter 6 Live trees and other plants; bulbs, roots and the like; cut flowers and ornamental foliage
Chapter 7 Edible vegetables and certain roots and tubers
Chapter 8 Edible fruit and nuts; peel of citrus fruit or melons
Chapter 9 Coffee, tea, maté and spices
Chapter 10 Cereals
Chapter 11 Products of the milling industry; malt; starches; inulin; wheat gluten
Chapter 12 Oil seeds and oleaginous fruits; miscellaneous grains, seeds and fruits; industrial or medicinal plants; straw and fodder
Chapter 13 Lac; gums, resins and other vegetable saps and extracts
Chapter 14 Vegetable plaiting materials; vegetable products not elsewhere specified or included

SECTION III: ANIMAL OR VEGETABLE FATS AND OILS
AND THEIR CLEAVAGE PRODUCTS; PREPARED EDIBLE FATS; ANIMAL OR VEGETABLE WAXES
Chapter 15 Animal or vegetable fats and oils and their cleavage products prepared edible fats;
animal or vegetable waxes

SECTION IV: PREPARED FOODSTUFFS; BEVERAGES,
SPIRITS, AND VINEGAR; TOBACCO AND MANUFACTURED TOBACCO SUBSTITUTES
Chapter 16 Preparations of meat, of fish or of crustaceans, molluscs or other aquatic invertebrates
Chapter 17 Sugars and sugar confectionery
Chapter 18 Cocoa and cocoa preparations
Chapter 19 Preparations of cereals, flour, starch or milk; bakers' wares
Chapter 20 Preparations of vegetables, fruit, nuts or other parts of plants
Chapter 21 Miscellaneous edible preparations
Chapter 22 Beverages, spirits and vinegar
Chapter 23 Residues and waste from the food industries; prepared animal feed
Chapter 24 Tobacco and manufactured tobacco substitutes

SECTION V: MINERAL PRODUCTS
Chapter 25 Salt; sulfur; earths and stone; plastering materials, lime and cement
Chapter 26 Ores, slag and ash
Chapter 27 Mineral fuels, mineral oils and products of their distillation; bituminous substances; mineral waxes

SECTION VI: PRODUCTS OF THE CHEMICAL OR ALLIED INDUSTRIES
Chapter 28 Inorganic chemicals; organic or inorganic compounds of precious metals, of rare-earth metals,of radioactive elements or of isotopes
Chapter 29 Organic chemicals
Chapter 30 Pharmaceutical products
Chapter 31 Fertilizers
Chapter 32 Tanning or dyeing extracts; dyes, pigments, paints, varnishes, putty and mastics
Chapter 33 Essential oils and resinoids; perfumery, cosmetic or toilet preparations
Chapter 34 Soap, organic surface-active agents, washing preparations, lubricating preparations, artificial waxes, prepared waxes, polishing or scouring preparations, candles and similar articles, modeling pastes, "dental waxes" and dental preparations with a basis of plaster
Chapter 35 Albuminoidal substances; modified starches; glues; enzymes
Chapter 36 Explosives; pyrotechnic products; matches; pyrophoric alloys; certain combustible preparations
Chapter 37 Photographic or cinematographic goods
Chapter 38 Miscellaneous chemical products

SECTION VII: PLASTICS AND ARTICLES THEREOF
RUBBER AND ARTICLES THEREOF
Chapter 39 Plastics and articles thereof
Chapter 40 Rubber and articles thereof

SECTION VIII: RAW HIDES AND SKINS, LEATHER, FURSKINS AND ARTICLES THEREOF; SADDLERY AND HARNESS; TRAVEL GOODS, HANDBAGS AND SIMILAR CONTAINERS; ARTICLES OF ANIMAL GUT (OTHER THAN SILKWORM GUT)
Chapter 41 Raw hides and skins (other than furskins) and leather
Chapter 42 Articles of leather; saddlery and harness; travel goods, handbags and similar containers; articles of animal gut (other than silkworm gut)
Chapter 43 Furskins and artificial fur; manufactures thereof

SECTION IX: WOOD AND ARTICLES OF WOOD; WOOD CHARCOAL; CORK AND ARTICLES OF CORK; MANUFACTURERS OF STRAW,OF ESPARTO OR OF OTHER PLAITING MATERIALS; BASKETWARE AND WICKERWORK
Chapter 44 Wood and articles of wood; wood charcoal
Chapter 45 Cork and articles of cork
Chapter 46 Manufactures of straw, of esparto or of other plaiting materials; basketware and wickerwork

