ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Monday, April 11, 2016

Challenge accepted

A professor of economics with a PhD from the ultimate monetarist school throws down a gauntlet, albeit in a considerably more civil manner than I've come to expect from my critics:
I've recently started a podcast called Future Strategist and I would love to interview you by Skype audio.  We could discuss political correctness and debate free trade.  While I do not support open borders for people, I do support free trade in goods and while I doubt I could get you to change your opinion I hopefully wouldn't underwhelm you as have other economists.

James Miller
Associate Professor of Economics, Smith College
Phd University of Chicago
I have accepted Dr. Miller's challenge to debate free trade. More details to come.

By the way, he's the author of Game Theory at Work, so he's obviously a smart guy. We're going to do one podcast discussion of political correctness first - he obviously won his 2003 tenure battle - and then we'll do the debate, Game Theorist vs Game Designer.

UPDATE: Dr. Miller and I have decided to simply do the free trade debate, and we'll do it at the Brainstorm on Wednesday. Invitations have already gone out to the Brainstorm members. Once all the members interested have taken their seats, I'll open the remaining ones up to everyone else on a first-come, first-serve basis.

This is the sort of thing that Brainstorm makes possible, so if you want to be a part of it, consider signing up for an annual membership.

Labels: ,

92 Comments:

Blogger Ahazuerus April 11, 2016 11:02 AM  

Ordering the popcorn...

Blogger Lovekraft April 11, 2016 11:05 AM  

would you consider this a ringing endorsement of your views? It is a definite progression from ad hominem attacks of the past.

Blogger Christopher Yost April 11, 2016 11:08 AM  

Twizzlers.

Anonymous Cash April 11, 2016 11:09 AM  

Sweet.

Although after an in person conversation I had with a PhD candidate at UC I personally no longer hold that school in high regard. It's sort of like beating Texas in football.

Anonymous Determinator April 11, 2016 11:14 AM  

@2 It is refreshing seeing someone with an opposing viewpoint respectfully challenging Vox. There's actually a possibility of honest discourse.

Blogger Nick S April 11, 2016 11:15 AM  

PhD from the University of Chicago? I smell a utopian.

Blogger VD April 11, 2016 11:17 AM  

would you consider this a ringing endorsement of your views?

No, I wouldn't consider it an endorsement of any kind. The smarter, more educated sorts have usually taken me quite seriously, it's mostly been the midwits who sneer at my lack of higher education.

Anonymous Soga April 11, 2016 11:19 AM  

Doesn't Vox argue that free trade of goods necessitates open borders for people?

Polish winemakers looking for a better life in England and all that.

I believe his argument was more or less that countries should practice sound protectionism. Wearing an economic condom, you could say.

Blogger Sevron April 11, 2016 11:23 AM  

I've never really understood the free trade argument to be honest. It's obvious that free trade is damaging to my culture, so I consider it bad. That it might work out to be more economically efficiently isn't of any interest. What am I missing?

Blogger Nate April 11, 2016 11:28 AM  

excellent.

Anonymous Napoleon 12pdr April 11, 2016 11:29 AM  

Lovely! I'm in the middle myself (I support free trade of goods with peer states, but regulated with non-peers), but that doesn't matter.

It's wonderful to see a civil challenge to a serious discussion. That DOES matter.

Blogger James Dixon April 11, 2016 11:33 AM  

Good. This should be quite a bit more educational than your run of the mill free trader who's limited to yelling Ricardo and comparative advantage.

Blogger Arcane Rhino April 11, 2016 11:33 AM  

It should be an interesting interview. I look forward to hearing it.

Anonymous Daedalus Mugged April 11, 2016 11:35 AM  

I am really looking forward to this. As someone who has progressed from lower case o-objectivist, libertarian/free trader to at least comprehending most of Vox's challenge to it enough to recognize that there are issues that I had not previously recognized/resolved, I look forward to this. I haven't dedicated enough time and thought to necessarily agreeing with VD, but look forward to this as an opportunity to do so. Thank you.

There are none so blind as those who will not see, but Vox, be assured there are some who are looking and listening, and benefiting from your engagement with issues like this. It may be a small remnant, but at least this piece of that remnant appreciates and thanks you. I look forward to the debate, and hopefully I learn enough from both sides to resolve my own views. I genuinely appreciate your efforts.

