Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (20725)	3/6/2002 10:26:58 AM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Here is a short piece from this months "Reason" on the long term effects of free trade. Lindy, I find two things with which I disagree in that short clip. First, the framing, that anti-globalization forces (whoever those are) think globalization is simply another excuse for the rich to fleece the poor. I'm certain you can find those views among the "anti-globalization" crowd. So far as I can tell, however, it's a very diverse group. So it's not the only position. A better one, in my view, is to put a human face on globalization. What can be done, since it's well-nigh inevitable and, if correctly handled, produce a much better globe, what can be done to make the process more humane? It seems to me the libertarians say you just have to let the terrible pain work through because to do anything would only make it worse. That's wrong. Short answer. The second problem I have with that piece is the data source of the argument. I thought Kevin (SirRealist) did a devastatingly good analysis of using that kind of data. It simply cannot be used to make the argument the authors wish. As for the assertion that the best way to keep poor nations poor is to segregate them from the world economy, perhaps that's true in general but it might not be true in particular. Some countries have flourished with barriers. It's a tricky argument that requires some nuance. John