04 February 2012

A Stupid Question


If Beijing’s intervention into the Chinese economy justifies U.S.-government ‘retaliation’ to ‘correct’ market distortions created by those interventions, shouldn’t the still-significant lingering negative consequences of Beijing’s interventions into the Chinese economy from 1949-1978 be considered?  Shouldn’t Beijing’s artificial destruction, during the middle decades of the 20th century, of production efficiencies in Chinese factories be weighed against Beijing’s artificial creation, in the early decades of the 21st century, of such efficiencies?

In short, the answer is no.

Boudreaux, in asking the question, implicitly accepts the validity of the state and of citizenship.  He must also accept that the state must act in the best interest of its citizens.  While the government should seek to redress the negative effects that its citizens face as a result of foreign market intervention, it has no responsibility to address the negative effects that non-citizens face as a result of foreign intervention.  China is not the US, and Chinese aren’t Americans.  As such, the US government has no obligation to concern itself with addressing negative economic outcomes faced by the Chinese people that arose as a result of the Chinese government’s economic policy.

No comments:

Post a Comment