Anonymous Alexander, #10 April 11, 2016 11:35 AM  

Also voicing my approval.

Blogger Shimshon April 11, 2016 11:40 AM  

I'm looking forward to this, though I still would love a debate between you and Robert Wenzel (who does support open immigration in addition to free trade).

Blogger Markku April 11, 2016 11:43 AM  

Let's imagine a fairy-tale world where the entire "international community" is a high-trust environment. Where you can assume that it will be an exceedingly rare event where someone would use trade strategically, to the other party's detriment. In such a world, such a nation would immediately invoke the wrath of all the rest, so it would be a bad play. And it wouldn't be done. In such a world, free trade would be a GREAT idea. Nations could concentrate on what they manufacture best, and trust not to get stabbed in the back if they focus their production on just those things. So, in a naive understanding, free trade is a great thing.

Just like pacifism is a great thing - IF everybody does it. But announcing to the world that even if some nation seems to behave in a suspicious way, you will not under any circumstances penalize them for it, is precisely like the pacifist strategy before Soviet Russia of unilaterally laying down arms, trusting that USSR will be so impressed by this that they will do the same.

In the real world, free trade of any kind is precisely as damaging as that strategy, for precisely the same reason. And it is birthed from solipsism, just like pacifism.

Blogger YIH April 11, 2016 11:47 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Markku April 11, 2016 11:48 AM  

Now, of course, PRETENDING to be for free trade, and getting the shmucks to buy it and shuffle their production accordingly, only to backstab them when they are exposed, is a GREAT play. I'm all for that.

Blogger Keef April 11, 2016 11:50 AM  

And what culture would that be?

I maintain that taxing imports hurts us consumers. The idea that you cannot have free trade without open borders is a dishonest agreement.

Blogger Salt April 11, 2016 11:50 AM  

While I do not support open borders for people

Whether (open) migration is inclusive or not within how one defines free trade, the effects of migration cannot be ignored nor overstated.

Blogger Markku April 11, 2016 11:53 AM  

Are you asking me? China, Russia, all international rivals. And their minions, if their overlords demand it.

Blogger Austin Ballast April 11, 2016 11:58 AM  

It will be interesting to see how VD connects free trade with free movement of people in such a format.

Sounds worthwhile.

Anonymous BGKB April 11, 2016 11:59 AM  

I have never understood how thousands of pages of crony set asides could be called free trade.

PhD from the University of Chicago? I smell a utopian.

I smell a rat, you have to admit you are in a hellhole when adding feral cats to your city makes it better. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/feline-fighters-feral-cats-hit-streets-of-chicago-to-keep-rats-away/

Blogger Derek Kite April 11, 2016 12:10 PM  

would you consider this a ringing endorsement of your views?

No, I wouldn't consider it an endorsement of any kind. The smarter, more educated sorts have usually taken me quite seriously, it's mostly been the midwits who sneer at my lack of higher education.

The winds of opinion have changed on this issue seeing how it has actually worked out.

Most people have opinions based on who they consider smart think. A type of status signalling, He is the smart guy, I'm with him. Really intelligent people know how tenuous their grasp on reality is, and are open and welcome to opposing views, especially for the opportunity to have their views challenged.

Looking forward to this. My opinions are open to adjustment. I have seen good quality manufacturers been put out of business by cheap trash from offshore, and I end up bearing the costs.

Anonymous TS April 11, 2016 12:12 PM  

"Now, of course, PRETENDING to be for free trade, and getting the shmucks to buy it and shuffle their production accordingly, only to backstab them when they are exposed, is a GREAT play. I'm all for that."

You chink.

Anonymous TS April 11, 2016 12:15 PM  

Why do they even make the distinction between goods and people?

Blogger Raziel Walker April 11, 2016 12:19 PM  

@9 Sevron It's obvious that free trade is damaging to my culture... That it might work out to be more economically efficiently isn't of any interest.

Don't you already give the answer yourself? Free trade proponents disregard culture and only look at money flows?
The only argument I ever heard in school was that local production costs x, outsourced production + transport costs less, so it is cheaper to import. While disregarding that in the first situation you keep the money local, creating local jobs, tax income, etc instead of giving all your money to strangers.

