Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site mnetor.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcs!mnetor!sophie
From: sophie@mnetor.UUCP (Sophie Quigley)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: High Duties => Increased Competitiveness?
Message-ID: <2223@mnetor.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 19-Sep-85 10:05:20 EDT
Article-I.D.: mnetor.2223
Posted: Thu Sep 19 10:05:20 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 19-Sep-85 11:17:28 EDT
References: <1394@utcsri.UUCP> <2188@mnetor.UUCP>
Reply-To: sophie@mnetor.UUCP (Sophie Quigley)
Organization: Computer X (CANADA) Ltd., Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Lines: 35
Summary: 

In article <420@looking.UUCP> brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton) writes:
>Let's slap a duty on shoes, for example.  First result is some Canadian
>shoe makers get nice and rich, and in the short term there are more jobs
>in the shoe industry.  And this means more votes from shoe makers.
>
>Second thing that happens is that *every* Canadian pays a few dollars more
>for shoes.  How much in total?  Well the extra paid is at least equal to
>the gain obtained by the shoe makers.   So a large sum of money is taken
>from one sector (the rest of Canada) and given to a proven non-productive
>sector.  Of course, when a large sum of money is taken away, it means jobs
>are lost.  In fact, at least as many as were saved in the shoe industry!

There is something I don't understand in this line of reasoning:  if people
start buying canadian shoes, then why the manufacturing of shoes be 
considered "non-productive"?  If the industry is making something that
people are buying, how could it be "non-productive"?  Shoes are pretty
useful things, what is your definition of "production", the production
of useless goods?

>Of course, this is spread over the whole country, so nobody blames their
>lack of a job on the "extra" job that was propped up in the shoe industry,
>so no votes are lost.

Why would the job of shoe-maker be "extra" and "propped up" if there is a 
real demand for shoes?  Why would people lose their job because they are
paying a few more dollars for their shoes?   The "large sum of money"
which is "taken away" is not taken away from a few people but in a 
distributed manner over the entire population.

>Now I see why duties are such a good idea!!

You do?
-- 
Sophie Quigley
{allegra|decvax|ihnp4|linus|watmath}!utzoo!mnetor!sophie