#TPA more popular among democrats
09 Oct 2015 Leave a comment
in income redistribution, international economics, politics - New Zealand, politics - USA, Public Choice, public economics, rentseeking Tags: TPA, voter demographics
@NZGreens @nzlabour @jamespshaw #TPA a brief history of trade policy
08 Oct 2015 Leave a comment
in economic history, international economic law, international economics, Public Choice Tags: Cato Institute, customs unions, Douglas Irwin, preferential trade agreements, regional trade agreements, TPA, TPPA, trade policy
Good grief, the architect of "the pivot to Asia" opposes TPP? In her book she praised the deal! http://t.co/9XDiv0btzM—
Ryan Lizza (@RyanLizza) October 07, 2015
Jane Kelsey oppose handcuffs on the democratic choices of future governments! Does she opposes labour and environmental standards in trade agreements too?
06 Oct 2015 Leave a comment
in development economics, international economic law, international economics, International law, politics - New Zealand, politics - USA Tags: colonialism, GATT, Leftover Left, preferential trading agreements, TPA, TPPA
What's in the #TPP? Robust enforceable environmental protections. Get the facts ustr.gov/tpp #LeadOnTrade http://t.co/hzapJwGaCa—
USTR (@USTradeRep) October 05, 2015What's in the #TPP? Protections for American workers. Get the facts: ustr.gov/tpp #MadeInAmerica http://t.co/VPeV70zaPT—
USTR (@USTradeRep) October 05, 2015https://twitter.com/JimRose69872629/status/651230008875220992
One of my policy essays for my Masters of Public Policy Degree in Japan was on the social clauses of the GATT. I described the labour and environmental clauses is a new form of colonialism.
My classmates were government officials from all around Asia, more than 20 countries. As they spoke English as a second language, they were pleased to learn of a new way of describing social clauses in trade agreements in English.
A Filipino friend had a blunter way of referring to social clauses in trade agreements: “the whites are back, telling us what to do”.
Environmentalists are praising wildlife measures in the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal nyti.ms/1hlu7hS http://t.co/ZLYarL9QE7—
The New York Times (@nytimes) October 05, 2015
Jane Kelsey in a television interview said she opposes the reductions in sovereignty in trade agreements that result from investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) provisions because they limit the democratic choices of future governments.
If so, she must oppose environmental and labour standards in trade agreements and, more importantly, binding the hands of future governments with climate treaties. All international treaties are about restrictions on sovereignty.
Environmental and labour clauses in trade agreements and climate treaties all limit the powers of governments to legislate on environmental and employment law in accordance with the will of the people as expressed in the most recent election and change of government. Power to the people.
https://twitter.com/rorymccourt/status/625540621457960960
Jane Kelsey would do better focusing on those parts of the TPPA deal that lowers the net value of the deal such as those extending the term of patents over the drugs. All international treaties are about trade-offs.
View original post 212 more words
@jamespeshaw nails the #TPPA policy trade-off @NZGreens
06 Oct 2015 1 Comment
in applied price theory, applied welfare economics, comparative institutional analysis, economics of regulation, international economic law, international economics, International law, law and economics, politics - Australia, politics - New Zealand, politics - USA, property rights Tags: conspiracy theories, David Friedman, foreign direct investment, free trade agreements, FTI, international investment law, Leftover Left, New Zealand Greens, preferential trading agreements, TPPA, Twitter left
About 1% more GDP but higher drug prices.
Source: No increased medicine costs under TPPA | Stuff.co.nz
.@MSF: Patients and treatment providers in developing countries the big losers of the #TPP bit.ly/TPPconcludes http://t.co/cbikANleyA—
MSF Access Campaign (@MSF_access) October 05, 2015
The next best arguments James Shaw made were xenophobia about foreign investment in land and some vast conspiracy theory regarding endangered dolphins.
When your next best argument is foreigners are coming to buy up all our land, you are playing from a weak populist hand. About half of million New Zealand born live in other countries.