Blogger pyrrhus April 11, 2016 12:21 PM  

Historically, countries with a comparative advantage in manufacturing, especially high end manufacturing, have consistently seen the terms of trade turn in their favor against countries that are primarily exporters of natural resources or agricultural products....This happened during the late 1920s, for example. Another way of looking at it is that if country A has a comparative advantage in bananas and coconuts, and country B has an comparative advantage in gunboats, what do you think is going to happen?

Anonymous VFM #6306 April 11, 2016 12:22 PM  

Soylent Green is a freely traded good.

Anonymous #8601 Jean Valjean April 11, 2016 12:24 PM  

Trump's critics have said his tariffs will increase the price of, say, iphones.

I say that's a small price to pay to preserve our jobs, our productive capacity and our culture.

Blogger praetorian April 11, 2016 12:25 PM  

I maintain that taxing imports hurts us consumers.

Yes, because that's what we are: passive, female consumers.

The idea that you cannot have free trade without open borders is a dishonest agreement.

You're the one being dishonest. People are saying that the free movement of capital and goods without the free movement of labor puts labor at a disadvantage, and ends up costing society more in terms of loss of productive capacity or social dissolution.

And what culture would that be?

Oh, I'm sorry, never mind.

Would you mind getting inside the oven to clean it?

Anonymous Brick Hardslab April 11, 2016 12:26 PM  

Nice. This I want to see.

OpenID denektenorsk April 11, 2016 12:37 PM  

I've never really understood the free trade argument to be honest. It's obvious that free trade is damaging to my culture, so I consider it bad. That it might work out to be more economically efficiently isn't of any interest. What am I missing?

Follow the money. Our betters who know better are making out like bandits. They can ship high paying jobs overseas for pennies on the dollar and you get goods at a slightly discounted price (i.e. you certainly DO NOT see the entire discount on labour costs) and our betters pocket the difference. Throw in the "creative destruction" argument and voila, smoke screen. The problem is that not all worker bees are created the same. Retraining only gets you so far. I don't know too many carpenters who would have the interest or aptitude to become computer programmers, but I digress.

Even when you factor in transportation of goods half way around the world (with a percentage lost in shipping) it is still highly profitable to exploit 3rd world labour.

Depending on how cucky one is they may bring up X million jobs are lost in NA, but Y million jobs are made in China. Look at how much better off they are than being a plot farmer! Such a virtuous globalist indeed!

I imagine the crowd that works at Foxconn may differ in outlook but hey, they are better off, right? Free Traders are pro-third world slavery.

Quite honestly, the well being of people on the other side of the globe is not my problem. If you can't provide for your family then, don't have one. It's called personal responsibility.

Semi-related: I keep waiting for the Climate Change crowd to ratify their views on manufacturing/emissions with their love of cheap sh#t from China. Not holding my breath though....



Blogger Jew613 April 11, 2016 12:38 PM  

The result of free trade is consumer goods are very cheap, and 80% of people are impoverished so cant afford the cheap goods anyway.

Blogger Automattic Bosoms of Liberty April 11, 2016 12:39 PM  

OT commenting tip: you can get the blockquote effect by wrapping the quoted text in this funny combination:

<i><em>Some brilliant statement</em></i>


This rigmarole is required because Blogspot forbids use of the blockquote tag, bizarrely.

Anonymous VFM #6306 April 11, 2016 12:41 PM  

Ooo. Call this one "Miller's Crossing."

OpenID denektenorsk April 11, 2016 12:42 PM  

Trump's critics have said his tariffs will increase the price of, say, iphones.

That will be an effective message with the right crowd. Look at how many people line up every 12-18 months to replace their iPhone for a different shade of gold or red.

I think one could hammer on the solution to Climate Change is import tariffs long and hard and perhaps see some traction. Don't tie it to free trade/free movement, but their other religion and see if it takes.

Blogger Josh April 11, 2016 12:45 PM  

Looking forward to this

Blogger Markku April 11, 2016 12:49 PM  

You chink.

Yep, that's what I'm insinuating.

Blogger praetorian April 11, 2016 12:50 PM  

The result of free trade is consumer goods are very cheap, and 80% of people are impoverished so cant afford the cheap goods anyway.

The expansion of credit can mask the problem for four or five decades, which is what makes the whole scam work.

It's humorous, in a hollow laughter, ha-ha sort of way, to note that the bête noire of libertarians, The Fed, is what makes their hobbyhorse, international free trade, even moderately plausible.

Blogger Josh April 11, 2016 12:51 PM  

Question for the anti-free trade group: do you support unions and the minimum wage?

Blogger Markku April 11, 2016 1:01 PM  

I support the right to create unions, based on free association, but not giving any particular rights to the unions that don't come from rights that all individuals have. In other words, employers should be allowed to punish their employees for any union action that they could have punished, were it an action taken individually by an employee.

I do not support minimum wage.

Blogger praetorian April 11, 2016 1:01 PM  

Josh, I have no problem with either in theory, but ultimately I don't think they matter too much. Either you have social solidarity or you don't and the laws and organizations you get are the social expressions of that fact.

Anonymous VFM #6306 April 11, 2016 1:03 PM  

I do. Unions so you can better enslave employees if they are dumb enough to join one and a minimum wage of $25 so you can clear Mexicans off the books.

Blogger James Dixon April 11, 2016 1:04 PM  

> do you support unions

As voluntary organizations, yes. As a requirement for holding a job, no.

> and the minimum wage?

No.

Anonymous LastRedoubt April 11, 2016 1:04 PM  

Cool

Anonymous zzzz April 11, 2016 1:08 PM  

36. Automattic Bosoms of Liberty April 11, 2016 12:39 PM

OT commenting tip: you can get the blockquote effect by wrapping the quoted text in this funny combination:

Some brilliant statement

This rigmarole is required because Blogspot forbids use of the blockquote tag, bizarrely.


just testing

Blogger Gaiseric April 11, 2016 1:12 PM  

Sevron wrote:I've never really understood the free trade argument to be honest. It's obvious that free trade is damaging to my culture, so I consider it bad. That it might work out to be more economically efficiently isn't of any interest. What am I missing?
It hasn't always been so obvious, though. Due to the credit bubble, and the ability to switch from manufacturing to service white collar industries, the measurements usually used to indicate economic health masked the damage done to our economy.

Plus, economists have a blind spot for efficiency. It's often very difficult to get them to notice that a less efficient total outcome can be better for an individual player.

Plus, economists have become de facto cheerleaders and proponents of globalism due to overt patronage; who pays their bills, their salaries, who gives them research grants, etc? What do the soi-disant elite care about the economic fate of the hoi palloi as long as their own profit margins keep rising?

Free trade is one of those kind of feel good ideologies that can work—kinda, sorta—when things are going well, but which exacerbates issues when things aren't. Economists have largely had a big blind spot due to the way that their trained, the way data is measured, and what metrics they give priority to that suggested to them that free trade was double-plus more awesome than it actually was. One of the interesting side effects of the Trump candidacy is that has largely revealed this blind spot, as Washington and the educated technocrat pundit class has basically scratched their heads wondering why Americans out of work in the Rust Belt don't just go get degrees and become engineers or whatever. It's the modern equivalent to "let them eat cake."

Anonymous zzzz April 11, 2016 1:15 PM  

"While I do not support open borders for people"

hmm, who do you support it for?

"...and while I doubt I could get you to change your opinion I hopefully wouldn't underwhelm you as have other economists."

what would you call this? sounds like veiled insult then false modesty? doesn't sound like he thinks much of VD

Blogger Gaiseric April 11, 2016 1:16 PM  

Josh wrote:Question for the anti-free trade group: do you support unions and the minimum wage?
In reverse order, no, not at all, and yes with caveats. I'm not a fan of unions at all, but I support the notion of the right of free association. Where unions have become problematic is where they have either gotten in the pocket of a crony politician who gave them advantages that they shouldn't, or where they use overt intimidation tactics as a kind of racketeering. Unions too often become a de facto Mafia of sorts. But the idea of collective bargaining overall doesn't overly bother me.

OpenID denektenorsk April 11, 2016 1:22 PM  

Question for the anti-free trade group: do you support unions and the minimum wage?

BAH! Even the Unions don't support minimum wage: http://dailysignal.com/2015/09/30/california-labor-union-that-fought-for-15-minimum-wage-now-wants-an-exemption/

I can get behind the idea (in theory) of a union being a counter to an all powerful employer. In practice they tend to be just as bad as the globalist corporations they are supposed to balance out.

