> > There are growing numbers of us that take these issues to heart. I
> > have long thought about starting a retail store where everything
> > available was "Made In America". I think these would prove far more
> > popular than many people think.
> It's a good idea, but why stop there? How about a "Made in Nebraska"
> store for Nebraskans, and similarly for other states?
> Or better still, "Made in Dubuque", "Made in Palm Springs", "Made in
> Talahassee" stores, etc.
> In fact, this whole business about trade is a bunch of nonsense, really.
> Why give your money to someone else when you can keep it right here at
> home. Build and make everything yourself: shop at your own "Made at My
> House" store and you won't ship any of your money off your own property.
> If it's good to keep your money within your country, surely it's even
> better to keep it within your state, better still within your city,
> and best of all within your house.
> Hopefully the fallacy here is clear: the advantage of trade is that
> it allows people in different areas to specialize in different things.
> This is more efficient and less wasteful than trying to do everything
> locally. The wider the range of talents and resources available, the
> greater are the opportunities for finding the best possible match of
> people and production. Trade on a worldwide basis maximizes available
> resources for everyone.
> The most efficient system is one where you buy the goods that are
> cheapest, regardless of where they are produced. Anything else is just
> throwing money away. You're hurting yourself and those around you by
> boycotting trade opportunities.
I think that is not so simple. For example, it is good to shop around for
bargains, but also you must consider the premiums of cost.
-- Ross Andrew Finlayson Finlayson Consulting Ross at Tiki-Lounge: http://www.tiki-lounge.com/~raf/ "It's always one more." - Internet multi-player computer game player
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:59:46 MDT