Both countries continued their respective policies for at least half a century. In 1860, the British GNP/capita exceeded the American GNP/capita. In 1910, the situation was reversed - US GNP/capita was much greater than British. Wouldn't this vast and momentous experiment seem to suggest that unreciprocated free trade is not necessarily always and everywhere the right policy?
It takes a lot of faith to have an unconditional intellectual relationship with economists who are unwilling or incapable of testing their economic models against the natural experiments of history. In 1860 America embarked on a path of hyper-protectionism, while Britain embarked on a path of completely free trade. Continued -
I think that many of these comments are too rigid and ideologically driven. Free trade is not as simple as many of you make it out to be. The positive externalities of industrialization can sometimes outweigh the benefits of unreciprocated free trade. Unreciprocated free trade is not necessarily always and everywhere the right policy. The goodness or badness of low to no tariffs and quotas on trade depends on the economic and political conditions at hand.
These days,trade is expanding and tariffs and duties are being lowerd around the world.Free trade is on the rise and export restrictions are loosening up.Forex has become the world's biggest financial market.For exporters,importers and traders alike,the business world is becoming barrier-free.But throughout these prosperous times,developing countries continue to be left out.Developing countries are increasingly counting on foreign direct investment,or to lift sanctions,in order to survive.
"You really have no idea, how independent people live". There you go again, just come out with stupid phrases and nothing to back them up. Because you have no serious argument. Typical socialist. I give up. I can't discuss this with someone who is so devoid of intelligence, you would only respond with yet another vacuous phrase, and we would have to start all over again.
I will leave you with this fact: Economics is a SCIENCE. Socialists never learned this fact and that's why they always fail.
His name is Thorstein Veblen, and I have read up on him. He was a fascist who wanted to dictate how people spent their own money, and believed in massive taxes for ostentatious things. A deplorable little man who hated freedom.
I realise now you are incapable of having a conversation. You simply ignore all my points and keep throwing in moronic random phrases like 'slavery is sin' or 'you are deluding yourself'. You're an idiot. I've tried to have a conversation, but you are incapable.
You will have to expand. I don't understand your comments - please put in context. "Why consume for such frivolous matters"? I don't know what that means.
And forget "leisure class". "Class" is just a collective (collectivist) term designed to lump individuals together to form a target of hate or ridicule.The only 'class' is the corrupt,conspiring political class that screws the world. We should be united against THEM, not against private unhindered trade across borders between free peoples.
You believe I don't see the 'big picture'? I can't imagine what led you to that conclusion. Prejudice maybe? I certainly do see the big, nasty, corrupt picture. We haven't BEGUN to touch upon the secret societies that run the world's economies. What I do not understand is your disdain for freedom. Real, full, honest freedom is my aspiration as a libertarian. I don't play the left-right bullshit game played by conservatives and socialists - to me they are all full of shit. I just want freedom.
Final reply to you comment (sorry to drag on). I just want to emphasise that you haven't actually made an argument against free trade -you are arguing against corrupt govnmnts who print fiat money and take us all into massive national debt.But that's not about Capitalism or free markets.That's manipulative corrupt governments controlling markets with their worthless fiat printed money that is not backed up with any value (i.e. actual stock).That is what I am against. Gov't theft from the people.
Your sentence is meaningless-"consume 70% more than you produce?" 70% what? Bread? Meat?Cars?Of course it's ok -we all consume many things that we produce nothing of.And many of us also produce stuff that we consume nothing of (but sell to others).
And yes, I believe it's ok to consume as much as you can AFFORD to consume.Consuming more than you can afford leads directly,by definition, to debt, and is of course to be avoided as ultimately pay day will come round. We do that, and yes it's stupid.
Man, you haven't actually said anything to argue with my point. I AGREE with you and always have on that issue: of COURSE economic war by the US or ANYONE is always 'by design'. Can you not see that's why I'm so much for free trade? Most governments hate free trade because it puts control into the hands of the consumer and away from the governments. Free trade directly OPPOSES economic war - free trade is just clean, open, honest trade between free parties through choice. And we don't have it.