Don't even get me started on white collar government employee unions holding the public purse ransom every X years.

Minimum wage is a a bandaid, not a treatment.

Minimum wage doesn't really help the working poor does it? X months later prices have balanced out the extra cost to the employer and the only result is your middle class have less disposable income (they didn't get a raise). Our local minimum wage is over double what it was when I was a teenager. That massive increase hasn't done anything to change the number of working poor.

I think there are plenty of taxation clauses available to governments if they actually wanted to help the poor. No tax on any salary under X $/year with income tax splitting for families would be a start. Not clawing back any income people make while they are trying to get off assistance would be another idea.

A guaranteed income tax level via income tax filings and dispensing with all of the social assistance programs (e.g. housing, food stamps, etc.). Just completely eliminate the spending/management waste there and give people $$ directly. Granted administrating those programs is welfare of another sort (mid-wit college graduates) so you may end up with more people out of work.

Can I just opt out now? I promise not to come to the hospital if you stop taxing me.

OpenID denektenorsk April 11, 2016 1:25 PM  

what would you call this? sounds like veiled insult then false modesty? doesn't sound like he thinks much of VD

Re-read it. He believes he'll put up a better argument than the previous people Vox has debated/tangled with.

Anonymous Boetain April 11, 2016 1:27 PM  

When this topic comes up, the protectionist/trade-war guys always sound so convincing to me. So I have to do a reality check. First I go to a random number generator 1-10; this time it came up 10. So I went to Heritage.org trade freedom list and looked at the country 10th from the top which was Austria; then I looked at the country 10th from the bottom which was Djibouti. Then I thought about which country I would rather live in.

Blogger Sevron April 11, 2016 1:33 PM  

Question for the anti-free trade group: do you support unions and the minimum wage?

People can form whatever sort of cooperative arrangement they want that they can get their employer to agree to, but there should be no special legal rights or requirements for it.

The real minimum wage is $0, always. I always ask people, if $15/hr minimum is good, why isn't $30/hr gooder? Why do you want people to be poor? (that isn't Josh's position as far as I know, it's just something I ask in person or FB and nobody can ever answer the question).

Blogger John Williams April 11, 2016 1:34 PM  

While I do not support open borders for people
While trying to fiddle with state laws, Michigan's Attorney General, Jennifer Granholm, argued that Michigan residents were not people.
We're living in an age where the governments are going to do what they want, despite the laws.

Blogger praetorian April 11, 2016 1:35 PM  

Can you think of any other differences between Austria and Djibouti?

Blogger Joe Doakes April 11, 2016 1:37 PM  

Excellent. Maybe you'll get some good material to add to the next edition of SJW's Always Lie, helping to explain the free trade bit (that transition was jarring).

Anonymous OS April 11, 2016 1:42 PM  

"So I went to Heritage.org trade freedom list and looked at the country 10th from the top which was Austria; then I looked at the country 10th from the bottom which was Djibouti. Then I thought about which country I would rather live in."

Ruh roh! Italy is ranked 86th under "moderately free".

Blogger praetorian April 11, 2016 1:42 PM  

The real minimum wage is $0, always. I always ask people, if $15/hr minimum is good, why isn't $30/hr gooder? Why do you want people to be poor?

I don't think that argument is nearly as clever as you do.

I'm instinctively against a minimum wage, certainly beyond a certain political unit size where such a law is controversial within that political unit, but there are so many non-linear variables in play when you make a broad law like that. Additionally, say it with me kids, value is subjective. So I have no problem imagining scenarios where a given political unit is more satisfied with a minimum wage than without it.

Probably not mine, but, hey, man, that's just, like, my opinion.

Blogger praetorian April 11, 2016 1:49 PM  

Nationalism is libertarianism applied at the group level.

Anonymous BGKB April 11, 2016 2:02 PM  

Trump's critics have said his tariffs will increase the price of, say, iphones.

I think that's great as there will be less of a chance a welfare recipient has a more expensive phone than me just because I tend to keep things until they break.

Blogger Nick S April 11, 2016 2:04 PM  

Minimum wage only stisfies short time preferences. Are short time preferences sometimes justified? Maybe. Depends on the metrics.

