Fortsätt till huvudinnehåll

Conflicting traditions on the two sides of the Channel

There are powerful producer interest groups in the EU which make sure that things are run to suit them. In addition, there is the continental dirigiste tradition, which stems partly from its legal forms, which are not derived from Common Law, and partly from the centralising religious tradition which originates in Roman Catholicism and was carried over into Lutheranism and Calvinism, which are different animals from the Anglican/Nonconformist branches of protestantism which prevail in England and Wales.

On top of that is the persistence of the seventeenth century mercantilist view of trade and the economy, which lies behind the single market obsession. There is an irony here, because it was the French Physiocrats who first exposed the falsehood of mercantiism. One of the Physiocrats, Turgot, was appointed by King Louis XVI to introduce free trade reforms. Unfortunately, the vested interests prevailed, people starved during the famine of 1783/4 (caused by the volcanic eruption on Iceland), and the King lost his head.

The ideas of the Physiocrats was built on by the British economists Smith, Hume, Ricardo and later on, Henry George; the last named was influential in the commonwealth countries, notably Australia, New Zealand and Singapore, as well as China and Japan, which was the reason for the rapid industrialisation of Japan and accounts for the present day success of Taiwan.

One of the reasons for the unpopularity of the EU in Britain is the abhorrence of taxes and tariffs on food. The Corn Laws were abolished in 1846, by a Conservative Prime Minister, after a campaign which had run for 50 years. The Peterloo protests and massacre were a part of the Free Trade movement. That gain was heedlessly thrown away in 1973. Many have not forgotten.

Kommentarer

Skicka en kommentar

Populära inlägg i den här bloggen

Importing people to sustain demand

I got involved in a discussion with a Youtuber called “Philosophy all along”. This was in connection with criticism of Trump’s policy of deporting illegal migrants, which he argued would be bad for the economy as it would reduce demand. This implies that there is a need to import people to sustain demand. There is no obvious reason why a population should not be able to consume everything that the same population produces. If it can not, then something else is going on. It is a basic principle that wages are the least that workers will accept to do a job. Wages are a share of the value added by workers through their wages. The remainder is distributed as economic rent, after government has taken its cut in taxes. Monopoly profit is a temporary surplus that after a delay gets absorbed into economic rent. Land values in Silicon Valley are an example of this; it's like a gold rush. The miners get little out of it. Rent and tax syphon purchasing power away from those who produce the g...
Skicka en kommentar
Läs mer

The Zombie Train that refuses to die

The Guardian has published a couple more articles against HS2, one by specialist rail commentator Christian Wolmar, and another today by journalist Simon Jenkins. The main arguments in favour will doubtless be wheeled out by the commentators: the need for capacity and the disruption caused by upgrading existing routes. HST itself will severely disrupt services to Euston during the construction period. Capacity can be increased at a fraction of the cost by a variety of measures, provided that it is accepted that the additional traffic will run at existing speeds. It is not generally known that the Midland main line is, or was, four track all the way from London to Trent Junction, between Nottingham and Derby. This is because the additional tracks are separate, having been added for coal trains which trundled down to Brent sidings, on the edge of London, from a collection point at Toton in Nottinghamshire, where the Midland Railway build a huge marshalling yard. Beyond Derby, the main l...
Skicka en kommentar
Läs mer

How much more will the British tolerate?

The British are phlegmatic, tolerant and slow to rouse. Thus there was no great reaction after the terrorist attack in July 2005. The murder of Lee Rigby created a sense of outrage, but nothing more, since it appeared to be an isolated incident. Two serious incidents within a fortnight are another matter. Since the first major terrorist incident in 2001, authority has tried to persuade the public that Islam is a religion of peace, that these were isolated events, or the actions of deranged "lone wolves", having nothing to do with Islam, or to reassure that the chances of being killed in a terrorist attack were infinitesimally small. These assurances are are beginning to wear thin. They no longer convince. If government does not act effectively, people will take the law into their own hands. What, however, would effective action look like? What sort of effective action would not amount to rough justice for a lot of innocent people? Given the difficulties of keeping large n...
Skicka en kommentar
Läs mer