Liberty Alone

There are many who campaign against trade. US politics seems to be dominated by NAFTA, not because its a mere parody of free trade, but because it is trade at all.
Drew Carey points out that if you’re worried about people doing work for less money, you should be worrying about machines, not trade.

Don’t worry though, machines and trade actually create jobs. They increase wealth and solve our problems.

The New York Times reports on a strange instance of sex discrimination in the US. It isn’t a simple matter of discrimination against women, but affects both sexes at different times.
The situation is that there are different tariffs on items of clothing based on whether they are for men or women. For example, men’s synthetic swimwear has a 27.8% tariff whilst women’s only has a 11.8% tariff. Women are hard done by when it comes to shoes with a 10% tariff as opposed to an 8.5% one for men’s shoes.

At last, the clothing industry is taking this to court though. Hopefully they will win - striking a blow against sex discrimination and hopefully lowering tariffs at the same time.

Nobody knows why this tariff structure is in place. It is illogical, but then again tariffs themselves are illogical when it comes to the overall economy.

(hat tip: Marginal Revolution)

There’s been a little lunacy emanating from the Welsh Liberal Democrats recently, but this really takes the biscuit.

This is basically a call for tariffs and protectionism. Its a call for putting the interests of farmers over those of everyone else.

Farmers already gains from obscene tariffs and the inhuman Common Agriculture Policy which sees $1200 a year taken from the pockets of a 2 child family to spend on farming and around $20 billion in losses a year from the developing world - far more than we spend on aid.

This goes to give each cow in the EU $2.50 a day - when billions of people struggle to live on under $2 a day.

This is obscene.

Now we’re told that the farmers cannot cope and need more help, now dressed up as ‘fair trade’ (remember, free trade is the only fair trade).

If they cannot survive with the obscene level of support they already have then frankly what are they doing in the business?

I’m sure people will complain about the job losses - but its not liberalisation which causes them, its the protectionism which encourages stasis and protects from the competition which breeds progress and success.

The Liberal Democrats are meant to be a party of free trade, a party of the individual and the masses against the classes. Not a lobby group for today’s high profile campaign.

As for British farmers being labeled ‘Fair Trade’. If the Fair Trade group lets them then fine, they can apply and be approved or not.
If they can’t, then develop their own branding. See if you can get people to pay a premium for that. That’s all fine, but it is not the politician’s place to support that.

Update:
The hypocrisy of this still rankles.
Why is Fair Trade seen as neeed? Because the developed world is deliberately pursuing protectionist policies designed to remove the developing world’s comparative advantage and means to develop and get out of poverty.

I remember an Oxfam advert which went along the lines of ‘Give a man a fish and he can feed himself for a day. Teach a man to fish and he can feed himself for life’.

That obviously makes sense, so long as fish stocks hold up of course.

But lets take it a bit further. Why should we be teaching everyone to fish? Why not let a man work in a Nike (or whoever) ’sweat shop’. Then he can earn money which he can use to buy fish, or meat, or vegetables, or clothing, all produced by people far more skilled than he in producing such things.
Of course, as the man works, he learns more skills, he becomes more valuable, he will get paid more, or a competing ’sweat shop’ hires him for a better paid job. He will have disposable income, he won’t need his children to work to make a living, instead they can go to school, they can then in turn earn even higher wages.

For women, the situation is even better. They can be hired to work now, they can earn their own wages. This gives them more financial freedom and makes them less dependent upon a husband or family. If they’re abused they can more easily leave and survive, they will become more educated over time, through work and school, leading to greater demand for equality - and that equality being given.

Higher income means even more diversification, mobile phones can become common, the Internet may arrive. More knowledge about the rest of the world and more ideas. Its a virtuous circle.

Of course, none of this will happen without property rights and the rule of law. Why risk investing in a country if the government might turn around and confiscate your assets on a whim? How are ordinary people expected to make investments in their own life if those investments may be confiscated or take years of paperwork and bribes to secure?

So lets not teach a man to fish, lets let a man choose where to work and give him opportunities. Self sufficiency means poverty, its through trade and the division of labour that we get rich.