Globalisation and Chocolate


This entry was posted in Economics and economy. Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to Globalisation and Chocolate

  1. So, Australian’s should from now on become coffee bean pickers and live happily ever after.

  2. entropy

    Only if they live north of Mossman on the far north coast, Bemused. Otherwise they won’t be able to produce enough to complete.

  3. Egor

    A tiny 3rd world economic non lesson vs the history of incredible US mercantile success?
    The vid does not compute.

  4. max


    globalization has two dimensions, an economic and a political one.
    Economic globalization is synonymous with the cross-border division of labor. Today, no country produces solely to satisfy its own needs, but instead also for producers and consumers in other countries. And each country makes what it knows best, relatively speaking.
    Economic globalization, with free trade being a natural component, increases productivity. Without it, the poverty on this planet would not have been reduced to the extent it has been over the past decades.
    From the very outset, political globalization has nothing to do with economic globalization. It aims to direct and determine all relations between people on the various continents by way of authoritarian rule. The decision about what is being produced and consumed as well as where and at what time isn’t to be found by the free market, the division of labor and free trade, but instead by an ideological-political creative force.
    Of course, the thinking behind this opinion is purely socialist-collectivist.
    It is also the basis of the European Union (EU). Ultimately, it aims to create a European super state, in which nation states will dissolve like sugar cubes in a hot cup of tea.

    “Globalism” and “globalization,” are terms that suffer from a lack of any precise definition. The terms are used freely by a wide variety of commentators to mean both good and bad things — many of which are opposites of each other.

    It is not a coincidence that one of the nineteenth century’s most effective proponents of liberalism was Richard Cobden, who fought tirelessly against both trade barriers and against aggressive foreign policy. Cobden can be credited with waging an effective ideological war against the mercantilism of his day which was characterized by nationalist ideas in which both economic success and military security were zero sum games that required highly interventionist government institutions.

  5. max

    “Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.” ~ The Gospel According to Keynes, Chapter 1, verse 1.

    Keynesianism is an economic philosophy based on the idea that the free market requires intervention from the civil government in order to maintain justice and efficiency. The free market is both inefficient and unfair to the common man, Keynesianism teaches.
    So does mercantilism.

    The textbooks are officially anti-mercantilistic. There is a reason for this. Mercantilism is officially wrong, because it is undeniably old. Textbooks promote that which is new: “The latest is the greatest.” Mercantilism was believed from 1650 to 1750. It is therefore outmoded.

    Original mercantilism was a widely believed and invariably incorrect theory of trade that insisted that a nation grows rich by exporting more than it imports. David Hume, the Scottish philosopher, refuted this logic over 250 years ago. His fellow Scot, Adam Smith, refuted it in detail in 1776.

    A nation gets rich only if its residents get rich. Residents get rich by increasing their productivity. They stay rich by being allowed by the government to do whatever they want with their wealth, whether counted in gold, bank accounts, or goods. Liberty is the #1 basis of increasing people’s ability to become more efficient and therefore more productive. That was Smith’s argument in 1776. This is denied by Keynesianism.

  6. Death Giraffe

    If you think this lying, condescending, stupid video makes any kind of argument for you, you are a nut.
    Before importation there was no competition in the States? Really?
    US chocolate is crunchy? Not creamy? Really?
    Hershey. Dove. Ghirardelli Chocolate Company.
    Stupid, stupid shit for you to post here. Lift your game.

  7. Sinclair Davidson

    I think if you had watched the clip you’d realise the author was from Latin America not the US.

  8. Death Giraffe

    Well, why’d he bloody circle Florida in red then?

  9. Death Giraffe

    “This is where I grew up” circles large chunk of US, Mexico and Caribean.
    Ok he meant Mexico?
    “Where I grew up”.
    Not where he lives now though? But didn’t globalisation turn it into a freedom-loving paradise, and his dad a chocolate bean picking moghul? Why’d he leave?

  10. max

    Mercantilism is the economic philosophy that says, “I can use political power to get into your wallet deeper than you can use political power to get into mine.” It appeals to men’s egos. Men think of themselves as very clever politically. They do not think of themselves as equally clever in the competitive free market. They see, day after day, that other men can compete against them as producers. They see the results of political competition only vaguely. They cannot trace the effects of political interference with the economy. Even when they see that politics is stripping them of the liberty and their wealth, they reassure themselves: “Our side can do better at the next election.”
    All sides find that they are losing their liberty, but all sides have confidence that the next election will bring them the victory they need to make the government act in the interest of their political party.
    Those few groups that benefit from ever-greater government spending staff the political parties. They cannot lose, because they always promise the same thing: “More booty next time. More free lunches next time. More fame, honor, and glory next time. Trust us.” The voters do just that.
    Mercantilism is an easy sell. It sells to people who believe that badges and guns are the basis of wealth, if the good guys can somehow get their hands on badges and guns.
    The trouble is, bad guys always seem to have the larger guns. But the faithful do not conclude that it would be better to issue fewer badges and fewer guns. They call for more laws, more taxes, and more badges and guns. Next time, next time, next time: the good guys will win.
    The rich and influential people who sell to the government smile and nod in agreement. “We will help you toss out the bad guys next time.” The voters on all sides believe.
    The economic philosophy of this religion of “Next Time for Sure” is mercantilism. This religion is widely believed. It appeals to the larceny in men’s hearts, of which there is a never-ending supply at zero official price. It has a statement of economic faith: “Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.”

