23 ms·

Can you back up your claims with any evidence?

rapsey 8y ago
It's from here: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Things-They-Dont-About-Capitalism/dp/0141047976 https://www.amazon.co.uk/Things-They-Dont-About-Capitalism/d...
- antidesitter 8y ago
  Just linking to a book doesn’t help. Elaborate. Be specific.
hardlianotion 8y ago
Here is a starting point for your research. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ha-Joon_Chang https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ha-Joon_Chang He has written a lot on this subject. Also https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Jacobs https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Jacobs Jane Jacobs is another who writes very clearly on the role protecting home markets ply in development. Anecdotally, Victorian Britain was full of indignant stories about Yankees stealing intellectual property. One of the reasons Dickens conducted his US tours was to try and plead the case for payment with folk who were pirating his work.
- antidesitter 8y ago
  Again, I see no data that supports rapsey's claims, namely that 1. Protectionism resulted in greater economic growth for the US, Germany, Japan, and China. The example of China is particularly egregious since it was China's economic liberalization reforms in the 1980s and 1990s, including opening up to foreign investment and lifting protectionist policies, that resulted in massive economic growth and massive poverty reduction. 2. There is a positive correlation between protectionism and development in African countries. This is ironic because protectionism is a major source of harm for African countries. From the introduction of [5]: In recent years, as African governments and development advocates have stepped up their campaign to reform the trade policies of rich countries, the issue of agricultural protectionism has come to the forefront. This is a highly divisive issue, with rich countries resisting poor countries' demands for major changes... Critics highlight the hypocrisy of rich countries giving lip service to free trade while maintaining tariff barriers and paying subsidies to their farmers. Their argument that agricultural protectionism places an unfair burden on Africa is becoming a mainstream view. There is a consensus among economists that protectionism has a negative effect on economic growth and economic welfare [1][2][3][4], so rapsey's extraordinary claim to the contrary requires extraordinary evidence. As Gregory Mankiw says [6], "Few propositions command as much consensus among professional economists as that open world trade increases economic growth and raises living standards." [1] https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/675410 https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/675410 [2] https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/26/upshot/economists-actually-agree-on-this-point-the-wisdom-of-free-trade.html https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/26/upshot/economists-actuall... [3] https://piie.com/newsroom/short-videos/why-after-200-years-cant-economists-sell-free-trade https://piie.com/newsroom/short-videos/why-after-200-years-c... [4] https://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/review/2004/09/01/free-trade-why-are-economists-and-noneconomists-so-far-apart/ https://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/review/2004/09/... [5] https://www.jstor.org/stable/40209918 https://www.jstor.org/stable/40209918 [6] http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2006/05/outsourcing-redux.html http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2006/05/outsourcing-redux.htm...
  - rapsey 8y ago
    > lifting protectionist policies Not lifting completely, just enough to facilitate economic growth. Importing anything in the US, EU or China is process full of protectionist policies and tariffs that you must overcome. The proof is in the pudding. The right amount of protectionism has proven to work in every successfully developed country. There are NO exceptions. > "Few propositions command as much consensus among professional economists as that open world trade increases economic growth and raises living standards." Economics would not be the first field with a popular theory that is complete nonsense that whenever tried has only resulted in catastrophe. Because it only works well in mathematical models instead of the read world. Funny how all those economists have not convinced a single developed country to believe their theories and put them into practice.
    - antidesitter 8y ago
      > Importing anything in the US, EU or China is process full of protectionist policies and tariffs that you must overcome. What is this supposed to prove? > The right amount of protectionism has proven to work in every successfully developed country. Every developed country has different amounts of protectionism. I have no idea what you mean by the "right" amount. > Economics would not be the first field with a popular theory that is complete nonsense What popular theory is "complete nonsense"? > that whenever tried has only resulted in catastrophe Which catastrophe? > Funny how all those economists have not convinced a single developed country to believe their theories and put them into practice. So not convincing someone to implement a good policy means the policy is bad?