@ DIVERSITYRECESSION3: when we import goods from another nation it makes no difference whatsoever to us what their political system is.We import goods simply because it makes economic sense to do so (i.e. cheaper than making our own). And we sell goods to other nations when they desire OUR goods at the price. It is always a two-way agreement. Both sides benefit by the trade (otherwise they wouldn't do it). Economic wars are caused by tariffs and protectionism, not free trade. Come on, study up!
This causes mass retail inflation, owning anyone who is confined in its shackles. Government influence over the market must be annihilated completely if prosperity is ever to endure in any state.
Wanna know how many of the top 10 countries on the Index of Economic Freedom also have the highest GDP per capita by PPP? 5. The economies of four others are all hinged on fluke natural resource possession and regional placement. Wanna know how many in the top 15? 9. Ask yourself how monopolies got there in the first place. It sure as hell wasn't from free trade.
Illegals are hired to circumvent the national taxation rape.
Capitalists are not greedy - unless a yearning for freedom to better ones life should be considered 'greedy'. Self reliance is not perfect - it is inefficient. Example: Scotland cannot produce cheap wine. Too damn cold, needs artificial heat etc. So it imports it because it is cheaper to import than to produce it. So the labour force don't waste time producing expensive wine, they produce stuff that Scotland CAN produce cheaply - Whisky! And that is EXported. Trade benefits all.
Hi platorevolution: Again no my friend, free trade is not communism, it's the exact opposite. It's 'laissez faire' (leave alone) which means the government stays the hell out of private business and consumer interests and doesn't interfere. Communism is about governments controlling markets and prices and production and propping up loss-making businesses with tax money, rather than allowing consumer choice. Communism never allows free trade - they're mutually incompatible.
@ DIVERSITYRECESSION3: but that's just the point my friend. Yes, you ARE free to work for Walmart producing shit for 5 dollars an hour. You are also free NOT to! If Walmart did not exist it would just be one less choice. Sure, it's a crappy choice that you personally (and me too) aren't interested in - but many others are glad of a job there, as crappy as that may seem to you or me. And the average wage there is $11 - still crap, but hardly $5. If they can find better, then great.
Hi Platorrevolution - no, trading with China has led to LOW prices! Chinese produce goods cheaper than we can, so it means we buy them cheaply too - would be even cheaper if there were no tariffs. Sure, this hurts domestic businesses who cannot compete in the same line - but it also forces businessmen/entrepreneurs to move into other areas of demand instead so that labour is not wasted on producing stuff that can be bought cheaper elsewhere. Hence free trade benefits US all - the consumers! :)
@platorevolution: You're absolutely MAD! You actually WANT communism?! You don't want freedom?! You trust governments to run your life and tell you what you can do? You want your government to assign false value to things rather than let the market (i.e. free people) decide? Ever wondered why people live longer with more wealth in free capitalist societies? Human beings yearn to be FREE, not to be slaves to the state.
@platorevolution: Free market favours BOTH parties. When two parties trade FREELY, it is through FREE WILL,because both have something the other party wants (i.e. goods or a service or money, etc). Profit is the fruit of ones labours.Why do you have a problem with free people turning a profit? No one forces you to buy their products. You should be FREE to buy it if you WANT.Why do you believe governments should stop us trading freely?You think freedom is bad?Don't be a slave to your government.
Thank you Schell for doing your part by educating some of us and now its our responsibility to spread this knowledge. Because knowledge is more powerful then money and weapons.
You're for 'self-reliance'? Why? You think you (or your country) can produce everything you need yourself, better, more cheaply and more efficiently than trading with others? What are you afraid of? You're actually afraid of being free to trade without restrictions? You WANT government restrictions and tariffs? You want YOUR taxes to pay for those tariffs to artificially add value to a crap product or business? I will never understand you stupid socialists.
BS! The freemarket doesn't kill jobs! It frees up people to work more productively. It's called 'division of labour'. People produce what other people need. If that thing is already being produced satisfactorily, and you cannot compete, then you PRODUCE SOMETHING ELSE! How feckless do you have to be to be scared of freedom?
