Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6   Go Down

Author Topic: Asking for libertarian input..  (Read 19394 times)

RhythmStar

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1886
  • Imagine there's no Heaven.
    • RhythmStar Records
Re:Asking for libertarian input..
« Reply #45 on: January 25, 2004, 06:16:33 pm »


FWIW, the economic globalization movement is a WORLD GOVERNMENT MOVEMENT.

Evidence?  

WTO.  EU.  

Neither is even nascently political-globalist, although the EU does have a strong political-regionalist impulse that disturbs me.


From the WTO's own website:

Quote
The World Trade Organization (WTO) is the only global international organization dealing with the rules of trade between nations.

What are rules, if not government?  Can not a WTO ruling bind a nation to take a course of action its citizens do not agree with?  That may even be in something less than the best interests of at least some of them?  Perhaps this is the government's fault for being in the WTO to begin with.

Quote
Windows Media
The case on environmental standards for gasoline, brought by Venezuela and Brazil against the US and the case on sound recordings brought by the US and EC against Japan are taken as examples to explain the WTO dispute settlement process.

Having some way for nations to adjudicate their disputes seems like a fine thing, but the WTO is like a world trade court -- it makes judgements, issues rulings and in effect does binding arbitration.  Normally, I am not that big a promoter of sovereignty issues, but a global trade court IS a sort of provisional, limited world government, at least in many people's eyes.  Another quote from the WTO site:

Quote
The preamble of the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization includes among its objectives, optimal use of the world’s resources, sustainable development and environmental protection.
This is backed up in concrete terms by a range of provisions in the WTO’s rules. Among the most important are umbrella clauses (such as Article 20 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) which allow countries to take actions to protect human, animal or plant life or health, and to conserve exhaustible natural resources.

Beyond the broad principles, specific agreements on specific subjects also take environmental concerns into account. Subsidies are permitted for environmental protection. Environmental objectives are recognized specifically in the WTO agreements dealing with product standards, food safety, intellectual property protection, etc.

In addition, the system and its rules can help countries allocate scarce resources more efficiently and less wastefully. For example, negotiations have led to reductions in industrial and agricultural subsidies, which in turn reduce wasteful over-production.

A WTO ruling on a dispute about shrimp imports and the protection of sea turtles has reinforced these principles. WTO members can, should and do take measures to protect endangered species and to protect the environment in other ways, the report says. Another ruling upheld a ban on asbestos products on the grounds that WTO agreements give priority to health and safety over trade.

So, the WTO rules on product bans and environmental limitations that most right-libs bristle at when undertaken by our own government.  

Seems to me that the natural evolution of the WTO and the UN and other supra-national organizations is to centralize the economic planning and decision-making processes world-wide.  Is this a process you favor explicitly?

:)

RS
Logged
Irony is the innate perversity of circumstance. -- William House

RhythmStar

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1886
  • Imagine there's no Heaven.
    • RhythmStar Records
Re:Asking for libertarian input..
« Reply #46 on: January 25, 2004, 06:44:53 pm »

When I help pay the bills (like it or not) and the overall health of the US economy and employment picture impacts me and my family, it seems pretty simple to me.   If it makes it any easier for you to grok, try thinking of it as "team spirit", or perhaps "esprit de corps".   I guess I'd just rather patronize US businesses (when the quality is there and the price is reasonable) than pay welfare, or watch the homeless people stack up like cordwood.

For such a smart guy, Jason, you have some interesting blind spots. I trust you'll grow out of them.  :)


Buying American-made goods doesn't help the American economy or do anything positive for unemployment, though.  

Last time I looked, companies that made sales were able to pay their employees.  Has that suddenly changed in the "new" global economy?

Quote
It merely redirects some resources away from more productive American industries to less productive American industries (assuming you're buying for the American label at some cost in quality or price, or both).

An assumption you make with no substantiation, other than your (apparent) belief that price alone is the only value that one may consider when spending their own money, or that American goods are somehow inferior.  

Quote
Put it this way: the supply of currency in a country isn't its wealth.  By circulating currency you're not putting people to work; you're merely choosing to put certain people to work instead of others.

Given the choice of reasonably equivalent products, one from New Hampshire and one from Malaysia, I will buy the New Hampshire product.  If the NH folks that end up with the revenue decide to buy stuff from China with it, that's their perogative, but I will have helped to keep those New Hampshire folks employed.  As a result, they will continue to have money so they won't end up on the streets, and they might even buy something from me -- I am far more likely to benefit economically from well-off New Hampshirites than I am from well-off Malaysians.  

RS
« Last Edit: January 26, 2004, 09:42:09 am by RhythmStar »
Logged
Irony is the innate perversity of circumstance. -- William House

LeopardPM

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2248
Re:Asking for libertarian input..
« Reply #47 on: January 25, 2004, 06:50:54 pm »

re: the WTO and the UN
I am totally with you on this - I am against any 'world' organization which supposedly has powers which over-rule a nations soveriegnty.