About 80% of these live in Australia, the great majority as residents rather than as citizens. These New Zealanders living in Australia and elsewhere need protection under international agreements to ensure they are not the victim of populist outbreaks against the sale of land to foreigners.
Source: Statistics New Zealand.
In addition, if a foreigner wants to pay over the odds for my house I am glad to separate a fool from his money.
Source: Statistics New Zealand.
New Zealand has a strong interest in protecting the rights of its own expatriates as well as New Zealand foreign investors to buy land in other countries. As David Friedman explains:
Much more commonly, [economic imperialism] is used by Marxists to describe–and attack–foreign investment in “developing” (i.e., poor) nations. The implication of the term is that such investment is only a subtler equivalent of military imperialism–a way by which capitalists in rich and powerful countries control and exploit the inhabitants of poor and weak countries.
There is one interesting feature of such “economic imperialism” that seems to have escaped the notice of most of those who use the term. Developing countries are generally labour rich and capital poor; developed countries are, relatively, capital rich and labour poor. One result is that in developing countries, the return on labour is low and the return on capital is high–wages are low and profits high. That is why they are attractive to foreign investors.
To the extent that foreign investment occurs, it raises the amount of capital in the country, driving wages up and profits down. The effect is exactly analogous to the effect of free migration. If people move from labour-rich countries to labour-poor ones, they drive wages down and rents and profits up in the countries they go to, while having the opposite effect in the countries they come from.
If capital moves from capital-rich countries to capital-poor ones, it drives profits down and wages up in the countries it goes to and has the opposite effect in the countries it comes from. The people who attack “economic imperialism” generally regard themselves as champions of the poor and oppressed.
To the extent that they succeed in preventing foreign investment in poor countries, they are benefiting the capitalists of those countries by holding up profits and injuring the workers by holding down wages. It would be interesting to know how much of the clamour against foreign investment in such countries is due to Marxist ideologues who do not understand this and how much is financed by local capitalists who do.
What is so flash about #Singapore as an expat destination
04 Oct 2015 Leave a comment
in applied welfare economics, international economics, labour economics, labour supply, occupational choice Tags: economics of emigration, economics of immigration, expats
Which is the best country to be an expat? wef.ch/1j35Y1j #expats http://t.co/K58jgHSasy—
World Economic Forum (@wef) October 02, 2015
Most expensive countries for tourists to visit
02 Oct 2015 Leave a comment
These are the most expensive countries for tourists to visit wef.ch/1Jr8zqx #tourism #travel http://t.co/WDFCUa8J2W—
World Economic Forum (@wef) October 01, 2015
Labour costs across the European Union
23 Sep 2015 Leave a comment
in applied welfare economics, currency unions, Euro crisis, international economics, macroeconomics Tags: comparative advantage, EU, Euroland
A single labour market in Europe? Chart shows labour costs in some countries 10 times higher than in others http://t.co/HEzvsSoCPb—
paulkirby (@paul1kirby) September 14, 2015
@GreenpeaceNZ should not support the vexatious claims of climate refugees @NZGreens
22 Sep 2015 Leave a comment
in Economics of international refugee law, environmental economics, global warming, international economics, law and economics, politics - New Zealand Tags: climate refugees, global warming, Greenpeace, Kiribati, nuisance suits, political refugees, vexatious litigation, war refugees
Political support is tenuous enough for admitting more political refugees and war refugees to New Zealand without visa overstayers trying it on with claims for asylum on the basis of climate change – that they are a climate refugee.
Currently New Zealand small refugee quota of 750 is under review. Chances of that been increased to 1000 are reasonable. If people are trying to open the floodgates to millions of people as potential refugees of climate change, if Greenpeace’s own alarmist rhetoric about global warming is to be believed, Greenpeace only strengthens the hand of the anti-immigration and xenophobic parties such as New Zealand First and within the National Party caucus.
Not everyone is a worthy cause, particularly those who make vexatious legal claims that were always going to fail in court. The High Court, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court all ruled that it is not their place to expand the scope of the international refugee convention to cover those displaced by climate change. As the Court of Appeal ruled
No-one should read this judgment as downplaying the importance of climate change. It is a major and growing concern for the international community. The point this judgment makes is that climate change and its effect on countries like Kiribati is not appropriately addressed under the Refugee Convention.
Source: Doing Business in Kiribati – World Bank Group
Kirabati can do a lot more to help itself rather than looking to others to solve its problems. It is ranked 133rd in the World Bank’s Doing Business database. This means it can do a lot to help its own development, which strengthens its resilience against climate change and rising sea levels. In the High Court, Priestley J observed:
The economic environment of Kiribati might certainly not be as attractive to the applicant and his fellow nationals as the economic environment and prospects of Australia and New Zealand. But he would not, if he returns, be subjected to individual persecution…
The appellant raised an argument that the international community itself was tantamount to the “persecutor” for the purposes of the Refugee Convention. This completely reverses the traditional refugee paradigm. Traditionally a refugee is fleeing his own government or a non-state actor from whom the government is unwilling or unable to protect him. Thus the claimant is seeking refuge within the very countries that are allegedly “persecuting” him.
Kiribati’s Human Development Index value for 2012 is 0.629—in the medium human development category—positioning the country at 121 out of 187 countries and territories. The rank is shared with Indonesia and South Africa. Kiribati is not unusually poor if it is similar in human development index ranking is to Indonesia and South Africa. Since 1980, Kiribati life expectancy at birth has increased from 55 years to 68 years. Average years of schooling is nearly 8 years and expected years of schooling for their children is now 12 years.
Tariffs and the class war
10 Sep 2015 1 Comment
in applied welfare economics, income redistribution, international economics, Public Choice, rentseeking Tags: rentseeking, tariffs
Map of undersea cables around the world
25 Aug 2015 Leave a comment
in economic history, industrial organisation, international economics, technological progress Tags: map, undersea cables
The undersea cables wiring the Earth (2014).
(Explanation at: bit.ly/1yBFuEL) http://t.co/IWzrKL5pDl—
Max Roser (@MaxCRoser) June 25, 2015
Why @NZGreens @nzlabour @GreenpeaceNZ hate applied welfare economics
21 Aug 2015 Leave a comment
in applied welfare economics, economics of regulation, energy economics, environmental economics, health economics, international economics, labour economics, law and economics, politics - New Zealand, Public Choice Tags: antiforeign bias, antimarket bias, expressive voting, Greenpeace, Leftover Left, make-work bias, methodology of economics, New Zealand Greens, New Zealand Labour Party, rational ignorance, rational irrationality
Quotation of the Day from French Economist Frederic Bastiat in the 1850s http://t.co/2ECWtb6m9u—
Mark J. Perry (@Mark_J_Perry) August 14, 2015
John Stuart Mill on who loses from trade barriers
15 Aug 2015 Leave a comment
in applied price theory, applied welfare economics, international economics, liberalism Tags: antiforeign bias, expressive voting, John Stuart Mill, protectionism, rational ignorance, rational irrationality, tariffs and quotas
Creative destruction in car manufacturing
14 Aug 2015 Leave a comment
in development economics, economic history, entrepreneurship, growth miracles, industrial organisation, international economics, survivor principle Tags: automotive industry, car industry, comparative advantage, creative destruction, entrepreneurial alertness, manufacturing industry, market selection, The meaning of competition
Changing shares of car production since 1950
(source bit.ly/1hn1l0Y) http://t.co/VPhianlBBX—
Max Roser (@MaxCRoser) August 07, 2015
Explanation of the Greece Bailout in 90 Seconds
13 Aug 2015 Leave a comment
in budget deficits, business cycles, currency unions, economic growth, fiscal policy, international economic law, international economics, International law, macroeconomics Tags: credible commitments, Eurosclerosis, game theory, Greece, sovereign bailouts, sovereign defaults
Utopia, you are standing in it! 
Recent Comments