I've got a logic chain for you then, I'm hoping you can point out the flaw for me since I don't see it. /1
-
-
Replying to @wraithburn @MorlockP
The sole justification for distinguishing in economic theory between domestic and foreign trade is to be found in the fact that in the case of the former there is free mobility of capital and labor, whereas this is not true with regards to the commerce between nations. /2
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
-
Replying to @MorlockP
It's a quote straight out of Mises: https://mises.org/library/liberalism-classical-tradition/html/p/44 …
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
-
Replying to @MorlockP
To rewrite the statement: Economic theory has a single justification for separating domestic and foreign trade. In domestic trade, capital and labor move freely. In foreign trade they do not.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @wraithburn
1/ this seems like a taxonomy of academic departments I don't care about the distinction between domestic and foreign trade. That has nothing to do with whether free trade requires free travel. It does not.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @MorlockP @wraithburn
2/ A blacksmith can sell a shovel to a farmer without either of them setting foot on the other's land. A man in Georgia can sell a computer to a man in Maine without either of them leaving their home state. An American can sell a movie to a Chinese without any travel.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @MorlockP @wraithburn
ⓘ Dogs don't have thumbs Retweeted Prometheus 2.1
3/ Except for a very very very minor amount of "the ship ties up briefly to load cargo", free trade has absolutely nothing to do with free movement of people. Free movement of people is not a precondition. Thus I entirely disagree withhttps://twitter.com/wraithburn/status/1356621905516765188 …
ⓘ Dogs don't have thumbs added,
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @MorlockP
So selling my services as a ditch digger is not considered trade?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
You said that free movement of people is REQUIRED to have free trade. The vast majority of trade does not require free movement of people. If we repealed the H-1 B regulation, we'd have 99.9% as much trade afterwards as we have now.
-
-
Replying to @MorlockP @wraithburn
Perhaps your argument is "but if we only have 99.9% of trade, then we do not have TRULY FREE TRADE", and that's really pedantic and boring. It's like saying "until people can own hydrogen bombs then they have NO right to keep and bear arms". Oh? The other 99.9% isn't 99.9% ?
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @MorlockP @wraithburn
The entire argument is based around the non-central fallacy. You WANT to discredit free trade, and so you set up an argument where X, which we all dislike in the absolute crazy limit is REQUIRED to get free trade, and since we all dislike X, then free trade is also bad.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.