I believe that libertarianism is a form of 'self-soveriegnty' and to simplify things I look at the World Organizations as some sort of government and each nation as an individual - let each nation be unless they violate the sovereignty of another nation....

michael
Logged
nothing to say...

Tracy Saboe

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3859
    • Rand for US Senate in Kentucky!
Re:Asking for libertarian input..
« Reply #48 on: January 25, 2004, 10:49:32 pm »

BTW, I have to object to this tripe.  What makes companies fat and lazy is ignorance, not customers willing to pay a price for qualities they value.  To me, the fact that a fellow American got to feed his family as a result of me buying a car is definitely worth something.  THAT, my friend, IS the free market at work, invisible hand and all!


When it comes to my clothing, I always try to implement a Buy Bangladeshi policy.  It's much more important to feed Bangladeshi families than to feed American ones.

They wouldn't have to be fed if their subsistence culture wasn't been destroyed by globalization forces...

Destroyed by global politics not global economics.

Bill do you truly believe that people were better off in the subsistance culture of 100 years ago? With infant death around 50%, and starvation?

Tracy Saboe
Logged
We agree that "Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action." --George Washington

Jack Conway

Conway Supports Obamacare
Conway Supports Cap and Trade
Conway Supports Abortion
Conway’s Utilities Rate Hike Scandal
Conway is in Bed with Big Pharma
Conway is Backed by Wall Street Bankers

Tracy Saboe

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3859
    • Rand for US Senate in Kentucky!
Re:Asking for libertarian input..
« Reply #49 on: January 25, 2004, 11:02:19 pm »


FWIW, the economic globalization movement is a WORLD GOVERNMENT MOVEMENT.

Evidence?  

WTO.  EU.  

WTO, EU, NAFTA, CAFTA, and all the other internation governing regulation agreements are NOT free trade. They are, governed trade.

You only need two sentences to have a free trade agreement.

1 Anybody can buy something from anybody who wants to sell that something to them.

2 Anybody can sell something to anybody who want to buy that something from them.

NAFTA, WTO, World Bank, and EU are Government REGULATED trade.

Not free trade.

Yes those agreements DO increase the size of government and push towards more world government. But you can call regulations economic globalization.

What EU is, is if The French tax bread more, and the Germans tax bear more. They want to make sure that each countries respective tarrifs are adjusted to make sure that the trade is FAIR. Meaning It's about making sure the government is just as statist in Germany as it is in France, so that EVERYBODY has to pay the same high taxes someway on any given product.

You are sorely misinformed if you think EU and WTO treaties represent economic globalization.

Tracy
Logged
We agree that "Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action." --George Washington

Jack Conway

Conway Supports Obamacare
Conway Supports Cap and Trade
Conway Supports Abortion
Conway’s Utilities Rate Hike Scandal
Conway is in Bed with Big Pharma
Conway is Backed by Wall Street Bankers

Tracy Saboe

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3859
    • Rand for US Senate in Kentucky!
Re:Asking for libertarian input..
« Reply #50 on: January 25, 2004, 11:07:59 pm »

For the record.

I agree with RhythmStar about the UN, WTO, EU, NAFTA, CAFTA, and every other long complicated international trade treaty.

They are evil. They aren't about free trade, they are about "FAIR TRADE" (Whatever that means) They are about government regulated trade.

They need to be scrapped in favor of short two sentence agreement.

Tracy
Logged
We agree that "Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action." --George Washington

Jack Conway

Conway Supports Obamacare
Conway Supports Cap and Trade
Conway Supports Abortion
Conway’s Utilities Rate Hike Scandal
Conway is in Bed with Big Pharma
Conway is Backed by Wall Street Bankers

BillG

  • Guest
Re:Asking for libertarian input..
« Reply #51 on: January 25, 2004, 11:08:49 pm »

BTW, I have to object to this tripe.  What makes companies fat and lazy is ignorance, not customers willing to pay a price for qualities they value.  To me, the fact that a fellow American got to feed his family as a result of me buying a car is definitely worth something.  THAT, my friend, IS the free market at work, invisible hand and all!


When it comes to my clothing, I always try to implement a Buy Bangladeshi policy.  It's much more important to feed Bangladeshi families than to feed American ones.

They wouldn't have to be fed if their subsistence culture wasn't been destroyed by globalization forces...

Destroyed by global politics not global economics.

Bill do you truly believe that people were better off in the subsistance culture of 100 years ago? With infant death around 50%, and starvation?

Tracy Saboe

as opposed to what...a coke and a smile?
Logged

LeopardPM

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2248
Re:Asking for libertarian input..
« Reply #52 on: January 25, 2004, 11:44:16 pm »

LOL BillG!
Logged
nothing to say...

