Here's the rub in this whole thing. Yes, you should be able to seek out
an efficient producer that can give you the best value for the dollar.
However, when a society imposes policies upon business that effectively
cause inefficiencies relative to a government that doesn't, the whole
process is thrown out of whack. Reducing the dumping of contaminants
down the storm drain is a good thing...and that's why we have laws to
restrict the dumping. China does not have such laws (or they are
ignored/bribed off). Are they then truly the "most efficient" or is
that an advantage in the marketplace?

Is a social security system where the employer contributes an
"inefficiency" or a societal choice? When we make such choices, are we
not giving those who don't an advantage?

I personally believe we should remove the advantage for such items via
real duties (not fake protectionist duties, lobbied for by certain
industries). Although it won't correct the whole problem, it would be a
step toward comparing "apples to apples".

Hey, Ed....any idea of what percent of net goods (production) cost in
the USA can be attributed to things like federal compliance and
paperwork that is not required in China or other foreign countries? You
have often said that 90% of the cost difference is labor (my guess at a
number, not your words)....what percent is from the other things they
can "get away" with that we can't in the USA?

Koz

Gary Coffman wrote:

snip


OTOH, free trade allows the consumer to seek out the best
value, wherever it may be, and maximize the value received
for dollars spent. That rewards efficient producers and
penalizes inefficient ones.
snip