"Mark Winlund" wrote in message
...

"Ed Huntress" wrote

You should look at it from the other end of the telescope, Mark. All any
of
us do is supply services, unless we're farmers. "Tangible goods" are
just
services bundled into convenient packages. Your can opener provides the
service of opening cans, not of delighting your artistic sensibilities.
g

Ed Huntress



Perhaps you are right, Ed. I'll be the first to admit I am not an expert
on
this, and you have spent a lot of time and energy examining the situation.
That being said, I do know that there is an awful lot of misery out there
due to our losing manufacturing jobs to places like China. I fear for my
kid's (and his kid's) future. He's no dummy, and the employment situation
looks very bleak with very little improvement in sight.

I have closely followed your articles on the subject.

Regards,

Mark



I'm sure you realize that I'm not pointing this out in order to support the
idea that manufacturing doesn't matter, Mark. The point is that the
relationship between goods and services is a complex one, and that economic
arguments have to be thought through before they'll hold any water.

Many of the arguments in favor of manufacturing are poorly thought through
and, thus, they are poorly argued. When you're arguing with free-trade
ideologues, like the President's Council of Economic Advisors, it's no fun
to get shot down before you utter your second sentence. The arguments in
favor of encouraging a strong manufacturing base in the US are powerful
ones -- if they're based on an understanding of such things as this complex
relationship.

It isn't easy and, when you get involved in it, you quickly reach a point
where theories are being tossed around with little thought being given to
the practical realities behind them. I don't try to argue economic theories
with the economists but I, like you and the other readers of our magazine,
can teach them a few things about the realities.

--
Ed Huntress
(remove "3" from email address for email reply)