<Patrick>

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 911
  • Radical Capitalist
    • Ayn Rand Institute
Re:Asking for libertarian input..
« Reply #53 on: January 26, 2004, 05:07:47 am »

Quote
1 Anybody can buy something from anybody who wants to sell that something to them.

2 Anybody can sell something to anybody who want to buy that something from them.

Nice Tracy. That's my kind of trade agreement.
Logged
"I came here to say that I do not recognize anyone’s right to one minute of my life.  Nor to any part of my energy.  Nor to any achievement of mine… I wished to come here and say that I am a man who does not exist for others."
-Ayn Rand
http://www.aynrand.org
http://capitalism.org

BillG

  • Guest
Re:Asking for libertarian input..
« Reply #54 on: January 26, 2004, 06:00:46 am »

Quote
1 Anybody can buy something from anybody who wants to sell that something to them.

2 Anybody can sell something to anybody who want to buy that something from them.

Nice Tracy. That's my kind of trade agreement.

Now can you send that to dubya...even he can understandd this language!
Logged

RhythmStar

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1886
  • Imagine there's no Heaven.
    • RhythmStar Records
Re:Asking for libertarian input..
« Reply #55 on: January 26, 2004, 09:51:59 am »

BTW, I have to object to this tripe.  What makes companies fat and lazy is ignorance, not customers willing to pay a price for qualities they value.  To me, the fact that a fellow American got to feed his family as a result of me buying a car is definitely worth something.  THAT, my friend, IS the free market at work, invisible hand and all!


When it comes to my clothing, I always try to implement a Buy Bangladeshi policy.  It's much more important to feed Bangladeshi families than to feed American ones.

They wouldn't have to be fed if their subsistence culture wasn't been destroyed by globalization forces...

Destroyed by global politics not global economics.

Bill do you truly believe that people were better off in the subsistance culture of 100 years ago? With infant death around 50%, and starvation?

Tracy Saboe

In the West, people are generally better off.  In the 3rd World, where the process BillG is speaking of takes place, it is not so simple.  Part of the reason is that in this country, the slate was clean for the invaders and they were acquiring top real estate, loaded with resources and arable lands, while in the 3rd world, you are often dealing with less productive lands and subsistence cultures that have existed for thousands of years -- you can't just get them all to go cut the trees down and expect them to have built Utopia in their hut-villages on the minimum pay you gave them by the time the last tree is felled.  

Cultural modernization is a multi-generational process, while the low-hanging fruit of an area can be extraced in a single lifetime.   The point being that if modern technology were applied to enhancing the subsistence culture's ability to sustain itself, there would be a bigger net positive for the locals than if they are merely exploited and their pre-existing culture effectively destroyed.   You can see the same corrosive process pretty much everywhere an ancient culture meets the Borg.

RS
« Last Edit: January 26, 2004, 11:31:37 am by RhythmStar »
Logged
Irony is the innate perversity of circumstance. -- William House

JasonPSorens

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5720
  • Neohantonum liberissimum erit.
    • My Homepage
Re:Asking for libertarian input..
« Reply #56 on: January 26, 2004, 09:59:16 am »

From the WTO's own website:

Quote
The World Trade Organization (WTO) is the only global international organization dealing with the rules of trade between nations.

What are rules, if not government?  Can not a WTO ruling bind a nation to take a course of action its citizens do not agree with?  That may even be in something less than the best interests of at least some of them?  Perhaps this is the government's fault for being in the WTO to begin with.

The only thing the WTO can do is to make a judgement on the "legality" of a trade barrier.  It can't enforce that ruling, but its member states can impose retaliatory trade barriers on the state that imposes its own trade barriers.  Thus, no state is "forced" to do anything - they simply pay the price in terms of international retaliation for their own barriers to trade.  The WTO is simply international cooperation for economic liberalization, which is a Very Good Thing.  It's even less coercive than the federal government's "forcing" states to stop discriminating against their own citizens on the basis of race through Jim Crow, which I think we both can agree was a good thing.

Quote
So, the WTO rules on product bans and environmental limitations that most right-libs bristle at when undertaken by our own government.  

When the WTO makes a ruling on these things, all that means is that it's not viewed as a fair retaliation to impose trade barriers on countries that have environmental regulations.  Making such a ruling in no way infringes on sovereignty; in fact, it's an explicit limitation on the WTO's remit.  Personally, I think it would be good for the WTO to sanction punishment of countries that have private-property-violating environmental regs, but the WTO expressly sets itself against this policy - which I think you would probably say is a good thing.
Logged
"Educate your children, educate yourselves, in the love for the freedom of others, for only in this way will your own freedom not be a gratuitous gift from fate. You will be aware of its worth and will have the courage to defend it." --Joaquim Nabuco (1883), Abolitionism

JasonPSorens

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5720
  • Neohantonum liberissimum erit.
    • My Homepage
Re:Asking for libertarian input..
« Reply #57 on: January 26, 2004, 10:06:48 am »


Last time I looked, companies that made sales were able to pay their employees.  Has that suddenly changed in the "new" global economy?

You don't understand economics. :)  When you spend more of your money rather than saving it, you help the company you buy from, obviously, but you also hurt the companies out there that don't have access to loaned funds from your savings.  You're indulging in Keynesian/mercantilist fallacies that have been repeatedly disproven.  Pumping currency into the economy does nothing to help productivity, which is the basis of all wealth.

Quote
Quote
It merely redirects some resources away from more productive American industries to less productive American industries (assuming you're buying for the American label at some cost in quality or price, or both).

An assumption you make with no substantiation, other than your (apparent) belief that price alone is the only value that one may consider when spending their own money, or that American goods are somehow inferior.  

By definition, if you're purchasing partly on the basis of a made-in-America label rather than quality or price solely, then you're willing to make some sacrifice on quality and price purely to assist an American company.  (Not even an American company necessarily, as "made in America" stickers can be found on goods produced by multinational corporations headquartered outside the U.S., of course.  But that's a side issue.)  If you're purchasing completely on the basis of price and quality, then you don't need to look at the "made in" sticker.

Quote
I am far more likely to benefit economically from well-off New Hampshirites than I am from well-off Malaysians.  

Don't be so sure.  It's a law of economics that exports and imports tend toward equilibrium.  So if you reduce your consumption of imports, you're also reducing the resources that would flow into America's export industries from abroad.  I'm not sure exactly what New Hampshire's trade balance is, but I suspect that NH is much more dependent on exporting than most of the U.S. (especially interior states).
« Last Edit: January 26, 2004, 10:08:34 am by JasonPSorens »
Logged
"Educate your children, educate yourselves, in the love for the freedom of others, for only in this way will your own freedom not be a gratuitous gift from fate. You will be aware of its worth and will have the courage to defend it." --Joaquim Nabuco (1883), Abolitionism

RhythmStar

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1886
  • Imagine there's no Heaven.
    • RhythmStar Records
Re:Asking for libertarian input..
« Reply #58 on: January 26, 2004, 10:11:06 am »

For the record.

I agree with RhythmStar about the UN, WTO, EU, NAFTA, CAFTA, and every other long complicated international trade treaty.

They are evil. They aren't about free trade, they are about "FAIR TRADE" (Whatever that means) They are about government regulated trade.

They need to be scrapped in favor of short two sentence agreement.

Tracy

Fair Trade among buyers and sellers is NOT the same thing as Alphabet Soup Fair Trade, as determined by the ruling global powers.   When I contact individual entrepreneurs in Viet Nam to do work for me that I cannot get done economically here in SoCal, that's Fair Trade, because I pay them a fair price and I get a fair amount of work in return -- there is no coercion, no government in the way, no problemo.  

AND, I am not shifting money away from any local person who is standing there, needing the work (All the Vietnamese people around here are doctors, lawyers, store owners, etc. -- they charge more than I do for their time!)  To get authentic Vietnamese translations that Momma-San will enjoy, you have to go to the source.

THAT is international trade that I am not having a problem with.  I do it myself. IT is in accordance with Libertarian ideals.

RS
« Last Edit: January 26, 2004, 11:42:30 am by RhythmStar »
Logged
Irony is the innate perversity of circumstance. -- William House

JasonPSorens

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5720
  • Neohantonum liberissimum erit.
    • My Homepage
Re:Asking for libertarian input..
« Reply #59 on: January 26, 2004, 10:11:40 am »

For the record.

I agree with RhythmStar about the UN, WTO, EU, NAFTA, CAFTA, and every other long complicated international trade treaty.

They are evil. They aren't about free trade, they are about "FAIR TRADE" (Whatever that means) They are about government regulated trade.

They need to be scrapped in favor of short two sentence agreement.

Tracy

Nope, the Libertarian Party, Lew Rockwell, et al. are wrong about the WTO and NAFTA, and the Cato Institute is right.  These agreements are complex, and the two-sentence agreement would be ideal, but the problem is that the two-sentence agreement is not politically sustainable.  No government will ever adopt that kind of unilateral free trade because it reduces their political leverage.  The WTO and NAFTA simply provide a political framework for the reduction of trade barriers.  They improve overall freedom to trade by making freedom politically palatable to national governments.  Now, it's true that NAFTA has labor and environmental side agreements that could damage freedom, but fortunately they haven't been enforced. :)
Logged
"Educate your children, educate yourselves, in the love for the freedom of others, for only in this way will your own freedom not be a gratuitous gift from fate. You will be aware of its worth and will have the courage to defend it." --Joaquim Nabuco (1883), Abolitionism
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6   Go Up