British government- Hey British manufacturer you now have to compete against the Chinese company whose men work for 20p an hour, have no health and safety regs, no environmental regs, or unions. Lets us know how you get on.
@thorogood473
8 ай бұрын
Depnds on the quality of goods, yed the chinese may be cheaper but it may cost more in the long run due to constantly needing to be replaced.
@davedismantled
8 ай бұрын
Isn't that the fault of British government and voters?
@alexmoran1711
8 ай бұрын
@andrearaujo4038 American products have also always been reputed to be cheaper and have worse quality and yet became the owners of the market. The capitalist economy is based on mass sales and this involves cheaper and lower quality products.
@Milkym0o
8 ай бұрын
@@thorogood473 People have proven they are more than willing to roll those dice to save a couple of quid.
@ethanfreeland2510
8 ай бұрын
short term corporate interests to not care and will inevitably just push the penalty, if it exists, onto the common people @@thorogood473
@crown9413
8 ай бұрын
17:50 This is exactly what happened to Greece. Millions of their population moved to Germany and other states. Leaving them with an aging population. I can’t remember the numbers but it was crazy like 20% of the population.
@user-BasedChad
6 ай бұрын
although some have moved back due to the crisis that happens in the other countries also. You are right, we got fucked. This is not only a good argument against complete free trade but also against immigration, if more population = more gdp = better economy as many globalists/progressivists yap all the time then immigration is stealing population from othe countries which makes them have less population = less gdp = worse economy thus the progressives exploit a foreign country.
@Vingul
8 ай бұрын
They should at least not pretend to be opposed to globalism if they also advocate for free trade.
@ILAptenodyte
8 ай бұрын
I am not a Milei fan, and I actually criticize him. But globalization is to free trade, and globalism is to a global and international government. They are different concepts.
@Jacob-pu4zj
8 ай бұрын
@@ILAptenodyte "Real free trade has never been tried."
@chico9805
8 ай бұрын
@@ILAptenodyteOne facilitates the other; they share the same relationship as libertarianism and liberalism.
@blue18404
8 ай бұрын
@@chico9805 correct
@Mocassin-1454
8 ай бұрын
@@chico9805 If globalisation means the expension of western soft power and faustian civilisation this is not a problem. If globalisation means the fiat Standard being accepted everywhere such as it destroy architecture and only give Macdonald well this is a problem.
@lefromage1914
8 ай бұрын
This also explains how small towns are getting hollowed out with its former capital getting collected either in megacities or flown overseas. Free trade in the absence of strong communal preferences that Mises' ilk took for granted is scouring the countryside of all culture, with local businesses all turning into chain restaurants and gas stations if they don't just wither away.
@willnitschke
8 ай бұрын
What has international trade got to do with people not wanting to live in small towns? 🤣
@lefromage1914
8 ай бұрын
@@willnitschke internal migration is a microcosm of global migration. Same reason people leave shithole countries to go to places like Singapore.
@untenableposition
8 ай бұрын
@@willnitschke You are pondlife. Do you have an actual counter to the point made by @lefromage1914, or are you just going to continue showing off your wilful ignorance?
@willnitschke
8 ай бұрын
@@untenableposition If you can only post a brainless insult when I ask someone a perfectly reasonable question, that doesn't reflect badly on the person you're insulting. You know that, right? 🤣
@untenableposition
8 ай бұрын
@@willnitschkeTake your bad faith arguments to someone who cares.
@maverickstclare3756
8 ай бұрын
When Ricardo wrote his works, Limited Companies did not even exist, the debts of all companies were the debts of the owners. He died in 1823 and Limited Companies began in Britain with the Limited Liability Act of 1855.
@Geokinkladze
7 ай бұрын
Limited liability existed long before the limited liability act.
@michaelashby9654
5 ай бұрын
Yes but was it not limited to specific tasks or companies with charters?
@Spido68_the_spectator
5 ай бұрын
His work is a literal fraud. He started from an impossible exchange, added words and for some reason said there was something.
@tastypymp1287
8 ай бұрын
Excellent explanation and I entirely agree with your assertion. I have previously asserted generally that the beautification of urban areas through philanthropic and altruistic behaviours of the elites occured because they lived where their capital was invested. However the increase in mobility resulted in elites being able to relocate themselves to other countries while still managing their capital in the original country and then subsequently relocating the capital itself. This resulted in abandoning the 'English Riviera' and grand towns and cities by the wealthy capitalists and bringing an end to their beautification.
@tehehe5929
3 ай бұрын
You need to have really stable system for that. Like gold based currency and non-crazy governments. Otherwise you are a complete idiot if you are not a nomad when you have money. Today basic of diversification is political diversification. You and your capital needs to be mobile to have a chance.
@tastypymp1287
3 ай бұрын
@@tehehe5929 You've missed the point entirely.
@tehehe5929
3 ай бұрын
@@tastypymp1287 How so?
@hibernian87
8 ай бұрын
Interesting how trade being restricted to a country you're at war with is seen as standard practice, but if they're merely adversarial then its a free for all. Your own money often ends up being used against you.
@hoppeanofasgard1365
8 ай бұрын
Yea that's one of the reason's I no longer favor freetrade with China. I do however support it in most cases with friendly or neutral countries though. I think where libertarians get into problems is they just can't see the forest for the trees, they're correct with in their narrow world view of economics, but they fail to see the bigger picture. Overall they are still the smartest people we have on our side though and I think everyone can become myopic at times so it's not a problem solely in libertarians, it just seems to happen more with them is all.
@willnitschke
8 ай бұрын
@@hoppeanofasgard1365 I don't think you have the slightest clue how much you're benefited from that trade relationship, and to some degree, how much the Chinese have lost in that deal. They have, after all, swapped useful products for little more than digits representing US dollars created on a Fed computer somewhere. 😉 Further, as an ignorant Libertarian, I also wonder why people like you want to expend so much energy into fixing problems that if fixed the way you would want to fix them, would in fact make everyone worse off.
@hoppeanofasgard1365
8 ай бұрын
@@willnitschke I don't think your ignorant at all, in fact I think libertarians are some of the smartest people in the political space. I would even consider my self to be mostly libertarian thus the name and pfp. That being said, as libertarians we can be quite myopic as I've stated earlier. what if China uses all that money to one day attack Taiwan or worse the US it self? It's a very real consideration. I like free trade, all for it, but we can't enrich people that have dangerous governments. But i do share your concerns, i don't want to make the west worse off, and cutting trade with China at this point in the game would be disastrous because the dollar has been so devalued and inflation is running rampant as a result of it. I think before any action like that is taken we have to fix the central bank problem.
@willnitschke
8 ай бұрын
@@hoppeanofasgard1365 Sure, China is an authoritarian shithole, but do you think if we stop buying their T-Shirts they won't invade Taiwan? In other words, if we try to isolate them economically, and their economy goes down the tubes even more than they are currently going, wouldn't a Taiwanese invasion be a nice distraction for the regime? I think the original hope was that if we helped boost them economically the country would become more liberal over time (like Taiwan did) but things didn't play out that way. So I see nothing but loose loose for the West, whether they are isolated economically or not. As for the problems with the Fed, that's a whole different mess.
@joshuadavies5631
8 ай бұрын
Providing we no longer rely on Taiwan for chips, I couldn't care less if China invades Taiwan.
@he1ar1
6 ай бұрын
Benefits of free trade are contingent. Adam Smith talked about them. People won't trade if such trade would cause conflict with their particular moral principles (things such as national security). Unless of cause you are a utilitarian and believe personnel gain is the only thing that matters.
@willnitschke
5 ай бұрын
Everything is contingent, mate. As in, extreme positions typically produce extreme outcomes. Adam Smith was no laissez-faire anarcho-capitalist, anyway.
@SacredCowStockyards
6 ай бұрын
Ricardo wrote when Britain owned 1/4 of the world, and the rest of Europe collectively owned another 1/4. So there was no reason to worry about institutional irregularity because virtually everywhere you went was Britain. So, the takeaway from this video isn't that free trade is wrong, but that getting rid of the Empire was a bad idea.
@willnitschke
5 ай бұрын
There was no takeaway from this video, because it had no arguments. It just made a bunch of assertions at the end, that weren't even based on anything empirical to back them up.
@timfallon8226
8 ай бұрын
Book ' Free trade doesn't work' by Ian Fletcher
@A_View_From_The_Shire
8 ай бұрын
Yeah I’ve suggested that one as well Tim. Completely changed my view on Free Trade.
@jacksoncapper
8 ай бұрын
I think you can generalise this: Human agents value widgets in poetic fashion, not by any known theoretical model of value. The goal of an economist is to identify inefficiencies and patch them by law according to the reflective will of the people (e.g., laws against addictive substances, and gambling). The will is important, because the economy should serve humanity, which does not necessarily mean min-maxing widget production.
@orbik_fin
8 ай бұрын
You bring really valuable clarity and explanation to what most, incl. me, would only feel instinctively.
@nikkili8944
8 ай бұрын
What a catchy trailer! Certified fren moment! 👌 Free Trade is one of the many sacred cows in Western countries among others.
@panagenesis2695
8 ай бұрын
Countries' economies develop under protectionism, not free trade.
@willnitschke
8 ай бұрын
Understand when you protect your markets, overseas markets retaliate. It's also hard to build an economy if you can't built your export markets.
@Septeus7
8 ай бұрын
@@willnitschke Tell that to modern China; the most protectionist economy in history. Their currency devaluation acts as about 250% tariff for all foreign goods.
@willnitschke
8 ай бұрын
@@Septeus7 I don't concur. The average Chinese has something like 3X less accumulated wealth per adult than the average Taiwanese. You're confusing over development of infrastructure, empty sky scrappers, etc., with prosperity. Prosperity is individual wealth, and the government has destroyed most of it for their citizens.
@Septeus7
8 ай бұрын
@@willnitschke The Taiwanese economy was based on land reform and you are confusing individual consumption with actual wealth which is actually passed on to future generation whereas the high consumption high debt based economies will fail compared to the high savings (infrastructure/IP) based economies. You also can't compare China to Taiwan due to massive differences in size and geography and history. Prosperity IS NOT debt based individual consumption. It is Intellectual Capital generated by a high skilled work force. Taiwanese Capital was artificially built up by America and will soon be overtaken by the Chinese and the neither the USA or Taiwanese will do anything because China is more wealthy than the USA in physical output capacity which as WW2 and current Russian NATO conflict proves is to superior to fragile globalized supply chains which can't even outcompete Russia let alone the Chinese. Free Trade is fragile. Houthi's in motor boats can cost billions and billions of damage and the Free Trade USA can't do anything to stop them. That's poverty and weakness not wealth.
@joshuadavies5631
8 ай бұрын
The US *could* stop them easily if it wanted to. But in any case the problem is US disastrous foreign policy rather than the shortfalls of free trade.
@CivilizedWasteland
5 ай бұрын
I don't think they are wrong at all, the problem lies with modern governments being completely separated from economic reality. You can't have massive surges of immigration as capacity is decreasing and then you certainly can't use an all encompassing welfare system to ensure that they never leave. Pre 1960s all the immigrants would have been going to countries like China and Mexico for work not the countries with decaying employment and strict unions and regulations.
@freedomarts
5 ай бұрын
Read my comments. Look at Monarchies, they have free market, even free movement of people with some countries. What he asks never worked anywhere and lead to poverty and social chaos, like Argentina. What he ignores is the empirical evidence of the opposite he says, like Monarchies, Liechtenstein, Monaco, Luxembourg, Qatar, UAE have no issue and are the best counrties in each region.
@willnitschke
5 ай бұрын
@@freedomarts Any form of government can have a free market to a greater or lesser extent. Monarchies, Social Democracies, dictatorships, communist regimes. You're not saying anything at all, because you're confusing politics with economics.
@devlinX
8 ай бұрын
As soon as corporate capture occurs the benefits of free trade evaporate and you just become the victim of vulture capitalists.
@NeonAnimeDreams
8 ай бұрын
Corporatism is a bi*ch
@NeonAnimeDreams
8 ай бұрын
Well, that's corporatism for you, how it was allowed to go this far I have no clue.
@Spido68_the_spectator
6 ай бұрын
@@NeonAnimeDreamsThat's not corporatism. It's just capitalism developing further. Corporatism is a different economic system altogether
@NeonAnimeDreams
6 ай бұрын
@Spido68_the_spectator Not true, corporatism is when the corporations control government. Under capitalism, they grew in power until it was possible to take over that system, after the take over you see what you see today.
@Spido68_the_spectator
6 ай бұрын
@@NeonAnimeDreams So untrue ! Corporatism is a socioeconomic system were the economy is treated like the human body and goes back to the Bible. Corporations (as people of the same professions banding together and trained others, made regulations and more) existed from the middle ages until capitalism took over. Instead of a class system, we have interest groups (farmers, military, doctors...) who are at the heart of things. The state is a mediator in the relationship between people, not a decider. Modern corporatism was born in the late 19th century in response to the horrible working conditions under capitalism, from meeting held by Pope Leon XIII (I forgot the name of the book). A French author (Mr de la tour du pin) said " the 3 economic (or social) systems: the one that sees man as a thing : Liberalism, the one that sees man as a beast : socialism and the one that sees it as a brother : corporatism " Corporatism was unfortunately featured in undemocratic countries (f@scist Italy, Salazar 's Portugal...) but should perhaps be further developed as an alternative to socialism for a post capitalist future. Some countries today use neo-corporatism, like the nordic countries, where tripartite agreements employee / employer / state are made. France almost took the road in 1969 when the senate could have become the national corporative chamber. Sadly the ruling class was having none of it and the left committed to shooting itself in the foot. (As the new system would have guaranteed their influence over time).
@hoppeanofasgard1365
8 ай бұрын
I'm not sure if Ricardo was a libertarian, but Mises was, so I'm not sure what you mean by "what libertarians get wrong". Mises argued for freetrade between nations not free movement of people. Hoppe is also very similar in this regard. So the only conclusion I'm getting from any of this is that you don't like neo liberal EU style polices and can see how disastrous they are, but EU polices have nothing to do with libertarian polices. This is not what Mises would have advocated for.
@csikostamas8604
8 ай бұрын
Very strongly agree with the overall point of the video, although I'm not sure about Ricardo's law only being effectual in conditions of narional protectionism. In fact, I think Ricardo's insight has great explanatory power regarding our current predicament. The problem here in my opinion is that Ricardo seems to draw an arbitrary line at the national level, and then formulating his law only in reference to trade between nations. In reality, the real acting economic unit as per the austrian tradition is the individual, and Ricardo's law I think applies to individuals just as it does to nations: if Person A is better at producing both shoes and shirts than Person B, it would still be economically beneficial for these two individuals to specialise in the production of only one commodity. The "trade" in this case is of course the exchange of shirts and shoes between Person A and Person B, instead of an exchange of shirts and shoes between Nation A and Nation B. Due to this, I think we can still say that at least the logic behind Ricardo's law is universally applicable, even if the actors within that logic are not necessarily nations. Mises seems to me be saying something similar when he writes that without protectionism, the entire world basically becomes one nation with one internal market. Now, another important aspect is, as both Mises and Ricardo point out, that in any exchange, whether between individuals or nations, the goods being exchanged are not limited to material economic goods. Rather, the exchange often also includes non-material considerations. For example, if Person A not only values shoes and shirts, but also his ability to provide those goods for himself, and to thus be able to support himself regarding them, not being dependent on others for their production; then he might choose not to specialise in the production of any one commodity, but rather to produce them both for himself. In this case, if the economic efficiency acquired by specialisation is deemed to be worth less than the value assigned to being self-sufficient, exchange might never arise between Person A and Person B. I think we can use the two insights above to approach the situation we find ourselves in today. Since due to the Four Freedoms both capital and labour (population) are mostly free-flowing in today's world, Ricardo's law ceases to function on the national level, but it nevertheless still applies on the individual level. On the individual level, however, the only thing stopping the high-speed disintegration of nations and cultures is personal non-material preferences for one's people, country, nation, for the nation's ability to be self-sufficient and so on. So if the elites simply make these preferences go away (maybe by associating them with being "le evil fash", for example), then there is nothing standing in the way of global disintegration. When you add mass democracy into the mix, the effects become even more swift and devastating. This is the two-sided coinf of the free market. The best thing about free markets is that they give the people exactly what they want. And the worst thing about them is that they give the people exactly what they wanrt. Without proper institution in place to channel the preferences and desires of the people properly, they can become very destructive to the very societies from which they emerged, kind of like an auto-immune disease.
@mike200017
8 ай бұрын
Very good points. Again, applying the principle between individuals relies on the assumption that each individual has an intrinsically unique mixture of skills. People like Murray Rothbard have famously written at length about this and how it ultimately is the justification for division of labor and personal freedom altogether. In reality, people's skill sets are not immutable (education, experience, etc.) but when individuals can freely trade with each other they are incentivized, over time, to specialize their production (in the Ricardian sense) and develop specific skills (and Rothbard argues, that in the opposite case, under socialism, people tend to generalize and become interchangeable, thus greatly reducing overall production). In the case of nations, the mixture of skills is really a function of the mixture of individuals and capital within it. So, with individuals who can't really "migrate" their skills into other individuals, the Ricardian principle holds a lot better. But nations can, of course, change their mixture of skills through migration (in or out). With a free flow of capital and people, there aren't really many limits on the dissolution of the national character, except things like fixed capital (natural resources, specific geographical features, etc.) and personal attachments to an area. So you'd expect all the movable capital (incl. human capital) to accrue and concentrate on some arbitrary places (e.g., big cities) and have only the specific labor and capital that is tied to specific natural resources to stay where those resources are (farms, mines, etc.). So, there is this irony built in, that only nations that can steadfastly preserve and protect their unique character and obstruct capital flows can actually benefit from global free trade, unless they are one of a few places that will accrue capital (e.g., US for the world, Germany for the EU, etc.). But even in those cases, the later ramifications might not be worth it (e.g., what if they lose that status of economic power-house, and are just left with an incoherent national character). AFAIK, Japan is the best example of a country that is wide open to global trade but almost completely closed to the migration of people or capital.
@joeblogs6598
2 ай бұрын
@csikostamas8604 "Without proper institution in place to channel the preferences and desires of the people properly, they can become very destructive to the very societies from which they emerged, kind of like an auto-immune disease." I disagree with this conclusion to the observation (which I agree with) that under a free market people could act self destructively. You do not need a moderating institution to prevent an inundation of self destructive behavior, because of natural selection in a free market. If some people take on self destructive behaviors they will be less successful than ones who don't; that behavior will be selected against.
@phillidaadamus4349
5 күн бұрын
Wow it's nice to see a fellow countryman here, it's a respite from the horrible slop that political "commentators" produce, bár ezt nem tudom miért angolul írtam.
@dutyrooster3737
8 ай бұрын
I'd be interested in AA's opinion on Friedrich List's work. I believe he was writing around the same time as Ricardo.
@juanme555
8 ай бұрын
love this old school aa vibes
@podrag
3 ай бұрын
Not how I'd described it previously, but definitely an interesting new perspective that broadly aligns and is more founded in the fundamental original theories. Especially your interpretation of Ricardo is very refreshing, he seems to be an economist that anyone uses to justify anything, but you really pin that down. Thanks.
@A_View_From_The_Shire
8 ай бұрын
I came round to this view point after reading “Free Trade Doesn't Work: What Should Replace It and Why” recommended by Vox Day. Well worth reading if anyone wants to go into more depth.
@MrSmith-zy2bp
8 ай бұрын
Ian Fletcher did have some good videos on KZitem.
@freedomarts
5 ай бұрын
Short version: Libertarians do not think like this, some do, but those are inconsistent. Free market is a private market, so regulated by private owners, not the government, and not compatible with migration, migration is also controlled by people, and it is only bad between different cultures, free borders are not bad between the same culture and not really free under private property rule. Market restricted to the nation is socialism and leads to 3d world country. European Union is a political entity, not free market. The most stable and rich countries, do have free market and open borders with some countries, these are Monarchies. The issue is not "free market" is the lack of it and the lack of private property and private law, with the lack of a religion as regulatory entity. And mostly the lack of a "private" government, like Monarchy. These are not issues in Monarchies like Liechtenstein, Monaco, Qatar or UAE.
@willnitschke
5 ай бұрын
There is no particular "Libertarian position" on migration as that is a state issue. Libertarians don't have an issue on whether ice cream is superior to, or inferior to, yogurt, either. This is just your personal obsession.
@lilaotearoa5399
8 ай бұрын
How does Free Trade look when practiced within a nation with protectionism practiced outside of the nation.
@tommyhill7645
8 ай бұрын
Preferable, were it up to me all domestic taxes would be abolished and replaced with a flat tariff/customs duty/tax on imports
@NeonAnimeDreams
8 ай бұрын
Well that's the US China relationship, US does free trade with Chine (internal policy) with a country, China, that's practicing protectnism outside of the US.
@lilaotearoa5399
8 ай бұрын
No it's not. I meant free trade only within the nation I.E. all citizens within a nation can only engage in free trade practices with other citizens/goods/capital within the nation but any dealings they want to do outside of their nation has moderate - to harsh protectionist policies (imposed by their own government) to contend with.
@NeonAnimeDreams
8 ай бұрын
@lilaotearoa5399 sounds like north Korea
@lilaotearoa5399
8 ай бұрын
@@NeonAnimeDreams Pretty sure the state has a heavy hand in how businesses are run North Korea
@mike200017
8 ай бұрын
Great video AA! I think there is also a time element to this that is mostly missing from analysis of this topic. That is, in a world where capital and labor is expected to move freely, and the laws reflect that (allow migration, allow foreign investments, etc.), it greatly reduces the incentives for long-term investments, which generally cheapens everything. It turns the world into a trailer park, where everything is built cheaply to work out for the time being, always ready to go. A devastating trend in recent decades has been the explosion of CapEx (Capital Expenditures) due, in part, to building capital for the short term, and constantly moving things around with the ebbs and flows of the global markets. A massive problem with the global economy is a kind of maturity mismatch where investors and people are constantly being conned into making long-term bets (e.g., "emerging markets") only to see things fall apart soon after (maybe because the labor pool migrated away, or politics changed, or whatever). That's another important real world aspect that isn't necessarily captured in Mises' or Ricardo's analysis, that nations (in Ricardo's days) are not just barriers to the flow of capital or labor, but they are also distinct political entities and the ever-changing rules create inefficiencies of their own (as Hayek has written about, that it is not only about what the rules are, but about the fact that they might soon change or be arbitrarily applied that comes at a great economic cost, because either the fear diminishes the investments made, or if made, they more often go to waste.
@willnitschke
8 ай бұрын
Yes because it's really really bad that cost of living declines and levels of prosperity increase. 'Cause reasons.
@blue18404
8 ай бұрын
Free Trade is the best environment for predators.
@Mocassin-1454
8 ай бұрын
Protectionnism is the best environnement for local mafia who refuse to be productive and love wasting other ressources in order to consolidate their monopoly
@ILAptenodyte
8 ай бұрын
Regulated Trade is the best way to create monopolist, thus, predators.
@blue18404
8 ай бұрын
@@ILAptenodyte history disagrees. You must be white.
@pcraft8785
8 ай бұрын
Small hats love "free trade".
@d4n4nable
8 ай бұрын
Prey mentality.
@MonkeyFabGarage
8 ай бұрын
People need to reconnect with the value of beauty. I feel like I’m living in a CAD model. I’d gladly sink capital there. Thanks AA for the insight.
@Jeton649
8 ай бұрын
What you dont mention is that many of these conditions (outsourcing and high production costs leading to that for that matter) were only made possible by government intervention. The reason people outsource production is because of rising production costs due to minimum wages, laws (unreasonably) benefitting workers, inflation and subsidization of zombie companies. Its not a free trade problem, its a government problem.
@Jeton649
8 ай бұрын
@@MagnaRedux very good question. Food prices in a free market are determined by supply and demand. If there is increased demand, producers of food will always try to fulfill it in order to make profit. It might lead to short-term paucity but sooner or later the price of food is going stabilize and food will therefore always be affordable and there will be enough of it. How are the producers going to fulfill it exactly? There are many means: Either through imports of food from foreign producers (free trade), local producers increasing their production capacities or an increase in the amount of producers in general. Same goes with the wage of workers: The wage of the factory worker is determined by supply and demand. If there is a limited supply of workers (in the western world its mainly caused by governments bailing out big and inefficient zombie companies), the wage will be increased in order to keep and attract new workers. If domestic producers cant compete with foreign producers, they will have to either simply close down or innovate themselves to stay competitive. Its a common belief that companies going bankrupt and a decrease in GDP is a bad thing but it really isnt. Its actually a good thing. If a bad company closes down the resources (workers, material etc.) will go to sectors that are more in need of them. In your example, the company he works in will go bankrupt and the factory worker will probably go and work as a farmer because the agricultural sector is in dire need in order to fulfill the demand and conquer the vacuum in the market. Long story short: food will always be affordable. The world issues (thats what AA also fails to mention) are caused by socialism, protectionism and government intervention. Its not a free trade problem but a government problem. The reason why so many people in third world countries live in poverty is because of their autarkic and socialistic attitude and not because of free trade. Every country that goes through economic liberalization improves in terms of poverty.
@chrisc7265
8 ай бұрын
this assumes that the only reason you have richer and poorer countries is government intervention
@Jeton649
8 ай бұрын
@@chrisc7265 yeah and thats true. I explained that in a previous comment in which I outlined that but its being filtered out. Just look at the countries with the highest poverty rates, they are all socialist and protectionist countries. The moment they economically liberalize, their poverty rate improves.
@willnitschke
8 ай бұрын
@@MagnaRedux If your arguments made sense, why hasn't the West collapsed and why are places like China now struggling? The reality is you can't outsource everything to foreign lands. Transport costs have to be dealt with. There are communications barriers. You can't be expected to fly to Vietnam every time you need a filling or a check-up. Tourism seems impervious. Education needs to be local, as does transport, distribution/warehousing, all kinds of services. A foreign guy can't fix your computer, your car, repair your roof. Construction needs to be local. I can go on and on... I would suggest you look up all the industry components (segments) of a modern Western economy, then you'll get a more realistic impression of what can be impacted and what can't.
@Jeton649
8 ай бұрын
@MagnaRedux I will answer it in a short answer because my comment will probably be deleted again: everyone producing value to society would be able to afford food in a free market. The reason is the economic principle of supply and demand.
@FeHearts
8 ай бұрын
I still think you should do a video readdressing your arguments with Truedilton on Free Trade vs Protectionism.
@brianbob7514
8 ай бұрын
would be great to here you talk this over with Bob Murphy
@sunnycareboo8924
8 ай бұрын
Proper economic calculation is not solely based on monetary profit. To think that is the crux of libertarian ideals completely misses the point. And the point is missed by those who claim to be economic liberals, and those who are against economic liberalism. It's a shame that Libertarians tend to show it this way, as if borders are not Libertarian. When in reality, property rights imply a border around your property and your community's property.
@CleopaOrthodox
8 ай бұрын
AA check out 'Guilds in the Middle Ages' by Georges Renard (1918)
@newthirx4311
8 ай бұрын
This video misses the point I believe. You fail to recognize that the last F freedom of movement of people is something not within the preview of authorities. If people desire social capital they will form it and if not they will not. The issue raised in the latter part of this video has an underlying idea that countries shoud be preserved, borders kept, nationalism maintained when most libertarians do not agree on this point. Then if you look at the more conservative libertarians they adhere to what i mentioned before that people willingly form communities, social capital, which would tie them up to a specific region. Long story short, your argument has a statist predisposition and a disregard for what people might want in favor of keeping borders or a sense of nationallitiy or regional affiliation when in fact libertarians afe perfectly okay with this.
