3 ms·

How to Save A Life

5 points by twampss 17y ago

rglovejoy 17y ago
The article starts off well, but then veers off into Bizarro world. The assertion that some countries are poor because their labor or natural resources are somehow being exploited is ridiculous. Countries like Sudan or Haiti are poor because of the bad choices and corruption committed by their governments, not because rich people in New York or London are doing dastardly deeds. The trade with Africa, say, is but a tiny drop in the bucket compared to the business we do with China or Canada. Swartz's contention that protectionism will help these countries climb out of poverty is equally ludicrous. The example he cites of Britain becoming a wealthy nation because if protectionism isn't really true. Britain became wealthy because it was the first country to industrialize on a large scale, which made its workforce much more productive. There were efforts by the British government to prevent its methods of industrialization from spreading to other countries, with mixed results. The attempts to prevent the American colonies from manufacturing goods was one of the causes of the Revolution; this policy was also resented in India and other parts of the Empire. The Continent industrialized, in varying degrees, over the course of the 19th century, with Britain staying at the head of the pack by continuously innovating. (These innovations ended up making everyone, not just Britons, wealthier.) If anything is going to alleviate the suffering of the poorest of the nations, it will be efforts to reduce official corruption and to eliminate tariffs.
pg 17y ago
"But how did medieval Europe stop being medieval Europe? The answer is through protectionism" That is false. Protectionism may (or may not) have helped specific industries in individual countries, but it was net harmful for medieval Europe, because nearly all international trade in medieval Europe was with other European countries. It's a very interesting question how medieval Europe stopped being medieval. The short version is peace and trade. When society is dominated by local warlords, you tend to have neither. Europe's rise out of medievalness was basically achieved by an alliance between medieval kings and a growing merchant class. The kings used the wealth of the merchants to increase the power of the central goverment, which then protected the merchants from the random exactions of over-powerful nobles.
- nazgulnarsil 17y ago
  You might be interested in Mancur Olson's Stationary Bandits hypothesis which he expounds in Power and Prosperity.

5 points by twampss 17y ago

The article starts off well, but then veers off into Bizarro world. The assertion that some countries are poor because their labor or natural resources are somehow being exploited is ridiculous. Countries like Sudan or Haiti are poor because of the bad choices and corruption committed by their governments, not because rich people in New York or London are doing dastardly deeds. The trade with Africa, say, is but a tiny drop in the bucket compared to the business we do with China or Canada. Swartz's contention that protectionism will help these countries climb out of poverty is equally ludicrous. The example he cites of Britain becoming a wealthy nation because if protectionism isn't really true. Britain became wealthy because it was the first country to industrialize on a large scale, which made its workforce much more productive. There were efforts by the British government to prevent its methods of industrialization from spreading to other countries, with mixed results. The attempts to prevent the American colonies from manufacturing goods was one of the causes of the Revolution; this policy was also resented in India and other parts of the Empire. The Continent industrialized, in varying degrees, over the course of the 19th century, with Britain staying at the head of the pack by continuously innovating. (These innovations ended up making everyone, not just Britons, wealthier.) If anything is going to alleviate the suffering of the poorest of the nations, it will be efforts to reduce official corruption and to eliminate tariffs.

pg 17y ago

"But how did medieval Europe stop being medieval Europe? The answer is through protectionism" That is false. Protectionism may (or may not) have helped specific industries in individual countries, but it was net harmful for medieval Europe, because nearly all international trade in medieval Europe was with other European countries. It's a very interesting question how medieval Europe stopped being medieval. The short version is peace and trade. When society is dominated by local warlords, you tend to have neither. Europe's rise out of medievalness was basically achieved by an alliance between medieval kings and a growing merchant class. The kings used the wealth of the merchants to increase the power of the central goverment, which then protected the merchants from the random exactions of over-powerful nobles.

nazgulnarsil 17y ago
You might be interested in Mancur Olson's Stationary Bandits hypothesis which he expounds in Power and Prosperity.