Re:How Economic Gobbledygook Divides Us
by marcosdumay on Monday November 07, 2016 @10:06AM
(#12891566)
You are mixing positive and normative aspects here, and getting a way less powerful worldview as a consequence. Well, you are not to blame, as by the time of Ricardo economists were always doing the same, so even the Wikipedia article will mix them.
A model is a positive construct, not normative. From the model:
1 - That is not answered by the model. You'll almost certainly need to answer it case by case, as the origin of some advantages are that somebody just happened to be born in a place instead of another. Other are clearly more systematic.
2 - Does not seem to be. This is also not on the model.
3 - The country does not get to "know" what it is best at. In a competitive market¹ the less competitive industries fail while the more competitive ones thrive.
4 - That's also not on the model. It will probably change the comparative advantages in the future.
5 - This one is completely normative.
6 - A much more likely claim you'll hear from economists is that overall the population benefits from international trade. There's no "long run" there, and not "everyone" either. This one model does not explain how a population can spread that benefit so it goes to everyone and is sustainable on the long run, you'll have so look at many of them to get a good answer to that.
As the GP said (and I on another comment), it's too simple. But you didn't point to flaws.
A model is a positive construct, not normative. From the model:
1 - That is not answered by the model. You'll almost certainly need to answer it case by case, as the origin of some advantages are that somebody just happened to be born in a place instead of another. Other are clearly more systematic.
2 - Does not seem to be. This is also not on the model.
3 - The country does not get to "know" what it is best at. In a competitive market¹ the less competitive industries fail while the more competitive ones thrive.
4 - That's also not on the model. It will probably change the comparative advantages in the future.
5 - This one is completely normative.
6 - A much more likely claim you'll hear from economists is that overall the population benefits from international trade. There's no "long run" there, and not "everyone" either. This one model does not explain how a population can spread that benefit so it goes to everyone and is sustainable on the long run, you'll have so look at many of them to get a good answer to that.
As the GP said (and I on another comment), it's too simple. But you didn't point to flaws.
1 - Notice I didn't say "free market" here.