5 ms·

Virtually all the wealth created in the world is because of unfettered trade. Trying to create an insular economy is just a path to poverty. Are they going to b

Virtually all the wealth created in the world is because of unfettered trade. Trying to create an insular economy is just a path to poverty. Are they going to build their own iPhones, Teslas, LCD screens and microprocessors? Obviously not. When a local consumer decides to pass on buying a local good for a substitute made far away, it's because they believe they benefit economically from doing so.

skrowl 9y ago
That would be true if currencies couldn't be converted / traded. Nothings stops you from trading Berkshares for USD or vice versa the same way you would Euros / Bitcoins / etc.
- valuearb 9y ago
  The 5% discount does.
deanCommie 9y ago
This only applies in a market where consumers always make objectively ideal decision. This applies to smart phones, electric cars, and CPUs. (mostly, see post-script) But for most goods, there is no such thing. What is the "best" tomato or a jar of honey for a consumer to buy? Is it the cheapest? The brightest? The most delicious? Yes, all those things. But the evaluation of them is subjective for most. A tomato from a local farmer you see on the street every weekend will look brighter and taste better and feel healthier to a lot of people than one coming across the world from Peru. Regardless of the truth or economics of scale. Also why is it a zero sum game? If some consumers choose to spend more to support local producers, is that not just a form of local subsidy which rebalances the wealth slightly from consumers to local producers? *Actually iPhones and Tesla are also emotional decisions. For some people an Android or a Chevy Volt are better decisions for factors beyond financial yet for emotional reasons they want the entire package that comes with the top brands.
- valuearb 9y ago
  Consumers always make objectively ideal decisions. What you think the best good for them to buy is not necessarily what they think, and they are the ones who are right.
  - icebraining 9y ago
    I've bought things despite knowing it wasn't the best for me. I think that one shouldn't presume to know better than the consumer, though.
  - deanCommie 9y ago
    That's the argument I'm making. Consumers know best.
    - gertef 9y ago
      Then why do class action lawsuits exist?
      - valuearb 9y ago
        To enrich class action lawyers.
dalbasal 9y ago
I agree with what you said, mostly. I say mostly because the world is complicated, and economics is something that applies at the it's complicated end. I think we do tend to go a little bit overboard about economic ideas. Local iPhones, Teslas, LCD screens and microprocessors is absolutely a path to poverty. Cultural and economic (I think these closely related) isolation is a path to poverty, of several kinds. Our isolationist instincts are often wrong, and closely bound with our xenophobic instincts. All else equal (including whatever you consider to be important), why buy local? Are faraway people not brothers and sisters? I am very comfortable making the case for openness. Yet... There is still lots of room for experimentation, and oddities, and places where the rules are bended. There's some food bank collective that hired an economist to invent a fake currency and auction market for them. It needs some part time central banking, but supposedly works well. The market & currency has all sorts of quirks like negative prices to help with their specific needs. Messing about with 5c on the dollar locally is totally fine. It's more than fine if it has a positive effect, and I wouldn't be surprised if that effect is something we'd see as "cultural."

skrowl 9y ago

That would be true if currencies couldn't be converted / traded. Nothings stops you from trading Berkshares for USD or vice versa the same way you would Euros / Bitcoins / etc.

valuearb 9y ago
The 5% discount does.

deanCommie 9y ago

This only applies in a market where consumers always make objectively ideal decision. This applies to smart phones, electric cars, and CPUs. (mostly, see post-script) But for most goods, there is no such thing. What is the "best" tomato or a jar of honey for a consumer to buy? Is it the cheapest? The brightest? The most delicious? Yes, all those things. But the evaluation of them is subjective for most. A tomato from a local farmer you see on the street every weekend will look brighter and taste better and feel healthier to a lot of people than one coming across the world from Peru. Regardless of the truth or economics of scale. Also why is it a zero sum game? If some consumers choose to spend more to support local producers, is that not just a form of local subsidy which rebalances the wealth slightly from consumers to local producers? *Actually iPhones and Tesla are also emotional decisions. For some people an Android or a Chevy Volt are better decisions for factors beyond financial yet for emotional reasons they want the entire package that comes with the top brands.

valuearb 9y ago
Consumers always make objectively ideal decisions. What you think the best good for them to buy is not necessarily what they think, and they are the ones who are right.
- icebraining 9y ago
  I've bought things despite knowing it wasn't the best for me. I think that one shouldn't presume to know better than the consumer, though.
- deanCommie 9y ago
  That's the argument I'm making. Consumers know best.
  - gertef 9y ago
    Then why do class action lawsuits exist?
    - valuearb 9y ago
      To enrich class action lawyers.

dalbasal 9y ago

I agree with what you said, mostly. I say mostly because the world is complicated, and economics is something that applies at the it's complicated end. I think we do tend to go a little bit overboard about economic ideas. Local iPhones, Teslas, LCD screens and microprocessors is absolutely a path to poverty. Cultural and economic (I think these closely related) isolation is a path to poverty, of several kinds. Our isolationist instincts are often wrong, and closely bound with our xenophobic instincts. All else equal (including whatever you consider to be important), why buy local? Are faraway people not brothers and sisters? I am very comfortable making the case for openness. Yet... There is still lots of room for experimentation, and oddities, and places where the rules are bended. There's some food bank collective that hired an economist to invent a fake currency and auction market for them. It needs some part time central banking, but supposedly works well. The market & currency has all sorts of quirks like negative prices to help with their specific needs. Messing about with 5c on the dollar locally is totally fine. It's more than fine if it has a positive effect, and I wouldn't be surprised if that effect is something we'd see as "cultural."