It's from here: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Things-They-Dont-About-Capitalism/dp/0141047976 https://www.amazon.co.uk/Things-They-Dont-About-Capitalism/d...

antidesitter 8y ago
Just linking to a book doesn’t help. Elaborate. Be specific.

hardlianotion 8y ago

Here is a starting point for your research. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ha-Joon_Chang https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ha-Joon_Chang He has written a lot on this subject. Also https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Jacobs https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Jacobs Jane Jacobs is another who writes very clearly on the role protecting home markets ply in development. Anecdotally, Victorian Britain was full of indignant stories about Yankees stealing intellectual property. One of the reasons Dickens conducted his US tours was to try and plead the case for payment with folk who were pirating his work.

antidesitter 8y ago
Again, I see no data that supports rapsey's claims, namely that 1. Protectionism resulted in greater economic growth for the US, Germany, Japan, and China. The example of China is particularly egregious since it was China's economic liberalization reforms in the 1980s and 1990s, including opening up to foreign investment and lifting protectionist policies, that resulted in massive economic growth and massive poverty reduction. 2. There is a positive correlation between protectionism and development in African countries. This is ironic because protectionism is a major source of harm for African countries. From the introduction of [5]: In recent years, as African governments and development advocates have stepped up their campaign to reform the trade policies of rich countries, the issue of agricultural protectionism has come to the forefront. This is a highly divisive issue, with rich countries resisting poor countries' demands for major changes... Critics highlight the hypocrisy of rich countries giving lip service to free trade while maintaining tariff barriers and paying subsidies to their farmers. Their argument that agricultural protectionism places an unfair burden on Africa is becoming a mainstream view. There is a consensus among economists that protectionism has a negative effect on economic growth and economic welfare [1][2][3][4], so rapsey's extraordinary claim to the contrary requires extraordinary evidence. As Gregory Mankiw says [6], "Few propositions command as much consensus among professional economists as that open world trade increases economic growth and raises living standards." [1] https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/675410 https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/675410 [2] https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/26/upshot/economists-actually-agree-on-this-point-the-wisdom-of-free-trade.html https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/26/upshot/economists-actuall... [3] https://piie.com/newsroom/short-videos/why-after-200-years-cant-economists-sell-free-trade https://piie.com/newsroom/short-videos/why-after-200-years-c... [4] https://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/review/2004/09/01/free-trade-why-are-economists-and-noneconomists-so-far-apart/ https://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/review/2004/09/... [5] https://www.jstor.org/stable/40209918 https://www.jstor.org/stable/40209918 [6] http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2006/05/outsourcing-redux.html http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2006/05/outsourcing-redux.htm...
- rapsey 8y ago
  > lifting protectionist policies Not lifting completely, just enough to facilitate economic growth. Importing anything in the US, EU or China is process full of protectionist policies and tariffs that you must overcome. The proof is in the pudding. The right amount of protectionism has proven to work in every successfully developed country. There are NO exceptions. > "Few propositions command as much consensus among professional economists as that open world trade increases economic growth and raises living standards." Economics would not be the first field with a popular theory that is complete nonsense that whenever tried has only resulted in catastrophe. Because it only works well in mathematical models instead of the read world. Funny how all those economists have not convinced a single developed country to believe their theories and put them into practice.
  - antidesitter 8y ago
    > Importing anything in the US, EU or China is process full of protectionist policies and tariffs that you must overcome. What is this supposed to prove? > The right amount of protectionism has proven to work in every successfully developed country. Every developed country has different amounts of protectionism. I have no idea what you mean by the "right" amount. > Economics would not be the first field with a popular theory that is complete nonsense What popular theory is "complete nonsense"? > that whenever tried has only resulted in catastrophe Which catastrophe? > Funny how all those economists have not convinced a single developed country to believe their theories and put them into practice. So not convincing someone to implement a good policy means the policy is bad?