[talk.politics.misc] Selling subsidized wheat to the Soviets

dmcanzi@watdcsu.UUCP (David Canzi) (09/12/86)

In article <479@aurora.UUCP> al@aurora.UUCP (Al Globus) writes:
>I don't know much about business but I do know one thing: buy low, sell high.
>The US has just concluded a deal with the Japanese to insure that they
>sell use memory chips at high prices, and another with the Russians to
>insure that they buy our wheat at low prices.  No wonder we're so much in
>debt.

If you're accurately reporting the nature of the agreement between the
US and Japan, I'm appalled but not really surprised.  It follows from
the same kind of theory that leads to a policy of subsidizing exports.

Subsidizing exports is intended to increase the amount of a country's
exports, without a corresponding increase in imports.  What this means
is that the total amount of work the people of the country do increases
but the total amount of goods and services they get doesn't.  Ie.  the
people are working more but not getting more.  Similarly, if the
government manages to reduce imports without a corresponding decrease
in exports, the people do the same amount of work and get less for it.

When an individual has to work more for less this is considered a
misfortune, but governments pursue trade policies that tend to have
this result for the country as a whole, and almost nobody seems to
see anything the least bit odd about the situation.

Some may see an advantage to such policies in terms of the movements of
pieces of green paper, but green paper is not what counts.  How well
you live, and how much you have to work to live that well are the
issues that really matter.  The green paper is just a distraction.
-- 
David Canzi		"If there is no God, who pops up the next Kleenex?"