Considering these problems, I think it is fair to say that all that the mathematical proof of comparative advantage tells us is that it is possible for all parties to benefit from free trade, not that they necessarily will.
Personally I think that Bob Katter, at least in broad principles, has got this one right. I think that we, economically as well as socially, along with our environment, would be better off encouraging diversity and some degree of self-reliance within our domestic economy through economic protectionism than we would be in pursuing free trade.
In saying this, it is important that we do not set our tariffs so high that they support profiteering or gross inefficiency within domestic markets; moderation is the way forward.
Advertisement
Perhaps it is worth remembering here that Australia's first and second Prime ministers were members of the Protectionist Party. Who will claim these votes in the modern Australia? Labor and the coalition are locked into the free trade agenda, at least for the foreseeable future. While they may effect Qld politics, I do not believe that the Australian Party has got what it takes to make a march on the southern states.
The Greens on the other hand could be big winners here. With their established national presence, in advocating moderate protectionism, the Greens could potentially increase their country vote, chew further into the Labor Party vote across the nation, and start driving wedges into the coalition, some elements of which recognize the value of economic protectionism.
Discuss in our Forums
See what other readers are saying about this article!
Click here to read & post comments.
12 posts so far.