Please.
No more nonsense.
Now he says we need to increase the competitiveness of our products.
He had said 'competitiveness', (rather than competitiveness of our products), as a concept, was flatly wrong, back in 94.
Ultimately, what's the real difference?
It is better not to trade internationally, if you do not have to.
If you have to, be prepared for a very, very, very, heavy, mostly hidden, cost.
He also praised free trade and 'sound money', 96, Tulip article. Way after 71.
Gold as a standard had already been washed up by then.
What do you think he thought he meant then,
or thinks he means now?
Now he wants to debase the already fiat currency in the name of competitive US products.
What is wrong with that picture?
Why compete with poor countries on price or cost,
or based on weak or debased currency?
Why manufacture something somewhere else,
unless you are prepared to have it stolen?
Why, if you want to survive?
No comments:
Post a Comment