Of course, in modern times, the objective of trade arrangements has been political rather than economic. The 'comparative advantage' story being merely the 'lipstick on the pig'.
Firstly, to move those sectors of industry that have been highly unionised from jurisdictions where state and employer thuggery is no longer acceptable as a tool of class power to jurisdictions where those things are still possible.
Secondly, the risibly-named 'free trade agreements' that are concomitant with international trade are used by the governments that make them to bind future governments to arrangements that are regulated by undemocratic, supranational, pro-corporate bodies such as Investor-State Dispute tribunals, thus defeating the sovereignty of future government.
I had a truly great and fantastically-funny comment this morning when I finished reading this, but by the time I changed my support from Patreon to Substack so I could comment, I forgot it... Sorry, will try to do better next time. Anyway, e = mc^^2 now, so thanks. Maybe now we can unwind all the mess the orthodox priesthood has made since Riccardo.
So please place the comparative advantage argument into the context of an intelligently planned economy with a long term planning horizon. Should a country use calculated comparative advantage in formulating long term goals and directing capital investment? How far should this be taken with the understanding that economic complexity is itself of value as I believe you have pointed out? You have some admiration for China in this regard. What have they done right and where have they made mistakes?
Of course, in modern times, the objective of trade arrangements has been political rather than economic. The 'comparative advantage' story being merely the 'lipstick on the pig'.
Firstly, to move those sectors of industry that have been highly unionised from jurisdictions where state and employer thuggery is no longer acceptable as a tool of class power to jurisdictions where those things are still possible.
Secondly, the risibly-named 'free trade agreements' that are concomitant with international trade are used by the governments that make them to bind future governments to arrangements that are regulated by undemocratic, supranational, pro-corporate bodies such as Investor-State Dispute tribunals, thus defeating the sovereignty of future government.
I had a truly great and fantastically-funny comment this morning when I finished reading this, but by the time I changed my support from Patreon to Substack so I could comment, I forgot it... Sorry, will try to do better next time. Anyway, e = mc^^2 now, so thanks. Maybe now we can unwind all the mess the orthodox priesthood has made since Riccardo.
Very interesting and persuasive. And, occasionally, even poetic, e.g. "did indeed succeed".
So please place the comparative advantage argument into the context of an intelligently planned economy with a long term planning horizon. Should a country use calculated comparative advantage in formulating long term goals and directing capital investment? How far should this be taken with the understanding that economic complexity is itself of value as I believe you have pointed out? You have some admiration for China in this regard. What have they done right and where have they made mistakes?