The people and organizations who own and control the world are long past the point of being challenged. Find a way to break through the barriers to entry into the 'in' crowd, or languish on the outside.
Even tho i know free market is bullshit in our days, and a way for big companies to become even more powerful by destroying local economies.. I dont think protectionism is the way to go, but on the other hand i dont know what the wright thing would be..
FREEDOM is always the right way to go, it should not be a dilema. Governments (and anyone else for that matter) have no moral right to take away our freedom to trade with one another. Protectionism is always paid for out of the taxpayers pocket, and is simply a case of throwing money at a product that is not in demand at the price (otherwise it would not be failing). Utter stupidity. Solution: let the crap businesses fail, let the good ones succeed naturally and FREELY. FREEDOM. Embrace it.
I don't believe this shit for a second, NXSchell. First off, these "Free Trade Agreements", are thousands upon thousands of pages long, when Free trade does not need any kind of exhaustive explanation. Protectionism makes countries poorer because it drives up the cost of living.
That you try to prove David Ricardo's comparative advantage wrong with this video is ambitious but comes short of doing so.
Any country that embraces protectionism makes their average citizen poorer.
This is the lie that is told to the masses. That the free market is what we have now and that it is causing this mess.....*Cough Michael Moore *cough!
Japan and Korea prospered because of massive help from the US. I spent about ten years in Korea working on this issue. NAFTA, the WTO, IMF, WB do not practice free trade. It is all managed trade. That is why there are about 80K pages on the books controlling business in America. It is not to restrain big business, but to put the shackles on small businesses so they can't compete.
Ron paul has integrety, something it seems politicians either come without or lose during the first few months of navigating the corridors of power.
As for him being president. Completely unrealistic. Politics is like a popularity contest, and he goes against too many tribal rules within our society. And also the average voter does not aquire the information to vote for the best candidate. Most vote for the best marketed one because it gives them the illusion of an informed choice.
What is it called when the citizens speak in tandem to request a politician to run for president? I nominate Ron Paul for President in 2012 and I hope others will do too. This man seems to be the only statesman with the balls to speak out against the Federal Reserve, NAFTA, prohibition of marijuana, and a host of other politically dangerous issues.
So is Ralph Nader and a host of other people from Third Parties, but I believe that you are right that Ron Paul would be a good choice for the 2012 presidency.
Both countries continued their respective policies for at least half a century. In 1860, the British GNP/capita exceeded the American GNP/capita. In 1910, the situation was reversed - US GNP/capita was much greater than British. Wouldn't this vast and momentous experiment seem to suggest that unreciprocated free trade is not necessarily always and everywhere the right policy?
Hierarchicalist 10 hours ago
It takes a lot of faith to have an unconditional intellectual relationship with economists who are unwilling or incapable of testing their economic models against the natural experiments of history. In 1860 America embarked on a path of hyper-protectionism, while Britain embarked on a path of completely free trade. Continued -
Hierarchicalist 10 hours ago
I think that many of these comments are too rigid and ideologically driven. Free trade is not as simple as many of you make it out to be. The positive externalities of industrialization can sometimes outweigh the benefits of unreciprocated free trade. Unreciprocated free trade is not necessarily always and everywhere the right policy. The goodness or badness of low to no tariffs and quotas on trade depends on the economic and political conditions at hand.
Hierarchicalist 10 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
These days,trade is expanding and tariffs and duties are being lowerd around the world.Free trade is on the rise and export restrictions are loosening up.Forex has become the world's biggest financial market.For exporters,importers and traders alike,the business world is becoming barrier-free.But throughout these prosperous times,developing countries continue to be left out.Developing countries are increasingly counting on foreign direct investment,or to lift sanctions,in order to survive.
wasahi30 18 hours ago
If you utter the term NAFTA and 'free trade' in the same breath you do nothing but to prove your own ignorance.
