more on OECD on employment protective laws

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Russ Nelson <nelson () crynwr com>
Date: April 24, 2006 8:10:18 PM EDT
To: dave () farber net, "'Frode Hegland'" <frode () hegland com>, Bob  
Frankston <Bob2-19-0501 () bobf frankston com>
Subject: RE: [IP] more on OECD on employment protective laws

> From: Frode Hegland <frode () hegland com>
> Date: April 17, 2006 11:47:03 AM EDT
> To: dave () farber net
> Subject: Re: [IP] OECD on employment protective laws

> Within a capitalistic country regulation is need to keep large
> companies from becoming monopolies.

Do we?  Name a few monopolies.  Were they created by the marketplace
or by governments?  Let's play a game.  You name a market monopoly,
and I'll name a government monopoly.  Last person to name a monopoly
wins.  If you get desperate, I'll let you name a duopoly, but you have
to name both companies and you can only count them as one.

I'll go first: Verizon (my local telephone company)

Since you're going to name it sooner or later, I'll give you Microsoft
even though it's sustained by a government monopoly (copyright), and
even though you can walk into any Apple store and come out with a
computer running MacOS, not Windows.

My turn: National Grid (my local electric company)

Your turn?

> In fact, the trade imbalance with Africa is so bad that locally grown
> produce is more expensive in many places, than US imports due to US
> subsidies.

Oh, that's a completely separate problem from monopolies.  The US
taxpayers are giving a gift of produce to these countries.
Unfortunately, comparative advantage is very much in their favor for
producing produce; they aren't as good at other things.  So they have
to do something they're bad at, while we do something we're bad at
(but which is made cheaper by our taxpayers).  The only people this
helps are US farmers -- at least half of whom are already wealthy and
don't need the subsidy.

> let's just discuss how to improve the outcome for more people,
> instead of simple pro/con arguments. End rant.

End US farm subsidies.  Better for US taxpayers, better for efficient
US export companies (whose share of US dollars held by foreigners is
being sucked away by the less efficient farmers), better for people in
poor agricultural countries.

And then end EU farm subsidies while we're at it.  Same reasoning.

And if we're successful with the two of them, we have a chance at
ending Japanese farm subsidies (and protective legislation).  Same
reasoning.

--
--my blog is at    http://blog.russnelson.com   | A computer without  
Python is
Crynwr sells support for free software  | PGPok | like a CPU without  
memory:
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-323-1241       | it runs, but you  
can't do
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  |     Sheepdog          | anything useful  
with it.


-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/