Libertarianism - the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

  • Guest, it's time once again for the hotly contested and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!



    Go here and fill out your bracket!
    Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Once again, only you can decide!

Lithose

Buzzfeed Editor
25,946
113,035
I guess what I'm asking is this: What would be the real-world effects if a country like Canada were to decide to go without the trade ensured (and insured) by the US? Say, if a politician were to use that as their platform (which is not to say one hasn't but I'm not one for spontaneous research)? Could Canada stand a chance, or would this politician be Canada's Ron Paul?
It would be catastrophic, really. Even China wasn't able to extricate itself from the financial system the U.S. uses to control trade--and I say the U.S. but it's not all the U.S., the EU collaborates with our Fed/Treasury on all of this (Britain's financial claws run deep still, as does French/German). The reason I say catastrophic is you only have control over the "actors" (Economic term for Companies, businesses ect) in your state. If you impose regulations on them that prevent them routing transactions and contracts through our financials, the price for their products would rise a great deal--putting them well above international competition, which would absolutely destroy your markets. So the only way to get out of the system is to use an isolationist strategy, or redesign your treaties to prevent certain imports, ect. Which will get you sanctioned in the WTO, and bring about reprisal policies in other states--which will collapse your foreign markets. So, as you said, the only way would be if Canada could become almost completely self sufficient. And honestly, even power house, diverse economies like the EU, U.S. and China can't do that, there is little hope for a narrower economy like Canada.

So, how to change? Well, continuing to limit dependence with things like oil, is a big step. Also making "mature" markets more competitive with developing ones is another--but that's going to take work from the developing markets (Chinese workers will need to learn to say it's not okay that they die making Ipads) and some smart domestic policy (Slowly lobbying for certain protections, which will force "equalized" markets for trading--this has to be done very carefully though, or the above will happen and this SHOULD be easier in smaller states, because the government should be less restrained by global private interests--hence the original post.). It's actually really complex, I know about it, but I wouldn't feel comfortable trying to outline a strategy for it--you can write entire books on the subject (My professor was writing his thesis on correcting corporate malfeasance in the U.S. market--which is just a small aspect of what would need to be done.)

Hate to sound like it's impossible--it's not. It's just a VERY big problem, and it's going to take a lot of effort and numerous small changes to correct it. If we bring the whole system down, the vacuum created, and the chaos, would probably end up making things worse (And when I say probably, I mean 99.9% sure it would, and not just in the short term)...What we have to remember is that, as bad as things are now, there is no time in history where things were "better" (As incompletelybetter overall--certain aspects were better, like wealth equality in the 50's/60's, social mobility ect but you had bigger wars, poorer environmental protection ect). Is there a lot of room to improve? Absolutely--HUGE amount of room to make things far, far better. But on that note, it can also bea lotworse. So, in my opinion, now isn't the time to hit the big red button and go for broke--now is the time to get candidates that are going to focus on things like wealth equality, social mobility and limiting foreign dependence,withoutburning everything down before starting those things. This whole thing is like a freight train, yes--but we can stop it without derailing it.


This is actually kind of straight forward.

Lithose, do you work for or with someone's state department attache? Most people have no fucking clue things get this deep.
Naa, I did work around lobbyists for a while and political science is a hobby of mine (I was an economics major, but it was heavily slanted toward the political end of it)...Now I mostly follow money trails, and help put large accounts in order. I see, on a regular basis, the disgusting amount of "wealth" flowing into Washington from all over the world and by wealth, I also mean things like information, favors and good old currency....Even the most pious politician (lol) would absolutely be corrupted by it. Which is why it's silly to expect an about face at this level, the world wide pressure to keep the boat steady reaches critical mass here. What we need to hope for is pushes from people like Warren to make incremental changes, but it's going to take a concerted effort, with politicians who can work inside the system (Those on the outside just get crushed or marginalized.)