Quote:
|
Originally Posted by smooth
Your view of the constraints on capital movement versus labor movement are distorted.
When I use the term free, I am referring to ability, not cost.
Corporations have much more freedom to move laterally than labor does or consumers can and this is a direct result of their influence over the laws that govern such behavior.
It does not suffice to simply say that "some" people move internationally.
Movement of both labor and capital does not exist in a vacuum, they are bounded by law. I don't see you accounting for the influences powerful entities, such as capitalists and corporations, have over the movement of labor and ability to consume. I think you are giving a very superficial view of one's ability to follow capital from one nation to another--regardless of personal and social considerations.
I do not agree with your assesment of Adam Smith's position on this. I believe he would agree with me and that the "invisible hand," in so far as it exists, can only do so when labor and consumers can move laterally as easily as capital can. The legal and political domains have corrupted the regulations that economists argue exists naturally to control capitalism.
In the few posts you've responded to me on this subject, you've consistently not acknowledged my point in this regard. I remain curious why economists purport to follow the tenets of Adam Smith, yet violate one of his basic premises that labor and capital must be equally unfettered in their ability to follow one another.
|
I will have to disagree on every point you make in the above post. You have now wandered into the realm of Political Studies, of which I am no expert. You claim that corporations prevent labour from moving by enacting laws and pressuring the government.
I cannot comment on laws that government makes in the US, as I am almost completely ignorant to your labour laws. I can tell you that there is a section in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms that explicitly states that there shall be no laws preventing the free movement of people and commerce within the country. Provinces are not allowed to discriminate.
Internationally, commerce is very mobile, and labour does indeed move from one location to another. My "Superficial View" on the subject is purposeful: I am keeping the discussion focused around economic factors and not political or ethical points of view.
Although we may agree to disagree, I appreciate the complexity of the issue. I do not pretend to know all facets af every issue, and on a personal level I find politics very frustrating.
Are there other questions you have? I think I might start an Economics thread in Tilted Knowledge. I haven't searched for it, but you never know...