Food Politics, Not Science

Saturday, April 9, 2016

A Bloomberg article, “The world is getting fatter and no one knows how to stop it,” blathers on about how world governments will centrally manage obesity, with one avenue being the bureaucratic analysis of the ”negative” impact that free trade has upon health outcomes, and hence the centralized management of trade via tariffs, taxation, and policy. Another Bloomberg piece hilariously gets it wrong on “unchallenged” free trade:

In the black-and-white world of economics textbooks, free trade is good for everyone. Each country figures out what it does best, then exchanges the wine or cloth or software it makes with other nations, creating wealth. Where jobs are lost, they’ll be replaced by more suitable ones. Or so the theory goes. For two centuries, the virtue of free trade went almost unchallenged by economists and politicians. Now it’s under attack. Plans for the most ambitious trade agreements in a generation have brought together an unlikely coalition of unions, religious groups, Internet freedom activists and conservationists to galvanize public opinion against them. They’ve refocused the debate on trade’s winners and losers, arguing that the deals threaten to aggravate inequality, degrade labor and health standards and weaken democracy.

Be Sociable, Share!
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Leave a Reply