SECTION X: PULP OF WOOD OR OF OTHER FIBROUS CELLULOSIC MATERIAL; WASTE AND SCRAP OF PAPER
OR PAPERBOARD; PAPER AND PAPERBOARD AND ARTICLES THEREOF
Chapter 47 Pulp of wood or of other fibrous cellulosic material; waste and scrap of paper or paperboard
Chapter 48 Paper and paperboard; articles of paper pulp, of paper or of paperboard
Chapter 49 Printed books, newspapers, pictures and other products of the printing industry; manuscripts, typescripts and plans

SECTION XI: TEXTILE AND TEXTILE ARTICLES
Chapter 50 Silk
Chapter 51 Wool, fine or coarse animal hair; horsehair yarn and woven fabric
Chapter 52 Cotton
Chapter 53 Other vegetable textile fibers; paper yarn and woven fabric of paper yarn
Chapter 54 Man-made filaments
Chapter 55 Man-made staple fibers
Chapter 56 Wadding, felt and nonwovens; special yarns, twine, cordage, ropes and cables and articles thereof
Chapter 57 Carpets and other textile floor coverings
Chapter 58 Special woven fabrics; tufted textile fabrics; lace, tapestries; trimmings; embroidery
Chapter 59 Impregnated, coated, covered or laminated textile fabrics; textile articles of a kind suitable for industrial use
Chapter 60 Knitted or crocheted fabrics
Chapter 61 Articles of apparel and clothing accessories, knitted or crocheted
Chapter 62 Articles of apparel and clothing accessories, not knitted or crocheted
Chapter 63 Other made up textile articles; sets; worn clothing and worn textile articles; rags

SECTION XII: FOOTWEAR, HEADGEAR, UMBRELLAS, SUN UMBRELLAS, WALKING STICKS, SEATSTICKS, WHIPS, RIDING-CROPS AND PARTS THEREOF; PREPARED FEATHERS AND ARTICLES MADE THEREWITH; ARTIFICIAL FLOWERS; ARTICLES OF HUMAN HAIR
Chapter 64 Footwear, gaiters and the like; parts of such articles
Chapter 65 Headgear and parts thereof
Chapter 66 Umbrellas, sun umbrellas, walking sticks, seatsticks, whips, riding-crops and parts thereof
Chapter 67 Prepared feathers and down and articles made of feathers or of down; artificial flowers; articles of human hair

SECTION XIII: ARTICLES OF STONE, PLASTER, CEMENT, ASBESTOS, MICA OR SIMILAR MATERIALS; CERAMIC PRODUCTS; GLASS AND GLASSWARE
Chapter 68 Articles of stone, plaster, cement, asbestos, mica or similar materials
Chapter 69 Ceramic products
Chapter 70 Glass and glassware

SECTION XIV: NATURAL OR CULTURED PEARLS, PRECIOUS OR SEMIPRECIOUS STONES, PRECIOUS METALS, METALS CLAD WITH PRECIOUS METAL, AND ARTICLES THEREOF; IMITATION JEWELRY; COIN
Chapter 71 Natural or cultured pearls, precious or semi-precious stones,precious metals, metals clad with precious metal and articles thereof; imitation jewelry; coin

SECTION XV:BASE METALS AND ARTICLES OF BASE METAL
Chapter 72 Iron and steel
Chapter 73 Articles of iron or steel
Chapter 74 Copper and articles thereof
Chapter 75 Nickel and articles thereof
Chapter 76 Aluminum and articles thereof
Chapter 77 (Reserved for possible future use)
Chapter 78 Lead and articles thereof
Chapter 79 Zinc and articles thereof
Chapter 80 Tin and articles thereof
Chapter 81 Other base metals; cermets; articles thereof
Chapter 82 Tools, implements, cutlery, spoons and forks, of base metal; parts thereof of base metal
Chapter 83 Miscellaneous articles of base metal

[slowerthenb4]

SECTION XVI: MACHINERY AND MECHANICAL APPLIANCES; ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT; PARTS
THEREOF; SOUND RECORDERS AND REPRODUCERS, TELEVISION IMAGE AND SOUND RECORDERS AND REPRODUCERS, AND PARTS AND ACCESSORIES OF SUCH ARTICLES
Chapter 84 Nuclear reactors, boilers, machinery and mechanical appliances; parts thereof
Chapter 85 Electrical machinery and equipment and parts thereof; sound recorders and reproducers, television image and sound recorders and reproducers, and parts and accessories of such articles

