Français/French Deutsch/German Italiano/Italian Português/Portuguese Español/Spanish 日本語/Japanese 한국어/Korean 中文(简体)/Chinese Simplified

Welcome!

I, God, welcome you to my blog!

The good book says only God is good, so it seems to me somebody needs to step up.

I hope you enjoy reading this, the Jesse Journal, as much as I have enjoyed writing it. Please feel free to subscribe, write me an email, request that I write about any particular topic you may want my perspective on, send a prayer, click on the charity link, or donate money to my bicycle fund! Have fun!

Your pal, Jess
L-I'm a straight, virgo/boar INTJ (age 52) who enjoys books, getting out into nature, music, and daily exercise.

(my email is JesseGod@live.com)

F.Y.I. There are about 2200 posts..

Here's a quote from Fyodor Dostoevsky to start things off right: Love the animals, love the plants, love everything. If you love everything, you will perceive the divine mystery in things. Once you perceive it, you will begin to comprehend it better every day. And you will come at last to love the whole world with an all-embracing love.

Sunday, August 24, 2008

SWBP: Subsidies and Trade Barriers

SWBP as I call it, Solutions for the World's Biggest Problems, is a book I'm reading; 2007, Edited by Bjorn Lomborg, Director of the Copenhagen Consensus Center, Chapter 4: Subsidies and Trade Barriers, written and solved by Kym Anderson, from the University of Adelaide and the World Bank. Big money, big money! Summary and Commentary:

Tear down the wall

The gist is that government intervention in markets causes harm. The brunt of which is carried by the poor. It's a no-brainer. The benefits of completely removing all trade barriers would be between 67 and 260 times the costs. No trade or agricultural barriers would result in benefits estimated to reach 287B US dollars a year. Include services, and the benefit goes up to 2.4T US dollars. That's T as in Trillion.

Cushioning the blow for those who lose their jobs would be a short-term headache, but the boost to economic growth would soon create many new jobs.

Such widely distributed prosperity makes trade liberalization a high priority, in Mrs. (?) Anderson's view. The distortionary policies in agriculture and clothing, in particular, are especially harmful to the world's poor. My whole religious sensibility is centered around lifting poor people from struggle, misery, and want. This one should be easy, once the world's policy makers are educated, with solid data from the past, as well as the theoretical model, of why liberalization works. Liberal is not a dirty word, you know. With a potential payoff of 260 dollars for every dollar spent, the political will for creating completely free trade should be ample. Even 67:1 is a mighty good deal.

No comments: