"Spehro Pefhany" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 14:47:34 GMT, the renowned "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

That's an interesting point, and the EU sometimes tries to draw parallels
between the countries of Europe and the states of the US. They do that
when
it helps support one specious argument or another. g

As they integrate economically, it makes some sense. The more they
standardize their byzantine system and consolidate all those
bureaucrats into a lesser number in Brussels, the more they will save.

The arguments are not primarily economic. They're primarily over how much
sovereign decision-making they're sacrificing with the EU. No one in the US
would ever imagine tolerating it between our country and any other. Because
we start off with a highly centralized, nominally federal system, we can't
really see what they're facing, nor can we put ourselves in their place.


But this is one country, albeit a large one. There are no trade barriers
of
any kind between the states -- 'never have been.

Mmm.. are there not licensing barriers for Professional Engineers,
construction contractors and such like? I think there are *some*
barriers, just not that many.

They really aren't barriers. They're just cases in which you may have to be
licensed in the state in which you practice. My wife went through that with
her teaching certificate. It's just a duplicative bureacratic procedure, not
a barrier against practicing her profession.


NAFTA put most goods and *some* services
in that category except for those items that are being "managed"
between the nations of North America. NAFTA also allows many
professionals to work in any of the countries with negligible
paperwork. The *big* difference is that ordinary Joes cannot easily
move to where there are jobs or other economic opportunity, even if
they wanted to.

NAFTA is a collection of halfway measures. It's long-term prospects look
better than those of the WTO, in my opinion, but only slightly so.


The specialization and
comparative-advantage issues are built right into our industrial- and
total
economic structure. We all operate under the same government and the same
set of federal taxes and laws. The only variations are in local taxes,
and
that's only a marginally competitive issue among the states, used to
attract
business or not. So there aren't many meaningful parallels that can be
drawn
between the states of the US and separate countries that trade with each
other.

I think there are useful parallels. One is that economic disparity
continues even when goods, services and people can move with almost
complete freedom. So we can probably expect Portugal to be poorer than
Switzerland for the foreseeable future.

But somebody moving from, say, Alabama to Michigan doesn't have to learn
another language, doesn't have to function as an alien worker, and so on.
That's why I say the parallels between the US and the EU are pretty flimsy.


BTW, one of the issues that's bothering me is that the current system
(international trade, NGOs, resource pricing) tends to give the
advantage to the biggest consumer and whoever has the most economic
power and growth. That's fine so long as you happen to be the dominant
top dog, but it could turn against you if others start competing and
outbidding. We may live long enough to see this happen in an obvious
way, but it's already happening subtly.

I'd have to know what specific events you're talking about to follow what
you're saying here.

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