|
Inlägg #1: Postat: 2002-11-14 11:25:00
|
|
Frederik |
The problem I have with your argumentation is that its based on lots of ifs and looks good only in theory and on paper and if indeed you see our earth as one big natural resource.
|
| |
|
Inlägg #2: Postat: 2002-11-14 11:25:00
|
|
Frederik |
Unfortunately the world is a messy place in which irrationality will always play a considerable role, and where the information we have is never fully accurate or complete. You may say that alternatives will be looked for if prices rise, but before that happens wars may be fought and lots of permanent damage will be done.
|
| |
|
Inlägg #3: Postat: 2002-11-15 09:43:00
|
|
David Woxberg |
Well, first of all, serious shortages are seldom a major concern in free market economies, because of their dynamic nature. However, we should be very careful to adopt price regulation-policies and othe things that destroy the information in the economy. Without a proper price system, one cannot make proper calculations. This is, like Ludwig von Mises concluded, one of socialisms greatest problems.
|
| |
|
Inlägg #4: Postat: 2002-11-15 09:48:00
|
|
David Woxberg |
This is because price regulations can prevent prices from rising, which leads to improper resource allocation. In order to see what a complete lack of prices leads to, one can merely observe the history of the Soviet Union. Not too good for the environment, I must say.
|
| |
|
Inlägg #5: Postat: 2002-11-15 09:52:00
|
|
David Woxberg |
Insofar as prices reflect supply and demand, the switch from one resource to another is comparably smoothe, since prople usually start looking for alternatives only because they THINK that there is a actual shortage. We are not omnipotent, of course, but unregulated prices is one precondition of a sound economic development in which we make the best out of our resources.
|
| |
|
Inlägg #6: Postat: 2002-11-15 18:49:00
|
|
Frederik |
Youre still assuming that all resources can be quantified and substituted by others. But not all can, biological diversity being one of them, landscape another. Take patents on plants: if we follow this logic and sadly enough its happening, then on the long run one company will be able to own the genetical code to rice or wheat, and will control the seed production of one of the worlds main staple crops.
|
| |
|
Inlägg #7: Postat: 2002-11-15 18:51:00
|
|
Frederik |
Agriculture simply isnt flexible and dynamic enough to quickly change to another crop if that company decides to raise its prices, and mass poverty and exploitation will be a direct consequence. And while the damage of for instance one software company owning the right to 95 of the operating systems to be foudn on computers, it becomes a totally different story altogether when its your most basic food were talking about.
|
| |
|
Inlägg #8: Postat: 2002-11-15 18:53:00
|
|
Frederik |
...please add is still relatively limited between computers and it becomes...
|
| |
|
Inlägg #9: Postat: 2002-11-15 18:58:00
|
|
Frederik |
Its part of human nature to exploit a situation - even laws - to ones maximum advantage, and even to influence or modify these laws if one has the power to do so. Because of this trade will never be free because those with relatively more power will always tend to directly or indirectly oppress those with relatively less power in order to keep their advantageous position think of the opposition against trade unions in the US.
|
| |
|
Inlägg #10: Postat: 2002-11-15 19:02:00
|
|
Frederik |
Laws and regulations are also dynamic, and you cant expect them to stay forever. Think again of the US, the champions of trade liberalisation, who dont mind subsidising their farmers or raising import taxes if it suits them best. Who has the power to prevent them, and what makes you expect that situations like this will one day have disappeared? They never will.
|
| |
|
Inlägg #11: Postat: 2002-11-15 19:06:00
|
|
Frederik |
The qualitative nature of some resources and peoples tendency to misuse power are two of the reasons why I put total trade liberalisation on the same level as communism: it looks nice in theory, but it just doesnt correspond to practice and to how people work.
|
| |
|
Inlägg #12: Postat: 2002-11-15 19:08:00
|
|
Frederik |
Mind me, if the environment would be included to a greater degree into trade mechanisms and people or companies would start to have to pay for the environmental damage they cause i.e. the resources they use Id be among the first to greet that initiative. But Kyoto has shown that here again power can be misused to prevent these very real factors from being taken into the calculations.
|
| |