@willnitschke
6 ай бұрын
The video has no point. It goes over some classic economics (which I always enjoy) and then it makes a couple of assertions at the end as to why those classical views are incorrect, based on no arguments whatsoever, beyond some harebrained opinions.
@thorogood473
8 ай бұрын
I must add though that as much as we may complain about free trade being the downfall of our country's native industries we must not forget that the ones you miss the most: automotive, steel and other heavy industries were run into the ground and already on their last legs by the time trade was opened up. A prime example would be britain's steel and automotive industries which were little more than unemployment programes by the time thatcher came along.
@tommyhill7645
8 ай бұрын
All those industries declined because of American imposed free trade, do try to keep up
@willnitschke
8 ай бұрын
@@tommyhill7645 I think his point was that labour relations were so dysfunctional that the country managed to blow itself up in that market segment and standards of living would have been crushed (more) if those industries had to be carried by productive segments of the economy up until today. Try to keep up.
@thorogood473
8 ай бұрын
@@willnitschke exactly, i remember clarcson discussing how unions basically stopped any attempt to improve efficiency
@AnyVideo999
4 ай бұрын
Restricting free movement of people is inefficient at the level of the globe but can make sense to an individual nation. Particularly it draws uoin the law of one price to achieve parity for wages and living conditions across the world, but it's in the interest of the elite nations to maintain an imbalance since their peoples lose in this arbitrage game.
@willnitschke
4 ай бұрын
The entire premise of restricting movement is retarded. This quasi-Marxist nonsense is based on the premise that the loss of manufacturing capability is crushing the West, so to fix that, either we have to stop population flows into China, or the reverse. But neither is happening in either case. So basically the video is stupid.
@thekwizatshaderach
28 күн бұрын
After listening to the debate between this guy and Jack Angstreich on the Labour Theory of Value, I wouldn't listen to AA on anything, especially if it was to do with economics. If he said it was raining outside, i would go out and check to make sure.
@mamrd7197
7 ай бұрын
>nooo you cant just leave our bad land to farm good land elsewhere! i get that you want people to stay with their stuff to keep the country going, but at least conquer the places everyone wants to go
@willnitschke
6 ай бұрын
Thank you, Adolf.
@hoppeanofasgard1365
8 ай бұрын
Yes, there was a reaction to libertarian economic policy at the tail end of the 19th century leading into the 20th century, that reaction was the start of the progressive era with people like Teddy Roosevelt for example. I'm not sure that's the path we want to go down, because that's the exact path that got us here in the first place. bringing it back to 1880s economic policy is what's needed, not what should be avoided.
@lefromage1914
8 ай бұрын
Sure, but you also need to bring back the prejudices of the people from 1880.
@freedomarts
5 ай бұрын
Correct.
@tropics8407
4 ай бұрын
Capital controls and Labour controls have been tried extensively and are still in place worldwide. The problem is if you do not let any out then none will come in 🫤 but maybe Great Britain is a special case then 🤷♂️
@mrjamesgordon
8 ай бұрын
Even when he's wrong Mises is usually right.
@paranoidandroid9511
2 ай бұрын
I would say that the UK did not suffer from too much free trade of capital and workers. The UK failed from too much protection is, regulations and assurance they had reached the top and had plenty of capital imports to push out filthy heavy industry. Because for sure the extreem case for total competitive advantage is theoretically true it was not the cause. The Sahara desert or antarctica sure has an almost total comperative disadvantage to almost any other place on earth and that is why capital and workers are not flooding in.
@jetfaker6666
8 ай бұрын
The haggling between the Reds and the Blues at 2:55 makes no sense. Why would the blues complain about getting a good deal? They're getting more shirts per shoe than their exchange rate and you say for some reason they'd complain about this and give away more shoes for the same number of shirts?
@ivandate9972
3 ай бұрын
i think we can read Ricardo positively or negatively
@hoppeanofasgard1365
8 ай бұрын
AA don't you think most of the reason capital or these manufacturing facilities up and left England and other western countries for places like China, Mexico, Vietnam and what not mostly has to do with less regulation and taxes? If so it's not really necessary to make laws that capital can't move, all you have to do is lower regulation and tax burden to the point it's less than that of Mexico or China or where ever and they wont move.
@freedomarts
5 ай бұрын
That is the reason and it is obvious. But he doesn't see those as "regulation" he defines "free market" in the wrong way to begin with. Also, he ignores Monarchies, and ignores the countries that do what he ask, all poor countries like Argentina. Stop watching this guy, move on, he is not a "globalist" but he is the same as globalist, just at national scale. Global socialism or local socialism, is socialism.
@hoppeanofasgard1365
5 ай бұрын
@@freedomarts How does he define free market and how can he not see that England is regulated pretty heavily? makes no sense.
@peterb9038
8 ай бұрын
This is an excellent overview of free trade and the nuance of it's troublesome axioms, thanks. There is another element of where the consumers are and how much they are fleeced before it becomes untenable. The adjustment of the price of goods and services to match the economic reallity of that particluar geolocated market lags behind the dissolving wealth of that region. Not only that but there is an insidious effect of usury with terms and rates based on economic conditions which are now gone and not coming back. I shudder to think of the long term result of that. I can only see a major adjustment on the cards of effected countries. I am sure there are historic precedents that can be refered to.
@Pinkdam
8 ай бұрын
There is also the matter of the exchange system; a foreign seller wants currency he can use for domestic purchases, not foreign currency he must spend on imports; the same applies in reverse. There is no 'haggling' as the infographic shows a sort of barter system (which has its advantages by cutting out a sort of middleman); there is an exchange system called upon which has various serious consequences above and beyond mere production. Then there is also the fact that much 'export' trade is raw materials or semi-manufactures that have previously been 'imported' to be worked upon. A premium is extracted due to the imparted value from the added labour; but that premium is subject to the exchange system, unless it is taken in more foreign currency to spend directly on more 'imports' to be so worked upon.
@ramblingimbecile2295
8 ай бұрын
Do lolberts get anything right?
@NeonAnimeDreams
8 ай бұрын
Mises was right about an awful lot actually
@user-hu3iy9gz5j
8 ай бұрын
@@NeonAnimeDreamsMises was as a liberal not comparable to the lolbertarian meme of today
@NeonAnimeDreams
8 ай бұрын
@user-hu3iy9gz5j libertarians are classical liberals, means the same thing. Unless you're trying to say Mises is comparable to modern day liberals, in which case yes, that's world's different than a libertarian but you'd also be wrong, because once again liberals back in the day were free market advocates which clearly Mises was, and liberals today are not. The reason libertarians stopped calling them selves liberals was because liberal took on a different meaning by the 60s, that's why Rothbard, who was actually Mise's student and believed in much the same things he did, chose to use the term libertarian instead of liberal.
@cookiesofamerica
8 ай бұрын
20:09 Isnt this just basically deterritorialization effects of Capitalism?
@cookiesofamerica
8 ай бұрын
Not sure if it is unintentional or not, but the arguments you made here have already been made by Paul Craig Roberts on Conditional Free trade
@freedomarts
5 ай бұрын
Capitalism is a hammer, people are stupid, not the hammer. And the result of stupid people is socialism and nationalism.
@dannyboywhaa3146
8 ай бұрын
Ludwig Von misses is American-pseudo Austrian economics mate, as is Hayek etc... they both abandon Menger’s central axiom! Anyway...
@freedomarts
5 ай бұрын
No, Misses is a subjectivism, sees economy as natural human actions. Also, that is a method, not all economy in all ways. Mises only explained how people are and think, and then how the economy works, "mate".
@GodsOwnPrototype
8 ай бұрын
14:57 Interbellum
@AcademicAgent
8 ай бұрын
😆
@alpha007org
8 ай бұрын
Vox Day had a much better refutation, but I don't know where he keeps his videos.
@anappropriatehandle
Ай бұрын
how many years to make 6 million pairs of shoes?
@freedomarts
5 ай бұрын
On top of the "Libertarian" position not being Libertarian at all, for Rothbard, for Hoppe, the 2 top Libertarian examples, since they oppose open borders and defend homogeneus culture. Rothbard in fact said that regulations are good as long as they are not done by the state, and this can be acceptable or less bad with a Monarchy, as Hoppe says. Free market definition is not "free stuff" but free from government control, so regulations are acceptable specially property regulations, which includes migration, again, as Hoppe says. Socialism dos not work, world socialism or national socialism, doesn't work, it is empirical and common sense. England is having problems because of some lvl of socialism and regulation by the government, in that case a DEMOCRACY, which is the main issue, while Monarchies have even MORE free market than England or the US and no problem at all. The issue is socialism and Democracy is the way socialism operates and nation lvl. The solution is Monarchy and religious values, traditional ones. Nationalism is a bad religion, still bad compared to globalism. Defending nationalism is like saying you want to be "less sick" instead of healthy. Monarchism is far better than nationalism.
@willnitschke
5 ай бұрын
There is no particular "Libertarian position" on migration as that is a state issue. Libertarians don't have an issue on whether ice cream is superior to, or inferior to, yogurt, either. This is just your personal obsession.
@canibezeroun1988
8 ай бұрын
I tried demonstrating this using thermodynamics but never finished. I ended up opposing it because free trade implies changing the boundaries of the control volume which was analogous to the try countries becoming one. Since this couldn't happen, it would necessitate one volume gaining either matter or energy at expense of the other. That would be capital and cash respectively
@willnitschke
8 ай бұрын
You claiming you're refuted Adam Smith doesn't mean you did it, though. 😅
@freedomarts
5 ай бұрын
You can't explain social sciences with hard sciences.....that lead to communism and is in fact what globalist does.
@richardcrook2112
8 ай бұрын
What a surprise they ignore these things, how convenient.
@NeonAnimeDreams
8 ай бұрын
Did you not listen to AA, Mises ignored nothing, and Mises was like the first libertarian intellectual. If libertarians ignore it today it's probably because they're ignoring the work of Mises in favor of Heyek or something.
@KRYPTOS_K5
8 ай бұрын
Excellent text of this British KZitemr. Brasil Not to say the never accounted movement of the intellectual and scientific asset... Brasil Reality is forever one step ahead ideology, literature with universality hopes or even science... Basically in Economy but also in the cognitive sciences and AI... Brasil
@ramblingimbecile2295
8 ай бұрын
How does this help get rid of all the bloody forrins here?
@A_View_From_The_Shire
8 ай бұрын
21:37 Austrianism in One Country
@ChromaToneMusic
8 ай бұрын
Why is most thinking stuck in 100+ years ago? Libertarians are right about a lot of things but things change so fast and models are always inaccurate
@blue18404
8 ай бұрын
What are they right about?
@A_View_From_The_Shire
8 ай бұрын
Austrians are still right about inflation being a hidden tax on the Middle and lower class, and a harder currency is better as a medium of exchange. They are also right that value is subjective and there is no such thing as intrinsic value.
@davedismantled
8 ай бұрын
@@blue18404 The Non-Aggression and Self-Defense Principles, for two. What are they wrong about? The entire philosophy is based upon non-aggression and voluntary consent.
@blue18404
8 ай бұрын
@@davedismantled and how did that work out? Just pack up and leave. Simpleton.
@davedismantled
8 ай бұрын
@@A_View_From_The_Shire Intrinsic means "essential". There is no intrinsic value in food? Water? Air? Funny how most things with "no intrinsic value" are mental or social constructs, while those things that do have intrinsic value exist in Nature. Intrinsic for a human would be those things essential to survival. Those things being air, water, food and shelter. Fiat "money" has no intrinsic value. Gold, silver, etc. don't really have intrinsic value themselves. I cannot breath, eat or drink them, nor can I shelter myself with them. Yes, I could potentially buy those things with them, but they themselves do no provide the "essentials" to my survival.
@Medhead101
8 ай бұрын
Doesnt free movement of labor mean cheaper prices for goods and services and therefore a wealthier society? Unemployment in the richer country can still be low despite the fact many jobs are outsourced over seas, it just means new (and usually more comfortable) jobs are created. For example better paid and more comfortable office jobs increasing whilst hard manual labour jobs in mines decreasing - whats the problem with that?
@A_View_From_The_Shire
8 ай бұрын
But you’re assuming these new jobs that are created are equally paid if not more than the steelworker jobs. If you’re a software engineer, yes, most likely. But the reality is, an ex-steelworker will at best, end up in Warehousing job that pays slightly above minimum wage.
@MartinMartinm
8 ай бұрын
So wrong. Free movement lowers wages, increases monopolistic profits, lowers standards of living, and eventually leads to decay. Hard jobs get easier through evolution of the workplace. More education means higher innovation and a better environment. You can't achieve those things if you have a population of uneducated cheap skilled labour's who contribute less than what they put in. That's only the economic part and not mentioning other knock on effects.
@Nukestarmaster
8 ай бұрын
Free movement of labour means suppressed wages and the death of any national identity. The only workers who benefit are the people who are irreplaceable or unfirable.
@deathsheadknight2137
8 ай бұрын
thanks fa gettin me yin
@DrEhrfurchtgebietend
8 ай бұрын
In your example right at the beginning you get one thing wrong. You end up with too many t-shirts and not enough shoes
@mrlnstrousden
8 ай бұрын
Do love this channel, it does makes me feel like my iq is increasing 😂🤪👊😎👍
@mysteriousstranger9496
8 ай бұрын
Your knowledge may increase but you're born with you IQ.
@chralexNET
8 ай бұрын
I would think that with the 4 freedoms, countries are more in competition to create a society where capital and labour wants to stay in the country. Ultimately this should make all countries that actively compete more liveable, and those who don't will decay until they realise that they have to change.
@user-rv1ku2pk1d
8 ай бұрын
Free trade gives people what they want. If the people want cheap Chinese junk, at the cost of their own industry, that is exactly what they get. This is not an argument against free trade, but for it.
@AcademicAgent
8 ай бұрын
Did you even watch this video?
@Cornflakes-sr3nq
8 ай бұрын
If people want Chinese crap then f what people want, better men should deny it to them
@hoppeanofasgard1365
8 ай бұрын
I used to feel the same way, but China posses a security risk and I no longer like enriching them because of it. That being said until we get back to sound money that doesn't constantly devalue I don't think we can cut them off just yet, inflation is bad enough as it is for so many right now.
@chrisc7265
8 ай бұрын
so free trade as punitive measure against consumerists? how about trying to make your people better, rather than being like, "hahaha they freely chose their own demise!"
@NeonAnimeDreams
8 ай бұрын
@chrisc7265 Everyone has choices to make in their own lives, this is the responsibility of being grown adults. Its not the place of anyone to force correct others bad choices, not only does this hurt the growth and development of the individual but it leads to a heavy hand of government interfering in matters of the market they should have no business being a part of.
@willnitschke
8 ай бұрын
While I'm sympathetic to the arguments presented, its major flaw is that it entirety focuses on a very narrow portion of the Western economy. (Manufacturing). Construction can't be exported, nor can catering, transportation, education, health care, tourism etc etc etc. Well, at least very little of all that.
@AcademicAgent
8 ай бұрын
I focused on production as this is the area that is wanring in the West, services are not the issue.
@AlexiusRedwood
8 ай бұрын
Tourism should be banned
@willnitschke
8 ай бұрын
@@AcademicAgent Yes I already pointed that out, which distorts the arguments and misrepresents the facts to the economically illiterate. Further, you complain about capital flows but neglect to mention that for Western companies (Apple is as good an example as any), the profits flow back into Western coffers again. So that's another distortion by omission.
@AlexiusRedwood
8 ай бұрын
@@willnitschke how does it flow back to the country ? You mean to rich people .a factory job is better than a profit from a company that then gets taxed and you will never see it .
@NeonAnimeDreams
8 ай бұрын
@AlexiusRedwood by that logic, the government should stop taxing factory workers, or really all workers for that matter, but I don't see you saying that. Seems that you're biassed in your thinking.
@DigitalNomadOnFIRE
8 ай бұрын
The thing YOU don't get about free trade is that sure, it's impossible to have a perfect free market, but so what? The more free trade we have the better the world is. You've concluded that because we can't have perfect free trade and that it gets distorted that we should just give up on the idea totally. This basically makes you a communist. Compare and contrast communist countries, and ones that are relatively free. You've totally gona off the rails bubba. I hope you find your way back. You are now the problem.
Пікірлер: 379