WSWarthog 1 month ago
It's nice to see some support for actual free markets in these comments <3
HolidayFortnight 5 months ago
@bxjam85 Excellent words. I propose you people...to read Rothbard, von Mises and H.H.Hoppe.
powstaniecpolski 6 months ago
El campo no aguan ta mas? The countryside has no water anymore? I would have chosen something a little more... relevant to put on a sign.
lvsoad22 11 months ago
@lvsoad22 The banner reads 'the fields are exhausted'
'aguantar' is a verb, nothing to do with the word 'agua'
J3D3Iq8pIEGEL 9 months ago
@J3D3Iq8pIEGEL ah you are right, I read that wrong
lvsoad22 9 months ago
So Schell, do you favour ACTUAL free trade, rather than what is masqueraded as free trade?
SaviorOfLogic 1 year ago
@SaviorOfLogic
Real Free trade is good but NAFTA was about managed trade to the benefit of the wealthy corporations.
xMaXiMuSx 9 months ago
serfdom all over again. the workers will belong to the big business bosses and they will and are acting like the lords and ladies of a monarchy.
polock94 1 year ago
Awesome!!! Nice build up!
MrBr3w 2 years ago
"You really have no idea, how independent people live". There you go again, just come out with stupid phrases and nothing to back them up. Because you have no serious argument. Typical socialist. I give up. I can't discuss this with someone who is so devoid of intelligence, you would only respond with yet another vacuous phrase, and we would have to start all over again.
I will leave you with this fact: Economics is a SCIENCE. Socialists never learned this fact and that's why they always fail.
numbskullandy 2 years ago
His name is Thorstein Veblen, and I have read up on him. He was a fascist who wanted to dictate how people spent their own money, and believed in massive taxes for ostentatious things. A deplorable little man who hated freedom.
I realise now you are incapable of having a conversation. You simply ignore all my points and keep throwing in moronic random phrases like 'slavery is sin' or 'you are deluding yourself'. You're an idiot. I've tried to have a conversation, but you are incapable.
numbskullandy 2 years ago
You will have to expand. I don't understand your comments - please put in context. "Why consume for such frivolous matters"? I don't know what that means.
And forget "leisure class". "Class" is just a collective (collectivist) term designed to lump individuals together to form a target of hate or ridicule.The only 'class' is the corrupt,conspiring political class that screws the world. We should be united against THEM, not against private unhindered trade across borders between free peoples.
numbskullandy 2 years ago
You believe I don't see the 'big picture'? I can't imagine what led you to that conclusion. Prejudice maybe? I certainly do see the big, nasty, corrupt picture. We haven't BEGUN to touch upon the secret societies that run the world's economies. What I do not understand is your disdain for freedom. Real, full, honest freedom is my aspiration as a libertarian. I don't play the left-right bullshit game played by conservatives and socialists - to me they are all full of shit. I just want freedom.
numbskullandy 2 years ago
Final reply to you comment (sorry to drag on). I just want to emphasise that you haven't actually made an argument against free trade -you are arguing against corrupt govnmnts who print fiat money and take us all into massive national debt.But that's not about Capitalism or free markets.That's manipulative corrupt governments controlling markets with their worthless fiat printed money that is not backed up with any value (i.e. actual stock).That is what I am against. Gov't theft from the people.
numbskullandy 2 years ago
Your sentence is meaningless-"consume 70% more than you produce?" 70% what? Bread? Meat?Cars?Of course it's ok -we all consume many things that we produce nothing of.And many of us also produce stuff that we consume nothing of (but sell to others).
And yes, I believe it's ok to consume as much as you can AFFORD to consume.Consuming more than you can afford leads directly,by definition, to debt, and is of course to be avoided as ultimately pay day will come round. We do that, and yes it's stupid.
numbskullandy 2 years ago
Man, you haven't actually said anything to argue with my point. I AGREE with you and always have on that issue: of COURSE economic war by the US or ANYONE is always 'by design'. Can you not see that's why I'm so much for free trade? Most governments hate free trade because it puts control into the hands of the consumer and away from the governments. Free trade directly OPPOSES economic war - free trade is just clean, open, honest trade between free parties through choice. And we don't have it.
numbskullandy 2 years ago
@ DIVERSITYRECESSION3: when we import goods from another nation it makes no difference whatsoever to us what their political system is.We import goods simply because it makes economic sense to do so (i.e. cheaper than making our own). And we sell goods to other nations when they desire OUR goods at the price. It is always a two-way agreement. Both sides benefit by the trade (otherwise they wouldn't do it). Economic wars are caused by tariffs and protectionism, not free trade. Come on, study up!
numbskullandy 2 years ago
This causes mass retail inflation, owning anyone who is confined in its shackles. Government influence over the market must be annihilated completely if prosperity is ever to endure in any state.
mrbeefy1515 2 years ago
Wanna know how many of the top 10 countries on the Index of Economic Freedom also have the highest GDP per capita by PPP? 5. The economies of four others are all hinged on fluke natural resource possession and regional placement. Wanna know how many in the top 15? 9. Ask yourself how monopolies got there in the first place. It sure as hell wasn't from free trade.
Illegals are hired to circumvent the national taxation rape.
mrbeefy1515 2 years ago
Capitalists are not greedy - unless a yearning for freedom to better ones life should be considered 'greedy'. Self reliance is not perfect - it is inefficient. Example: Scotland cannot produce cheap wine. Too damn cold, needs artificial heat etc. So it imports it because it is cheaper to import than to produce it. So the labour force don't waste time producing expensive wine, they produce stuff that Scotland CAN produce cheaply - Whisky! And that is EXported. Trade benefits all.
numbskullandy 2 years ago
Hi platorevolution: Again no my friend, free trade is not communism, it's the exact opposite. It's 'laissez faire' (leave alone) which means the government stays the hell out of private business and consumer interests and doesn't interfere. Communism is about governments controlling markets and prices and production and propping up loss-making businesses with tax money, rather than allowing consumer choice. Communism never allows free trade - they're mutually incompatible.
numbskullandy 2 years ago
@ DIVERSITYRECESSION3: but that's just the point my friend. Yes, you ARE free to work for Walmart producing shit for 5 dollars an hour. You are also free NOT to! If Walmart did not exist it would just be one less choice. Sure, it's a crappy choice that you personally (and me too) aren't interested in - but many others are glad of a job there, as crappy as that may seem to you or me. And the average wage there is $11 - still crap, but hardly $5. If they can find better, then great.
numbskullandy 2 years ago
Hi Platorrevolution - no, trading with China has led to LOW prices! Chinese produce goods cheaper than we can, so it means we buy them cheaply too - would be even cheaper if there were no tariffs. Sure, this hurts domestic businesses who cannot compete in the same line - but it also forces businessmen/entrepreneurs to move into other areas of demand instead so that labour is not wasted on producing stuff that can be bought cheaper elsewhere. Hence free trade benefits US all - the consumers! :)
numbskullandy 2 years ago
@platorevolution: You're absolutely MAD! You actually WANT communism?! You don't want freedom?! You trust governments to run your life and tell you what you can do? You want your government to assign false value to things rather than let the market (i.e. free people) decide? Ever wondered why people live longer with more wealth in free capitalist societies? Human beings yearn to be FREE, not to be slaves to the state.
numbskullandy 2 years ago
@platorevolution: Free market favours BOTH parties. When two parties trade FREELY, it is through FREE WILL,because both have something the other party wants (i.e. goods or a service or money, etc). Profit is the fruit of ones labours.Why do you have a problem with free people turning a profit? No one forces you to buy their products. You should be FREE to buy it if you WANT.Why do you believe governments should stop us trading freely?You think freedom is bad?Don't be a slave to your government.
numbskullandy 2 years ago
Thank you Schell for doing your part by educating some of us and now its our responsibility to spread this knowledge. Because knowledge is more powerful then money and weapons.
mbleek2001 2 years ago
You're for 'self-reliance'? Why? You think you (or your country) can produce everything you need yourself, better, more cheaply and more efficiently than trading with others? What are you afraid of? You're actually afraid of being free to trade without restrictions? You WANT government restrictions and tariffs? You want YOUR taxes to pay for those tariffs to artificially add value to a crap product or business? I will never understand you stupid socialists.
