For being 4th out of 4 official parties they have a substantial share of popular vote. I seem to remember it being around 20% but I may be a little high. That in my mind represents at least a reasonable amount of support for his views. Though I guess one could argue that people may have voted against the Liberals rather then for the NDP.

Even in the case of a monopolist, economic theory tells us that prices will go down as costs decline. Since an oligopoly is the existing framework it is safe to say that cost reductions have occurred as a result of trade policy.

At the same time better because of better economics theory and increased firm concentration there have been improvements in the ability for firms to price discriminate. Those who are able to self-select in the lower prices have seen a large reduction in their costs while those who have not tend not to see substantial savings.


To your second point many of the jobs that have been outsourced have low value added. America had, and to some extent still has, the opportunity to transform the economy into high value added one.

I should also add to this discussion that there is a trend towards policies that favor growth over equality. While the current economic situation is attributed to free trade and illegal immigration, other trends in economic policy play a substantial role in the economic situation.

I have always held the view that institutional design plays a larger role in long-term trends regarding real GDP and other economic indicators. If anything high inflation policies would tend to lower long run GDP as resources would be devoted to reducing shoeleather costs.

Ok. Now can you dumb it down for me. You sound like a high falootin economics professor.

Sorry, I did not realize how term heavy that was. I will elaborate and simplify the language.

The first comment was just the assertion that according to economic theory in the worst possible case, one producer, the price that individuals face will go down as the cost per unit decrease. Most competition is not monopolistic. Even a company like Microsoft has competition. In an oligopolistic framework (2 or more competitors) the same general conclusions will hold even in the case of perfect collusion because it holds for a monopolists. This again is an assertion (and is exceedingly difficult to prove) but if result holds for the monopolist something is wrong if it does not hold for an oligopologist.

The next comment is that that because firms are larger and are using some of the recent advancements in economic theory they are able to price in a fashion charges a higher price to people with a higher willingness to pay for the good. At the same time they charge a lower price for those who have a lower willingness to pay. The price decreases due to free trade will be greater for those who are able to behave as though they have a low willingness to pay for the good in question. Now more then ever that the people who are smart about how they shop do incredibly well.

Many of the jobs that are being outsourced are labor intensive and as such are not very profitable. At the same time they are necessary and the economy cannot function without someone doing these jobs. If the right policies are put into place a country can export these labor-intensive jobs to other countries and replace them with tasks that are more productive. Naturally this would require policies that change the nature of the economy. The particular focus would have to be the development of human capital through training and education. The government, particularly the federal government, has failed to take such initiatives. Hopefully actions will be taken to do address this issue, but as with many things addressing the problem earlier would have been more beneficial.

In 2001 the US exported twice China's export volume. In the first six months of 2006, China's export volume exceeded US Exports and China is now the world's largest goods exporter. China's exports are now being driven by high tech goods, the highest value added manufactured product in global trade.

For years China imported large quantities of parts and components and its cheap labor shops were used as a platform for final assembly, producing a low percentage of value added export products. EU, Japanese and US partnerships with manufacturing in China changed that by implementing training, technical support and systems that stressed quality and efficient manufacturing, all dependent on education. A large portion of the high tech product exports now provide up to 95% value added revenue. China now exports a large portion of high tech product parts and components with final assembly in the US and other countries to avoid finished product tariffs using cheap labor from the post-industrial employment status in those countries of assembly, driving margins even higher.

With the decline of US students seeking higher education in scientific and engineering fields due to outsourcing of professional level employment and a post-industrial economy, what do you suggest to reverse this trend? At the rate the US is going all university students are going to be in possession of undergrad or graduate degrees in business administration or the highly prized and lucrative public administrative degree with its union negotiated COLA increases and wages determined by population, not population wealth. Not much of a future for the US unless something reverses the current direction of consuming more than it produces.

Thanks for the clarification.

I wouldn't mind if the employers weren't "hiring" slaves overseas, often mistreating and neglecting to pay them.

__________________
War is a racket, no more. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that the vast majority of the people don't know about, and that only a small inside group understands. A racket is designed to benefit the few at the expense of the many.

-Smedley Butler, who saved America from fascism in the 30's.

History and books. There's a magical place down south called Mexico. This is what happened to it. However, there have been disagreements about exact percentages, but they all show that most of the money, roughly 90% of it is in the hands of less than 10% of the people.

__________________
War is a racket, no more. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that the vast majority of the people don't know about, and that only a small inside group understands. A racket is designed to benefit the few at the expense of the many.

-Smedley Butler, who saved America from fascism in the 30's.

Books. Well researched books and various copies of documents. Not entertainment articles, such as newspapers and TV news, which has got to be the worst thing I've ever heard of. It's not that the media has, necessarily, a conservative bias; it's that they have a leaning towards whoever pays them. That just happens to be the conservatives. As for liberal media, it's almost always only as liberal as the conservative businesses that own it.

__________________
War is a racket, no more. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that the vast majority of the people don't know about, and that only a small inside group understands. A racket is designed to benefit the few at the expense of the many.

-Smedley Butler, who saved America from fascism in the 30's.

I think infringement of contract is illegal in many foreign nations (if not all). And if it isn't, the workers are pretty stupid to work for a company in a manner that amounts to working for free and expecting to get a gift of money.

__________________
If a neocon whines about big government wealth redistribution, just ask him what he thinks about the portion of that big government that sends aid to Israel.

So in Mexico, trade is completely free? There are no restrictions upon it?

__________________
If a neocon whines about big government wealth redistribution, just ask him what he thinks about the portion of that big government that sends aid to Israel.

Not too far off the US where 70% of the wealth is held by 10% of the people, but Mexico has always been in that economic circumstance. What Americans should be concerned with is growing US economic inequity.

Here's a good read on that issue:

What's a Fair Distribution of Wealth?

Good point; and you're right, that was a good read on the issue. I have to agree with you on that one.

__________________
War is a racket, no more. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that the vast majority of the people don't know about, and that only a small inside group understands. A racket is designed to benefit the few at the expense of the many.

-Smedley Butler, who saved America from fascism in the 30's.