4 ms·

They want the economy to suffer to preserve their legacy careers doing pointless things like mining coal or forging steel, things that somebody in a developing

They want the economy to suffer to preserve their legacy careers doing pointless things like mining coal or forging steel, things that somebody in a developing nation can do just as well for 1/10 the cost. Why are blue collar jobs so sacrosanct? When the careers of secretaries and travel agents essentially vanished, there was no weeping and moaning, no irrational protectionism, no economic suicide. People moved on to do something more productive with their time, and so should the coal miners. So, yes, they are crabs at the bottom of the pot seeing other crabs moving up, and they cannot abide by that.

deogeo 7y ago
Ah yes, mustn't let "the economy" suffer - who cares about the actual workers within that economy.
- cycrutchfield 7y ago
  I mean, you’ve shown that you don’t even understand the concept of comparative advantage at the individual vs. aggregate level. How am I supposed to explain to you that protectionist policies benefit a small minority of workers at the expense of almost everybody else? Instead, I’ll just suggest that you find a good Freshman-level Economics textbook and read carefully. You may find it illuminating to understand the concepts behind complex policy decisions.
  - deogeo 7y ago
    > How am I supposed to explain to you that protectionist policies benefit a small minority of workers at the expense of almost everybody else? Given that none of the most successful economies developed without protectionism [1,2], you'll have a difficult time explaining that indeed. That pesky reality, always getting in the way of "good Freshman-level Economics textbooks". [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage#Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage#Criticis... [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20320483 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20320483
    - cycrutchfield 7y ago
      I forget, are we talking about workers in first world countries or workers in developing countries? I’m not quite sure why you are gloating like you just made a strong counterargument, but it’s not a good look.

deogeo 7y ago

Ah yes, mustn't let "the economy" suffer - who cares about the actual workers within that economy.

cycrutchfield 7y ago
I mean, you’ve shown that you don’t even understand the concept of comparative advantage at the individual vs. aggregate level. How am I supposed to explain to you that protectionist policies benefit a small minority of workers at the expense of almost everybody else? Instead, I’ll just suggest that you find a good Freshman-level Economics textbook and read carefully. You may find it illuminating to understand the concepts behind complex policy decisions.
- deogeo 7y ago
  > How am I supposed to explain to you that protectionist policies benefit a small minority of workers at the expense of almost everybody else? Given that none of the most successful economies developed without protectionism [1,2], you'll have a difficult time explaining that indeed. That pesky reality, always getting in the way of "good Freshman-level Economics textbooks". [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage#Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage#Criticis... [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20320483 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20320483
  - cycrutchfield 7y ago
    I forget, are we talking about workers in first world countries or workers in developing countries? I’m not quite sure why you are gloating like you just made a strong counterargument, but it’s not a good look.