  11. max

    The defenders of mercantilism have a religion: the religion of state worship. They do not believe that individuals acting in their own self-interest by trading with each other in order to benefit themselves are reliable sources of innovation, exploration, and creativity. They believe that the free market is an incomplete organization. They believe that there must be a sovereign judicial entity which provides guidance, by which they really mean coercion, in directing the flow of scarce economic resources. They believe that bureaucrats are trustworthy, that politicians act in the interest of the people. They believe that the state is a reliable source of economic wisdom, correct understanding of the future, correct understanding of the present, and is therefore the proper agency to equate supply with demand.
    Mercantilism is always a philosophy of state power. Mercantilism says that the state has a superior interest to the individuals who live under its jurisdiction. Anything that weakens the nation-state, anything that benefits individuals at the expense of the state, anything that elevates the judgment of property owners above the judgment of politicians and bureaucrats is considered by the mercantilist to be an enemy of the state, meaning an enemy of society, meaning an enemy of the nation.
    Mercantilists in the 17th century said that they believed in markets, but only regulated markets. They believed in monopolies granted by the state. They believed in exchange, but only when regulated by the state. What they really believed in was the expansion of the power of the state. They believed that the wisdom given to state bureaucrats is greater than the wisdom given to society as a whole by means of knowledge possessed by individuals. They believed that centralized knowledge, based on coercive statistics, is better than, meaning superior to, meaning more productive, than information possessed by all of the members of society. The information that all the members of society bring to bear on individual cases is considered inferior knowledge.

  12. max

    Alexander Hamilton is the ideological cornerstone of the American system of crony capitalism financed by a huge public debt and legalized counterfeiting through central banking. It is this system that is the real cause of the current economic crisis

    Hamilton was the intellectual leader of the group of men at the time of the founding who wanted to import the system of British mercantilism and imperialistic government to America. As long as they were on the paying side of British mercantilism and imperialism, they opposed it and even fought a revolution against it. But being on the collecting side was altogether different. It’s good to be the king, as Mel Brooks might say.
    It was Hamilton who coined the phrase “The American System” to describe his economic policy of corporate welfare, protectionist tariffs, central banking, and a large public debt,

  13. Shy Ted

    And that’s why we need a sugar tax.

  14. RobK

    Then there was fair trade and everyone felt better.

  15. Spring is coming

    … and if you’re agin it that means you’re Globalaphobiest!

  16. md

    His father became a coffee bean picker and then the wealthy donors to his political ‘rulers’ convinced them to bring in cheap labour to pick the beans and now he is out of work, can’t afford to rent or buy a house, because of the property price growth caused by the mass influx of new voters people, no longer feels that he belongs to a community and is terrified to go out at night and to catch public transport, because of the violent voters people who have taken over his community. Yes, good old globalisation. Everyone wins, don’t they!

  17. Tell me again why massive numbers of people – never before seen in the history of the World – are immigrating by hook or by crook away from these wonderful no longer poverty stricken places to the West and only to the West.
    Even this 12 year old from RMIT (for it’s a tertiary education institution donchano) seems to have emigrated away from his tropical paradise to the West.

    Anyone that thinks free trade is free, is free of brain cells.

  18. egg_

    Tell me again why massive numbers of people – never before seen in the history of the World – are immigrating by hook or by crook away from these wonderful no longer poverty stricken places to the West and only to the West.

    Aren’t Sh1tholistans the ‘most feminist’ of places?

  19. Jannie

    There’s globalisation and then there’s globalisation.

    Free trade usually provides prosperity and nice chocolate. Open borders provides different outcomes, usually involving cultural extinction, terrorism and a Police State.

  20. Aren’t Sh1tholistans the ‘most feminist’ of places?

    In fact yes Egg, yes they are. I come from a place that has recently turned back into a “sh!tholistan” (Thanks Erdogan).
    You see Egg, all those places which you speak of have ‘Safe Spaces’ for women called kitchens. Women don’t get hassled by men because women don’t mix with men. /sarc

Comments are closed.