SECTION XVII: VEHICLES, AIRCRAFT, VESSELS AND ASSOCIATED TRANSPORT EQUIPMENT
Chapter 86 Railway or tramway locomotives, rolling-stock and parts thereof; railway or tramway track fixtures and fittings and parts thereof; mechanical (including electro-mechanical) traffic signalling equipment of all kinds
Chapter 87 Vehicles other than railway or tramway rolling stock, and parts and accessories thereof
Chapter 88 Aircraft, spacecraft, and parts thereof
Chapter 89 Ships, boats and floating structures

SECTION XVIII: OPTICAL, PHOTOGRAPHIC, CINEMATOGRAPHIC, MEASURING, CHECKING, PRECISION,
MEDICAL OR SURGICAL INSTRUMENTS AND APPARATUS; CLOCKS AND WATCHES; MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS; PARTS AND ACCESSORIES THEREOF
Chapter 90 Optical, photographic, cinematographic, measuring, checking, precision, medical or surgical instruments and apparatus; parts and accessories thereof
Chapter 91 Clocks and watches and parts thereof
Chapter 92 Musical instruments; parts and accessories of such articles

SECTION XIX: ARMS AND AMMUNITION; PARTS AND
ACCESSORIES THEREOF
Chapter 93 Arms and ammunition; parts and accessories thereof

SECTION XX: MISCELLANEOUS MANUFACTURED ARTICLES
Chapter 94 Furniture; bedding, mattresses, mattress supports, cushions and similar stuffed furnishings; lamps and lighting fittings, not elsewhere specified or included; illuminated sign illuminated nameplates and the like; prefabricated buildings
Chapter 95 Toys, games and sports requisites; parts and accessories thereof
Chapter 96 Miscellaneous manufactured articles

SECTION XXI: WORKS OF ART, COLLECTORS' PIECES AND ANTIQUES
Chapter 97 Works of art, collectors' pieces and antiques

[slowerthenb4]

CITE

So given that we already practice a certain degree of protectionism should we instigate more legislation to levy tax on imported goods such as oil (nat gas) or even plain electricity to fund the cost of retooling our economy?

Is it absolutely necessary to make our nations energies infrastructure viable in a much shorter span of time at the expense of cheaper goods and a colder diplomatic trade environment?

[Slizor]

At 7/4/08 09:55 AM, Der-Lowe wrote:

At 7/4/08 09:03 AM, Slizor wrote: Yup. Cheap oil is one of the main premises of the current global capitalist order. Altering that premise will have significant effects on the current system and could lead to a reappraisal of economic theory (it's not very likely considering the abstractness of economic theory, but it could do.)

Meh, I don't think oil costs will grow so much as to have a significant effect on world trade; govt barriers are a much stronger problem.

Wah? The continued oil price rises are certain to have an affect on world trade. Firstly, the rise of oil prices is hurting all the major economies of the world

Anyhow, my original argument wasn't that oil price rises would dampen world trade, but instead that they would end up reordering world trade. If the price of oil continues to move in the upward direction the "efficiency" of transporting things halfway across the globe comes into question and having developing countries producing things on your doorstep (such as Mexico) becomes attractive.

What economic theories are you talking about?

Just orthadox neo-classical economics and its theory based, pretty much entirely, on the efficiency of capitalism purely because they externalise the costs of everything - environmental damage, resource costs, infrastructure costs, etc.

[Der-Lowe]

At 7/6/08 06:17 AM, Slizor wrote:

At 7/4/08 09:55 AM, Der-Lowe wrote:

At 7/4/08 09:03 AM, Slizor wrote: Yup. Cheap oil is one of the main premises of the current global capitalist order. Altering that premise will have significant effects on the current system and could lead to a reappraisal of economic theory (it's not very likely considering the abstractness of economic theory, but it could do.)

Meh, I don't think oil costs will grow so much as to have a significant effect on world trade; govt barriers are a much stronger problem.

Wah?

lol; I had never seen such expression.

The continued oil price rises are certain to have an affect on world trade. Firstly, the rise of oil prices is hurting all the major economies of the world

Yeah, but that doesn't interfere with global trade, at least in the economic sense. Some anti-globalization parties might go "Oh noez, we is in teh recession cuz teh evilz global thingy!!1!"

Anyhow, my original argument wasn't that oil price rises would dampen world trade, but instead that they would end up reordering world trade. If the price of oil continues to move in the upward direction the "efficiency" of transporting things halfway across the globe comes into question and having developing countries producing things on your doorstep (such as Mexico) becomes attractive.

Yes, but in order to have that happen you would need high oil prices for a long time, yet oil prices generally spike up due to short run movements in supply or demand.
Still, if a long run price of oil would remain high, I'd say that it is much more likely that alternative energies are used for transportation, instead of moving back to a more regional world.
I believe it needs more than a barrel at 150 dollars to hinder globalization.