Fog Creek Software
Discussion Board




Perspective

While we worry about losing job opportunities due to the lack of trade barriers, others are kept in abject poverty BECAUSE OF trade barriers.

http://www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock091903.asp

So maybe we have a few things to be thankful for.

Jim Rankin
Sunday, September 21, 2003

National Review is not an unbiased commentator. The agenda behind that story is rage that developing nations dared to stand up to the first world and thus to block the lucrative deals that big business profits from.

In terms of agriculture, even that is not so clear cut. Some people say that large agribusiness concerns benefit most from supposed trade liberalisation.

Certainly, the quote in the article that software designers were harmed by the impasse is a bit rich.

analyst
Sunday, September 21, 2003

>>> While we worry about losing job opportunities due to the lack of trade barriers, others are kept in abject poverty BECAUSE OF trade barriers. <<<

Statements like this make me feel old.  It's 2003 and this sort of thing is still news to some people!?

<----->

>>> National Review is not an unbiased commentator. The agenda behind that story is rage that developing nations dared to stand up to the first world and thus to block the lucrative deals that big business profits from. <<<

Could you point us to an "unbiased commentator" on this topic?

The second sentence in that paragraph is confusing.  You seem to be trying to tell us about a hidden agenda behind the article, but that supposed hidden agenda was the explicit point of the article: first world counties want developing nations to lower trade barriers, developing nations point out their hypocracy when first world subsidizes farming operations.  What is the point you're trying to make here?

>>> In terms of agriculture, even that is not so clear cut. Some people say that large agribusiness concerns benefit most from supposed trade liberalisation.<<<

I haven't heard that.  How does that work?  The point of the article was that farmers in US and Europe benefit from government subsidies.  These farmers often being large agribusiness concerns.  They don't seem to be the ones promoting trade liberalization.  But maybe some do. I don't keep up on all this international trade stuff.

>>> Certainly, the quote in the article that software designers were harmed by the impasse is a bit rich. <<<

It is not clear to me how that got into the article, except as a general principle going something like this:  with free trade US/Europe would have the comparative advantage in software development while developing countries would have it in agriculture.  Trade barriers / subsidies artificially reverse the advantage, thus US/Europe exports food and high tech jobs.

Hmmm, not sure if that is really how it works.

mackinac
Sunday, September 21, 2003

*  Recent Topics

*  Fog Creek Home