Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site watdcsu.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!watnot!watdcsu!dmcanzi
From: dmcanzi@watdcsu.UUCP (David Canzi)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: High Duties => Increased Competitiveness?
Message-ID: <1722@watdcsu.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 4-Oct-85 19:31:37 EDT
Article-I.D.: watdcsu.1722
Posted: Fri Oct  4 19:31:37 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 5-Oct-85 06:26:19 EDT
References: <2591@watcgl.UUCP>
Reply-To: dmcanzi@watdcsu.UUCP (David Canzi)
Organization: University of Woolamaloo
Lines: 52
Summary: 

In article <2591@watcgl.UUCP> jchapman@watcgl.UUCP (john chapman) writes:
>3. what happens to the (possibly up to 1 million according to the
>   cbc evening news) people who lose their jobs through free trade.

By dwelling on the topic of Canadian jobs, opponents of free trade can
make it look as if no harm results from quotas, except for a measly sum
paid by consumers in the form of higher prices.  They also make it look
as if anybody who bitches about quotas is a stingy S.O.B. who just
wants his lousy 5 bucks back.  Well, I'll be honest: I *am* a stingy
S.O.B. who wants his 5 bucks back.

But I can also show you that the issue is not quite as black-and-white,
from a moral point of view, as you think it is.  When quotas/duties are
introduced, the amount of foreign goods imported decreases.  As a
result, some of the people in other countries who produced these goods
become "redundant".  What happens to them?

You can be forgiven for not noticing the unemployed foreigners,
because nobody mentions them when free trade comes up for discussion.
Those for free trade dwell on Canadian consumers' money, and those
against dwell on Canadians' jobs.  But now that you're aware of them,
how can you reconcile exporting unemployment with your sense of morals?

			*	*	*

On another matter, I'll admit that the figures I quoted are more
relevant to the discussion if they are Canadian figures than if they
are not.  If they are not Canadian figures, they serve only as an
example of quotas raising the prices, and of how carelessly implemented
quotas can lead to a real absurdity.

The statistics were quoted in a Canadian newspaper discussing Canadian
import quotas, which suggests that the reporter who reported them
though they were relevant to Canada.  Also, the North-South Institute
is located in Ottawa, which suggests that their purpose is to try to
influence government policy.  This is both a good reason to believe
that they would only use Canadian economic statistics, and to suspect
that they might slant the results of their studies by omitting relevant
statistics which are not favourable to their position.  (And this last
consideration is why I want to get a copy of the study for myself.)

A major point of my original article was that the people who bitch
loudest in letters to the editor are usually successful businessmen
with a vested interest in keeping quotas, and that these letters
betray a level of ignorance about economics that is hard to believe
in a successful businessman.  Are they really as ignorant as they
seem, or are they lying?  I'll politely reserve judgement.
-- 
David Canzi

"It's Reagan's fault.  Everything's Reagan's fault.  Floods... volcanoes...
herpes... Reagan's fault." -- Editor Overbeek, Bloom Beacon