Re: National Socio-Economic Security Need for Encryption Technology
Blanc Weber wrote:
From: Bart Croughs
You haven't answered this question yet. I don't claim that the U.S. is worse off when US capital moves abroad. I only ask: how can you proof that the US isn't worse off when US capital moves abroad? .............................................................
You have to be able to imagine the advantages, and you can only imagine them when you have the background to understand the difference between having fewer choices rather than more, a limited market base rather than an open one full of unlimited opportunity, and the increased domestic tensions from frustrated consumers who are likely to set up blackmarkets as work-arounds to the lack of desired goods & services. Essentially, you have to want to see, and work for, the difference resulting from unprotected markets. I think people who put up a lot of objections are afraid and do not want any proof of their error. You'd have to hold their nose to the figures, and even then they might close their eyes....< You are wrong. I'm not in error; I don't think the US is worse off when US capital moves abroad. I just want to know how you can proof it, so I would be able to rebut protectionist arguments. I don't know how to prove it. And, unfortunately, neither do you. Rhetoric is no proof. Bart Croughs
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
From: Bart Croughs
You haven't answered this question yet. I don't claim that the U.S. is worse off when US capital moves abroad. I only ask: how can you proof that the US isn't worse off when US capital moves abroad?
I recall you were interested in how the Austrians would answer this. I think that they would object to the question because of their aversion to aggregates. Some individuals are better off and some worse off. The Austrians would deny that you can sum the results for individuals and get a result for the economy as a whole. This is because of Austrian subjectivity. Assume that I move a programming job to India, and make the required capital investments. I am presumably better off (otherwise I wouldn't have moved the capital). The worker I fire here in the US is worse off. (Other effects you have mentioned go here). Now, considering only me and the laid off worker, is this change overall good or bad? To answer this, you would have to compare the value of my gain to the value of the workers loss. But you can't. Value is subjective. And, it only gets harder when you try to take into account the other people affected. P.S. Bart, your quotes of other people are hard to follow. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBMhObE97xoXfnt4lpAQEU2AQAtllFg2gajiVhZqQoEJ5+yP9JvalU6ZiZ MD0L8CB+P04r0ICHrP2uhj40IUj2MTrb62JcHqKjrW5QU/51u+F4OfAryB4uHivH qz3WiAbscQgZTOf/zRyU7hBCSxQkYE/CZeDPjXPs8++6a0TvmJTlNp9KpJ1wIwgz eGgkhKQoaPY= =6ytQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -------------------- Scott McGuire <svmcguir@syr.edu> PGP key available at http://web.syr.edu/~svmcguir
participants (2)
-
Bart Croughs -
Scott McGuire