4 ms·
Competition is good. But banning the better player is not the way. That would be just feeding crony companies and forcing bad products to consumers with the m
by afsina 10y ago
Competition is good. But banning the better player is not the way. That would be just feeding crony companies and forcing bad products to consumers with the mask of security.
- vkou 10y agoIf the history of industrialized nations is anything to look up, protectionism is a pretty fantastic way to jump-start a capital-intensive industry. Now, once you have a world-class industry, complaining about foreign protectionism is also a pretty fantastic way of preventing other countries from developing theirs. This is an article from '92, but it's quite relevant today. http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1993/12/how-the-world-works/305854/?single_page=true http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1993/12/how-the-...
- afsina 10y agoGoogle become what it is because of protectionism? Protectionism slows down everything and gives pain to the consumers. You are better off without it.
- vkou 10y agoNo, it was a first mover, with what was in hindsight an obvious innovation. When you're a second mover, though, protectionism is absolutely necessary. Observe American heavy industry during the 19th century, the two Japanese economic miracles, any of the Asian Tiger economies, German auto firms... If your goal is to grow a domestic industry against powerful established players, you should absolutely not optimize what is good for consumers.