numbskullandy 2 years ago
BS! The freemarket doesn't kill jobs! It frees up people to work more productively. It's called 'division of labour'. People produce what other people need. If that thing is already being produced satisfactorily, and you cannot compete, then you PRODUCE SOMETHING ELSE! How feckless do you have to be to be scared of freedom?
numbskullandy 2 years ago
The people and organizations who own and control the world are long past the point of being challenged. Find a way to break through the barriers to entry into the 'in' crowd, or languish on the outside.
periphetes 2 years ago 2
Great video. Learned a lot.
Reazzurro90 2 years ago
Even tho i know free market is bullshit in our days, and a way for big companies to become even more powerful by destroying local economies.. I dont think protectionism is the way to go, but on the other hand i dont know what the wright thing would be..
otinane89 2 years ago
FREEDOM is always the right way to go, it should not be a dilema. Governments (and anyone else for that matter) have no moral right to take away our freedom to trade with one another. Protectionism is always paid for out of the taxpayers pocket, and is simply a case of throwing money at a product that is not in demand at the price (otherwise it would not be failing). Utter stupidity. Solution: let the crap businesses fail, let the good ones succeed naturally and FREELY. FREEDOM. Embrace it.
numbskullandy 2 years ago
"What protectionism teaches us is to do to ourselves in times of peace what enemies seek to do to us in times of war." -Henry George
Elasaltaculos 2 years ago
I don't believe this shit for a second, NXSchell. First off, these "Free Trade Agreements", are thousands upon thousands of pages long, when Free trade does not need any kind of exhaustive explanation. Protectionism makes countries poorer because it drives up the cost of living.
That you try to prove David Ricardo's comparative advantage wrong with this video is ambitious but comes short of doing so.
Any country that embraces protectionism makes their average citizen poorer.
Elasaltaculos 2 years ago
Thank you NXSchell. I am so sick of "anti-globalists" attacking capitalism, as if they're the same thing!
shockadelicaustralia 2 years ago 5
Britain and the U.S. wage war for international finance. Britain for two centuries, and America for the past century.
TheInternetG 2 years ago 3
This is the lie that is told to the masses. That the free market is what we have now and that it is causing this mess.....*Cough Michael Moore *cough!
UcanbeGOD 2 years ago 7
Anti-State
Pro-Market
ConstrainedNoMore 2 years ago 3
Dude:
Japan and Korea prospered because of massive help from the US. I spent about ten years in Korea working on this issue. NAFTA, the WTO, IMF, WB do not practice free trade. It is all managed trade. That is why there are about 80K pages on the books controlling business in America. It is not to restrain big business, but to put the shackles on small businesses so they can't compete.
steve0281 2 years ago 17
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Fuck that racist Ron Paul! Watch: ''Ron Paul: The Deep Dark Details''
organdva 2 years ago
Ron paul has integrety, something it seems politicians either come without or lose during the first few months of navigating the corridors of power.
As for him being president. Completely unrealistic. Politics is like a popularity contest, and he goes against too many tribal rules within our society. And also the average voter does not aquire the information to vote for the best candidate. Most vote for the best marketed one because it gives them the illusion of an informed choice.
Nangeala 2 years ago 15
Excellent video, Schell.
lunaris19 2 years ago 3
What is it called when the citizens speak in tandem to request a politician to run for president? I nominate Ron Paul for President in 2012 and I hope others will do too. This man seems to be the only statesman with the balls to speak out against the Federal Reserve, NAFTA, prohibition of marijuana, and a host of other politically dangerous issues.
strong8action 2 years ago
So is Ralph Nader and a host of other people from Third Parties, but I believe that you are right that Ron Paul would be a good choice for the 2012 presidency.
lunaris19 2 years ago
Great as always Schell.
UcanbeGOD 2 years ago 3
the 1st image was epic!
pwnagenuss 2 years ago 3