Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

It's Economic Theory, Stupid
http://www.economicpopulist.org/content/its-economic-theory-stupid-5588 ^

Posted on 11/13/2014 9:17:18 AM PST by Lincolns Economics

Is it conceivable there has never been a sound theory of economics and that both parties share the same 200 year old intellectual error?


TOPICS: Business/Economy
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

1 posted on 11/13/2014 9:17:18 AM PST by Lincolns Economics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Lincolns Economics

Wow.
A single sentence.
Awesome.


2 posted on 11/13/2014 9:19:43 AM PST by humblegunner (Why hello, Captain Trips.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lincolns Economics

No.


3 posted on 11/13/2014 9:20:15 AM PST by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lincolns Economics

So, despite the site having “populist” one of the new words for communist, right there in the name I went and waded through it. He’s just saying he doesn’t like free trade.


4 posted on 11/13/2014 9:32:39 AM PST by thorvaldr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lincolns Economics

Sound economic theory is given in scripture. No usury. It is by nature inflationary theft.

However, that doesn’t address what the article is truly trying to say, “protectionism is the answer”. Free trade among nations that share a common belief system, and a legal system founded on that belief system is not particularly harmful, and can be quite beneficial. Free trade between the Christian west and communist China or other similarly imbalanced entities is fraught with problems.


5 posted on 11/13/2014 9:33:13 AM PST by Prophet2520
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: humblegunner

The article is a call for economic autarky and heavy tariffs. It ignores the benefits of international competition in order to promote internally-directed investment. There are good points to both sides. US workers will not compete with Chinese ones given the wage differentials, but US companies will not compete with other US companies to make better or innovative products.
He also ignores monetary policies, such as government debt, floating currencies, and government-directed investments.

A $500 iPad vs a $1000 and non-existent Zenith touch screen? A Toyota or a Vega? US or CHinese rare earth metals?


6 posted on 11/13/2014 9:45:25 AM PST by VanShuyten ("a shadow...draped nobly in the folds of a gorgeous eloquence.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Lincolns Economics
Mr. Romney and President Obama...Both are promoters of free trade...

Bullcrap. Obama is no proponent of free trade. This entire article mixes micro and macro economic concepts to the point where policy conclusions are impossible from it.

7 posted on 11/13/2014 11:28:19 AM PST by econjack (I'm not bossy...I just know what you should be doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VanShuyten

At the most off shoring manufacturing saves a few pennies on the dollar. For that we get high unemployment, malaise and decrease security due to a smaller manufacturing base to support the military. “Free trade” is a failure except for the the few.


8 posted on 11/13/2014 11:31:18 AM PST by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: thorvaldr

Actually, if you Google for the in depth analysis called “The Unraveling of Economics” (cited in the essay) there you will find the detailed theoretical model. I’ll see if I can post that here tomorrow.


9 posted on 11/13/2014 3:52:30 PM PST by Lincolns Economics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: econjack

Econjack

I’d be interested in hearing why you don’t consider Obama a free trader Is he pushing for tariffs? I’d also be very interested in hearing why you see this an incorrect mix of micro and macro. Be as specific as you can in terms of theory. If you did not already see “The Unraveling of Economics”, it is the detailed analysis. I hope to post the link tomorrow to see what falls out. I’m definitely looking for critique to help simplify and clarify my model. thank you


10 posted on 11/13/2014 6:44:40 PM PST by Lincolns Economics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: humblegunner

I’m new to posting on FR. Did the link to the article not appear? I’ll try to post the detailed theoretical model tomorrow and see if I can hold my own against the critiques. It’s time for a new debate.


11 posted on 11/13/2014 6:44:41 PM PST by Lincolns Economics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Lincolns Economics

Free trade goes way beyond tariffs and quotas. Why do you think Obozo is fighting the Keystone pipeline? You don’t think reduced energy costs would make us more competitive in world markets? There are hundreds of small steps he could have taken to encourage free trade but I am unaware of any of them. Has he done anything to give businesses a reason to become more competitive in world markets? His tax policies are punitive on business and hinder US producers in world markets. Has he done anything to promote trade with other countries?

He has done nothing that would stimulate domestic production. At a time when we are clearly in a Keynesian Liquidity Trap, making monetary policy totally ineffective, his solution is quantitative easing and increased spending via transfer payments. His prescription out of a recession is free cell phones for the poor. Nothing about investing in human capital or any other type of capital. His increased spending was geared to buying votes, not ramping up real output to put in world markets.What is needed are fiscal measures and he comes up with class warfare and advocates raising taxes on the rich. When the top 10% of income earners foot 71% of the tax bill, how can you say with a straight face that the rich don’t pay their fair share? He fails to see that a rising tide lifts all boats. How many of you were hired by a poor person?

Ineffective monetary policy, punitive fiscal policy, and a naive and lackluster push for increased world trade tells me he is economically incompetent and has done nothing to promote free trade.


12 posted on 11/13/2014 8:45:16 PM PST by econjack (I'm not bossy...I just know what you should be doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Lincolns Economics

Obama is not a free trader, the last thing he wants is any kind of freedom at all.


13 posted on 11/13/2014 8:55:09 PM PST by GeronL (Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Lincolns Economics; humblegunner

Read Post #64.

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3109294/posts?page=64#64


14 posted on 11/14/2014 12:09:54 AM PST by shibumi ("Walk through the fire - Fly through the smoke")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lincolns Economics
Garbage!Protectionists are morons!

I demand the right to make deals with any counterparty anywhere in the world!

I like my cheap stuff.

Nobody is protecting the fruits of my labor from world-wide competition. Therefore, nobody else should be so protected.

15 posted on 11/14/2014 12:18:43 AM PST by cynwoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lincolns Economics

The economic “theories” we have today were all developed by people in the employ of a few insanely corrupt financial elites that exert all sorts of nasty influences, economically, politically, etc.

Strangely enough, the economic “theories” we have today don’t address the issue of a few insanely corrupt financial elites that exert all sorts of nasty influences, economically, politically, etc.


16 posted on 11/14/2014 12:32:51 AM PST by PieterCasparzen (We have to fix things ourselves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thorvaldr

Just to clarify. It’s not that I don’t “like” free trade. I believe it is defective economic theory (i.e. Ricardo’s theory of comparative advantage is logically flawed). Instead of making a country rich, it will cause economic harm.


17 posted on 12/06/2014 8:50:25 PM PST by Lincolns Economics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: VanShuyten

Just to clarify. If I’m not mistaken, a few years ago the Toyota Avalon was rated to have the highest percent of US components. In short, tariffs would simply force foreign companies to produce on to US soil. It’s the reverse logic of moving to companies of China. Tariffs turn the wage differential on its head.


18 posted on 12/06/2014 8:50:25 PM PST by Lincolns Economics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: cynwoody

Interesting philosophical point you raise. But say your unemployed fellow Americans demand jobs instead of cheap goods. Why should your demand take precedence over theirs? Just curious how you envision conflicting “demands” being resolved.


19 posted on 12/06/2014 8:50:25 PM PST by Lincolns Economics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Lincolns Economics

FOAD nOOb...

And your title alone is idiotic.


20 posted on 12/06/2014 8:56:49 PM PST by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously-you won't live through it anyway-Enjoy Yourself ala Louis Prima)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson