I believe that the free flow of capital is harmful – and has impoverished billions of people.
That\’s interesting, isn\’t it? Not actually according with any of the facts but interesting all the same.
I believe that green means reducing wasteful energy spent on transport.
Indeed, it does, but the method of working out what is wasteful spending on transport does need to be considered. Like, you know, using trade to do so, as Ol\’ Adam Smith pointed out about wine and Scottish grapes?
And I happen to think Ricardo did not get comparative advantage right: he forgot the forgot the fact that physical capital is not mobile, and nor are many people. Therefore there does not to be allowance for that ‘stickiness’ in world trade.
My word, how unlike Ritchie not to understand the only theory in all the social sciences which is not obvious nor trivial…..
The debate on what is and is not appropriate in trade is only now really beginning. What I do know is that the idea that it’s a free for all is profoundly wrong.
I think that\’s another sighting of Kip Esquire\’s Lawe, don\’t you? For if it isn\’t going to be a free for all then it must be regulated and who do we think is going to be doing the regulating?