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