Anonymous Bellator Mortalis April 11, 2016 2:05 PM  

It is a balance. Too far one direction and the citizens of an advanced civilization become unemployed and the civilization collapses. Too far the other way (high tariffs on imports) and most citizens have jobs in domestic manufacturing but the goods are expensive and due to crony capitalism and politics the quality is shoddy. Similar to US automobiles in the 70's due to lack of competition from higher quality imports.

Anonymous DissidentRight April 11, 2016 2:14 PM  

Question for the anti-free trade group: do you support unions and the minimum wage?

No, I support intra-national free markets/trade. No legal protections for unions and certainty no min wage.

Anonymous Boetain April 11, 2016 2:16 PM  

Actually Italy is #21 in trade freedom. The USA is #43.

Anonymous DissidentRight April 11, 2016 2:18 PM  

I think if you want the "intended" effect of a min wage, you should achieve it thru a welfare system. Actual min wages are too disruptive.

Anonymous Boetain April 11, 2016 2:22 PM  

#21 from the bottom is Cameroon. #43 from the bottom is Tajikistan.

Blogger Jeff Wood April 11, 2016 2:33 PM  

@64

Bellator, you raise a very good point: quality versus price.

The British car industry went through a long period of decline, which became a collapse when European imports of mostly good vehicles undercut the Brits, not on price but on greater quality.

There is still, now, a very good British can industry, but owned by foreigners and giving good work to areas mostly different to the previous centres.

Anonymous Quartermaster April 11, 2016 2:48 PM  

International Free Trade functions by reducing labor to a commodity. If labor mobility is prevented, then you get what we have now. China certainly isn't going to allow Americans in to work in their industry no matter how good they are.

@42
Josh, the minimum wage has always been $0. What is there to support?

The current law on Unions is unconstitutional. Closed shops violate the right of association. Also, Unions gain their power by having something they can hold hostage. Succinctly, Unions function through terrorism.

@54
If only it were so easy.

Blogger Sam vfm #111 April 11, 2016 2:59 PM  

Josh wrote:
Question for the anti-free trade group: do you support unions and the minimum wage?

No unions for government workers and only a union for one company. No things like the UAW having all the car companies.

Blogger ScottD April 11, 2016 3:11 PM  

Looking forward to the debate, but I doubt Prof. Miller will be at Smith College for long.

He has committed an unforgivable transgression by stating publicly that he does not support open borders. He is either unusually brave or foolhardy.

Blogger Sevron April 11, 2016 3:18 PM  

I would ordinarily say that you talk like a fag and your shit's all retarded, but let's have a nice discussion instead.

Any particular economic activity produces x amount of wealth, as determined by the customer. Money is a store of wealth (conceptually anyway, let's not talk about how fucked up the system is now). You therefore cannot be paid an amount of money greater than x. If you are employed by somebody, you must be paid rather less than x, so that the employer gets enough of a cut to consider it to have been worth their time/effort/organization to employ you to do said economic activity.

Government can stamp its feet and rally the economically-illiterate all they want to artificially distort the market, but like they say, you can ignore reality, you just can't ignore the consequences of ignoring reality. Ditch diggers do not generate $15/hr of wealth, and cannot be paid such without distorting the market and leading to all kinds of fun negative externalities.

If you do respond, please write something a normal human being would write, instead of waxing poetic about "political units".

Blogger praetorian April 11, 2016 3:41 PM  

If you do respond, please write something a normal human being would write, instead of waxing poetic about "political units".

Sure, I'll try to keep it at a level you can understand: some normal human beings, like, *don't give a shit* about maximizing employment, and don't have a magical view of the profit motive sans a shared moral framework.

Sorry, there's that fag talk again...

Cute attempt at quantifying value, though, brah.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan April 11, 2016 3:58 PM  

He either has tenure or he is crazy given this thought police environment.

Any SJW care to comment?

Blogger Eric April 11, 2016 4:06 PM  

So far, I appreciate that Miller has been civil.

Blogger Joshua_D April 11, 2016 4:21 PM  

Excellent. Looking forward to this discussion.

Blogger Doom April 11, 2016 4:23 PM  

That could be interesting. If he really doesn't have the real chops, expect it to get nasty from his side. Like you didn't know that. Yeah, there is room to debate. However, when the truth is plain, theory dies it's oft deserved horrid death, and the choices become raw and simple, most people won't go there. It's just that most people don't want to look that hard, or really are too busy or limited. I'd wish him luck, but I don't think he will do any better than I did. If he earned his ph. d. in real terms, he will change his mind if his statements are true, and he is honest. I know that gig. *grins*

Anonymous Osprey April 11, 2016 4:57 PM  

@29 Pyrrhus -- Great point.

if country A has a comparative advantage in bananas and coconuts, and country B has an comparative advantage in gunboats, what do you think is going to happen?

Country A will develop a comparative advantage in farmworkers, maids, and hookers. Country B will develop a comparative advantage in marketers, sloths, and tear-jerking documentary makers. What do you think is going to happen to Country B?

Blogger Aeoli Pera April 11, 2016 5:29 PM  

Game Theorist vs Game Designer

I'm sure putting it like that will encourage him to be at the top of his game.

Anonymous Full-Fledged Fiasco April 11, 2016 5:30 PM  

Vox, do you know this book?

Anonymous map April 11, 2016 11:41 PM  

Just an aside...

Vox, was your music group responsible for writing the main theme music to the "Mortal Kombat" movies?

Blogger Alec Rawls April 12, 2016 12:10 AM  

He supports open borders for trade, and no, he is not insulting Vox by suggesting that Vox has been underwhelmed by other economists (i.e. that Vox has kicked their asses).

Blogger Alec Rawls April 12, 2016 12:32 AM  

Free trade is only problematic because we have so heaped so many burdens on employers, both regulations and entitlement programs, that U.S. Labor has become uncompetitive in many industries, despite our huge advantages in the quality of our workforce (hardworking, reliable, smart) and the inexpensive abundance of our resources.

If we would just stop trying to help the poor by redistributing resources to them and instead let them compete with international labor unburdened by this "help," then the U.S. would dominate every industry in the world and, while Jesus is probably right that "the poor will always be with you," they would be few and far between.

Well, here at home at least. The rest of the world would remain poor until it followed suit, but that is on them.

I don't think Trump would be too resistant to this line, or Vox, or Dr. Miller. Only the truth-hating liberty-hating left resists truth and liberty.

Blogger Lana J April 12, 2016 12:58 AM  

Dang it. This week is not looking good for the annual membership cost and this is the one I would love to see, but if I miss the open registration I know you will knock it out of the park. I'd wish you luck? But I doubt you'll need it. Is there a possibility that the debate might be shared at some later point? It would be useful if possible.

Blogger rho April 12, 2016 2:25 AM  

This is the sort of thing that Brainstorm makes possible

This is the sort of thing that the Internet makes free.

10 Alpha points for controlling the distribution mechanism.

Pass.

Blogger Aeoli Pera April 12, 2016 7:04 AM  

VD wrote:would you consider this a ringing endorsement of your views?

No, I wouldn't consider it an endorsement of any kind. The smarter, more educated sorts have usually taken me quite seriously, it's mostly been the midwits who sneer at my lack of higher education.


Maybe he means because you're receiving attention from an authority?

Blogger Aeoli Pera April 12, 2016 7:15 AM  

Josh wrote:Question for the anti-free trade group: do you support unions and the minimum wage?

It's contingent on the situation. I support the union for electricians today, yes, but not unskilled workers, and the minimum wage for places without a lot of Mexicans.

Blogger James Dixon April 12, 2016 1:37 PM  

> UPDATE: Dr. Miller and I have decided to simply do the free trade debate, and we'll do it at the Brainstorm on Wednesday.

It's Miller time! Hey someone had to say it. :)

Blogger Sevron April 12, 2016 3:42 PM  

Going to put you down as "economically illiterate" then, thanks. I don't think we have a position for you just now, perhaps later...

Anonymous Puhleeze April 12, 2016 4:07 PM  

"The smarter, more educated sorts have usually taken me quite seriously..."
Is this a joke?
You're only "taken seriously" by deranged loners who, themselves, aren't taken seriously by anyone else!

Anonymous Mature-Craig April 12, 2016 6:39 PM  

deranged loners who, themselves, aren't taken seriously by anyone else!

that used to be me, but now I am a less deranged loner that is taken seriously by a few people....

actually that's me being too hard on myself, I want it to be known that Vox attracts solid winner-type men and not losers

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts