From: Bart  Croughs <bart.croughs@tip.nl>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 07:43:38 +0800
To: "'cypherpunks@toad.com>
Subject: re: National Socio-Economic Security Need for Encryption  Technology
Message-ID: <01BB87DE.CFF8D020@groningen15.pop.tip.nl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Duncan Frissell wrote:

The first axiom of economics is "Wants are unlimited."  I'm glad that
they're "shipping all those jobs overseas."  The more people we have working
the more goodies are produced.  If the labor of US workers is freed up, then
they can go about producing something else valuable that they didn't have
time to produce before because those "third worlders" weren't doing their
fair share back when they were trapped in feudalism or fabian socialism.
You can't get more stuff (wealth) unless everyone is out there working to
capacity (consistent with their desired work/leisure tradeoff).

I agree that 'shipping all those jobs overseas' will not cause the US workers to lose jobs. There is other work they can do.
	 But there is another axiom of economics which the nationalist/socialist can use for his case against the free movement of capital. This axiom states that the wages of workers depend on the amount of capital invested. The more capital invested, the higher the wages are. If American companies are moving capital to Third World countries because of the low wages in these countries, then the workers in the Third World will of course be better off. But in the US, the amount of capital will be lowered. So the American workers will be able to get other jobs, but these jobs will pay less, because of the diminished amount of capital in the US.
	Of course there are advantages also for the US (shareholders will get higher returns, trade will increase), but how can you proof that these advantages will offset the disadvantage of the lowered amount of capital in the US? 
	Anyone?

Bart Croughs