tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post1309536626298604222..comments2024-03-06T06:34:42.881-05:00Comments on EconoSpeak: Child Labor Through the Strange Filter of Orthodox EconomicsUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-56572956623063567672009-10-13T23:01:17.200-04:002009-10-13T23:01:17.200-04:00"In fact, there is no theoretical or empirica..."In fact, there is no theoretical or empirical proof of the free trade postulate..."<br /><br />So there is no such thing as a "national" economy?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-73919899180080116072009-10-13T13:03:50.526-04:002009-10-13T13:03:50.526-04:00Many thanks, Peter. :)Many thanks, Peter. :)Minnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-59663622773486412732009-10-13T11:21:35.897-04:002009-10-13T11:21:35.897-04:00Min,
The history of CL in the US and UK is a bit ...Min,<br /><br />The history of CL in the US and UK is a bit more complicated than this. (And one should also look at other now-advanced countries.) Just to mention one factor, CL became problematized when children began working more often outside the home, due to a conception of proper child work as a component of family exchange. (In the early industrial revolution, CL was often cast in the mold of apprenticeship, but it became apparent that this was misleading.) At the same time, social expectations concerning education were changing. And an ideal of child play was championed by the Romantics and became widely accepted among the middle and upper classes as part of the new cult of domesticity. There is no simple economic explanation for all of this.<br /><br />Anonymous,<br /><br />Actually, I posted on this some time ago. Rather than look it up, I'll repeat the core argument:<br /><br />Orthodox trade theory claims to prove that free trade maximizes aggregate social welfare, but also creates losers as well as winners. The losers will mobilize to impose protection if they can. Economists, who believe themselves to understand both of these phenomena, have a moral duty to stand up for trade.<br /><br />In fact, there is no theoretical or empirical proof of the free trade postulate. Aside from this, the choice is not between free trade and no trade, but also trade subject to social regulation in various ways.Peter Dormanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00093399591393648071noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-80199418731531636072009-10-13T10:56:16.057-04:002009-10-13T10:56:16.057-04:00"why is it that, whatever the question, the e..."why is it that, whatever the question, the economically correct answer is always “Don’t mess with trade”?"<br /><br />I was hoping you would answer this question...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-39986211116700074952009-10-13T05:34:35.990-04:002009-10-13T05:34:35.990-04:00IIUC, in the history of the West, the Industrial R...IIUC, in the history of the West, the Industrial Revolution brought about competition between children and adults, as children were often preferred as factory workers. What does that history have to say about our current problem of child labor? Thanks.Minnoreply@blogger.com