Skip to main content

View Diary: Morning Feature: 'Free' Markets, Part III - A Different Narrative (Non-Cynical Saturday) (207 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  What do you mean? (0+ / 0-)

    Honestly, I don't understand your point here.

    Why should US GDP drive the GDP in Zimbabwe or any other poor nation?  We don't control the internal conditions of those countries. We don't control Mugabe's monetary policy.

    Regardless of our world's savior/world's policeman fantasies, we simply don't have that ability.

    The best thing the US could do for world poverty is to stop supporting convenient thugs, stop pouring money into the IMF hole and stop subsidizing our agricultural exports which destroy markets for locally grown crops.

    You'll notice that all these involve government not doing things.  

    Results count for more than intentions do.

    by VA Classical Liberal on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 06:05:21 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Zimbabwe is stretching the point. (6+ / 0-)

      You're not adressing the argument. The argument isn't that wealth capture by the allready-rich makes every single poor person everwhere poorer. The argument is that it tends to do so in general. The argument is not that rising GDP in the USA causes immiseration elsewhere....rather that increasing wealth capture by the ruling class does tend to do so. This was actually quite clear from what NCrissieB wrote just above.

      A case in point would perhaps be free trade with Mexico, if it is in fact the case that falling cord proces have driven many peasnats off the farms and into unemployment in the slums.

      I've noticed that classical libertarians insist on treating all such negative outcomes as bugs. "If only", they will cry, "government had stayed out of it, and reduced the farm subsidies". As if this was an accident rather than a highly evolved and persistent design feature of The System.

      Rather than the industrial corn and soy subsidies falling, what will actually happen is that (for but one example) the Québec dairy marketing boards will be destroyed, so that Canadian dairy products will now come from Wisconsin or wherever. A pillar of Canadian rural life will disappear, prices will fall marginally, industrial agricultural interests in the US will capture the difference, and the Mexican campesinos will stay fracked.

      A soft answer turneth away wrath: but grievous words stir up anger (Proverbs 15:1)

      by Boreal Ecologist on Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 07:29:15 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Rich get richer means poor elsewhere get poorer (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jim W, Orinoco, DBunn, FarWestGirl

      The rich get richer policies in the US have affected India (and other poor countries) in two ways.

      First, they have led both to Government policies and individual aspirations that ape the West (surely they must know what they are doing?!), so that our Governments have shifted away from socialist policies that kept income inequality here within control.  There are reasons why several Indians now number among the wrold's richest people - while hundreds of thousands of farmers (people doing real work) have committed suicide over the past decade because the urban rich drive up prices, Govt policies favour "free markets" and urban & corporate growth, and the poor producer farmers are getting squeezed out of existence.

      Second, the growth in power of the financial industry, large corporations and rich individuals mean that they come to dominate in every country in the world.  When high tax rates and other mechanisms kept the power of corporates and rich individuals within limits, multinationals were already doing enormous damage to developing countries.  Now the foreign financial institutions and multinationals (plus local capitalists) have completely messed up both the culture and economy in developing countries, maximizing exploitation of poor people (contract jobs etc so their hands are not soiled with the exploitation) while tossing crumbs to the highly qualified, who do the outsourced jobs.  They have hugely increased income inequality in India directly, in addition to the indirect effect above.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site