Is it better the USA is a mercantile or free trade nation?

The purpose of the post is to argue against a populist idea that is mildly irritating to anyone with any clue about economics. That is the populist mercantile argument. It is not only harmful to the US economy (you) but President Obama supports it. It is beyond me why our President would lead us down a path of doom with a failed economic philosophy that has been out of date for about 250 years.

I understand why people favor mercantilism vs free trade. It is because it seems logical. But the reality is the biggest optical illusion of economics. It is unfair to the have nots and favors the rich and empowered.

The definition of mercantilism

The mercantilist industrial policy aimed at encouraging productive activity within the national territories by the concession of monopolistic privileges, State subsidies, and tax exemptions to national enterprises, as well as by the importation of advanced technology, the acquisition of manufacturing secrets, and the encouragement of the immigration of skilled workers. – An outline of the History of Economic thought -Ernesto Screpanti and Stefano Zamagni.

Now read this:

Capitalism should not be condemned, since we haven’t had capitalism. – Ron Paul

How would you compare these two quotes? What policy do you think the US pursues?

It comes down to this, would you rather lived under a controlled economy or a free economy, Adam Smith capitalism vs mercantilism?

Under a controlled economy you get higher prices and less choice as well as less choice in terms of professional career and work.  To make a metaphor, what if each town in the USA were to purse a protectionist economic policy and erect barriers to trade against the next. It would protect the people who live in the town but also impoverish all the towns. Life would be hard.

Or imagine if your household had to do everything from A to Z. You would only sell things but not buy, sure you would have a lot of work to do, but your life would not be as rich.

The counter argument by labor unions and politicians is jobs outsources and off shore never come back. When I was a kid all the Pineapple came from Hawaii. Now they come from abroad like Costa Rica.  I do not think Hawaii is a poorer place to live do you?

Consider nations that have tried mercantilism compared to free trade

Many people, despite 250 years of prosperity in the USA ,want to turn back to a mercantilist model of economics. On paper is sounds good. But I can tell you it was tried. It was tried many times in the past and the free trade capitalist model always worked better in every case. The mercantilist countries become poorer weaker and unable to defend themselves.

Think of Spain and France and Portugal in the 18th century. Now think of England and America. Think of Germany in the 1940s and how it had to create war to sustain the boom, that was about to collapse.

In the 17th and 18th century the French tried the mercantilist model. Jean-Baptiste Colbert was the chief architect.

The art of taxation consists in so plucking the goose as to obtain the largest amount of feathers with the least possible amount of hissing – Jean-Baptiste Colbert

Do you want this type of political economy? I do not.

England leaned more towards Adam Smith ‘s prescription of free trade and markets after the publication of Wealth of Nations. The result was obvious to historians. I can show countless other historical examples of this from Hong Kong to Singapore where when humans are given freedom society flourishes.

If anyone wants to drag the USA into a French economic model from the 17th century, I would highly advise we bring back a king and his armies to control the people also.

Russia pursues a mercantilist economic policy today as do many Arab , South American and African nations. Export driven, but only the rich benefit and the masses remain poor. This is always the case with mercantilism. mercantilism is for the ‘haves’ and the ‘have nots’ get a pittance to survived on and are told the myth that if free trade was introduction their jobs would be taken away. Do you want to live as an average person in these countries?

It is not true. People lose their jobs because they are unable to change with the market. I see it in Eastern Europe where I live. Under communism people wanted a job for life. That system collapsed. It destroyed the human spirit and created the structurally unemployed. People had the expectation that life does not change. For these people to work is hard because they have bad attitudes and a sense of entitlement. They are rude when dealing with customers and lazy on the job. In contrast in Eastern Europe the majority of people understand that what capitalism and free trade is about and even in old age have their businesses going.

Why Americans what to adopt a failed economy philosophy and apply it to such a beautiful country like the USA is beyond me, I can only attribute it to ignorance or politicians who have not had a classical education, but willed their head with gooply goop at law school or something. Read Adam Smith on why countries become rich.

If free trade and capitalism did not cause the economic crisis what did?

The economic crisis was caused by the government monopoly on the control of money. This that simple. This happened in the great Depression and the current great recession. Market failures are caused by market distortions. The Central bank exacerbated a cycle of boom and bust by trying to find tune economics.

The why are things more competitive in the US work place?

Because after WWII the rest of the world was in ruin or had communism. It was easy for the US to prosper. There were no real competitors, as the world was trying to survive. However, do not be foolish in thinking the rest of the world would stay behind and not try to improve themselves. This would happen regardless if the US was mercantilist or free trade.

The only difference would be the relative position of the United Stated depending on what economic system they pursued. The more the US goes towards a mercantile system or centrally controlled system of economics, we have problems. The more we gravitate towards freedom and liberty, the economy grows.

If this is true why do people believe in mercantilism?

The mercantilist argument gets popular support as it sounds nice but people have not studied history and failed economic systems of the past.

It is an elitist policy that reinforces ‘the haves’ and does little for the ‘have nots’. It is very unfair for the average person who wants to make something of their lives. It is a centrally planned industrial policy that favors special interests. I created a Wealth of Nations for free if you are interested in this topic.

One last thing if you do not care about Political Economy, history or logic

If you are still not convinced, try this  Play the game Civilization which is largely based on a computer model of countries competing economically. In the game  as soon as your nations  switches to capitalism, free movement of labor and capital, free trade and democracy as opposed to centrally controlled governments, your civilization starts to take off and prosper. Citizens and workers become rich and happy and science advances. Try it and then you decide if you would rather have the US a Free trade nation or a mercantilist country. If you are still not convinced please leave your best argument for protectionism and I can easily rebut it. Obama if you are reading this you are welcomed also.