Originally Posted by
Maninthebar
This, though, is not neo-liberal econimics but classical economic theory: it is not good for an economy to be using resources making things when they can be made (and then purchased) using less resource elsewhere - an economy is then able to use the resources freed up to make things the OTHER economy cannot.
Classical example, it is POSSIBLE to grow olive trees in the South West of England but it is better to let the e.g. Iberian peninsular do this while England focuses on growing apples for which the climate and geography gives a comparative advantage.
The extent to which European economies have tranferred resrouces from solar panel production to e.g. software writing (where there is, allegedly, an advantage) is moot. However, protectionism is rarely a long term solution.
And duration of "term" as used in "long- term" has been shrinking for several decades already, and the pace of compression of relevant time frames is accelerating - at least in some sectors of national and regional economies.
Protectionism reflects an unwillingness or inability to integrate sectors of economies so as to account for sets of larger, broader and more impactful developments. Consider space programs and technologies as an example. Economic activities across many sectors have become more and more dependent on satellite systems. But space technology deployments and utilization transcend both literal and conceptual demarcation of national borders and national economies. Protecting a given country's space technology sector would be ineffective (perhaps laughably so) given the almost complete detachment of space - Earth orbit - from the physical and geographic frame of reference for protectionism. Now throw in cybersecurity threats (borders relatively unimportant), the rise of AI constantly trumpeted in media of all sorts, add some cryptocurrency issues, and the frame of reference for "protecting" industrial and technological capacities and know-how looks pretty outdated.
Sorry (not sorry) to go all pedantic.... this SLF/attorney holds no portfolio for "globalization." I think wrenching reform (drastic changes) of educational systems is an absolute necessity. I happen to think that study and appreciation of foreign languages is a critical component, one that is receiving too little attention. If that makes this viewpoint "globalist", first of all, what do you see when you look toward the Earth's center from the ISS in LEO (maybe, ....."the globe"??) and second,
Ja,
Flugplatz.