The correct view to have of fair trade – as it is described by progressives – is a minority interest that raises consumer utility so not only why not but it’s a lovely thing. Because raising consumer utility, as perceived by the consumer, is the point of this whole having an economy thing. Everyone thinks their lives are made better by buying from those they prefer to buy from. Few of us would knowingly buy from those still employing chattel slavery.…See More
The Guardian treats us to a complaint about Brexit. That if we go to free trade then that will mean screwing the British farmer. Good, that’s what we want to do, screw the British farmer. That’s one of the points of having Brexit:
All this plays to my very real fear that we will be sold out as the British government desperately seeks trade deals with anyone who will have us. I believe they would happily open up our highly regulated food sector to all-comers if they’ll buy our financial services.
The Senior Lecturer tells us that we must stay inside the European Union so that we can protect the National Health Service. You see, if we leave, then we’ll try and get a free trade agreement with the United States. And such an agreement would require – no, really, require – the privatisation of the national religion, the NHS.
The correct response to this claim is bunkum, tosh, and Dear Lord what have you been smoking?…See More
There is no scam more delicious than restricting trade by devising “modernizations” of a “free trade agreement.”
The only intrinsic problem with the North American Free Trade Agreement is that it is 1000 pages longer than the single sentence that would proclaim free trade. These 1000 pages are transition rules toward free trade, plus hoops to jump through before one can benefit from free trade. And the only evolved problem with NAFTA is that it was designed assuming symmetry between Mexico’s value-added tax and the US’s state sales taxes, both of which hit imports and don’t hit exports.…See More