Thursday, June 16, 2011

Protectionism Ahead?

If you believe this poll, then yes.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

François Bayrou, justement, coined a nice definition of protectionism:

"Le protectionnisme, c'est d'imposer aux autres des règles que l'on ne respecte pas soi-même."

+- "Protectionism lies in imposing (to?) other countries rules that we do not respect ourselves."

You can derive that:

* Protectionism is unfair, it's a kind of violence in international relations, and for this reason, it's not relevant to us democracies - the rule of law at world level would be in our favour;

* It may be right to impose to others some rules that you do respect for your own (see Stiglitz's argument about the WTO "shrimp-turtle case" and combatting the greenhouse effect - given that China's industry is greenhouse-effect-intensive). Marine Le Pen's technical argument for protectionism is quite the same. Also Obama's accent on "fair trade". It's about extending the rule of law at world level, or fighting against cheats.

* We need to perform, once fair rules are set (and to perform is also needed, if you hope to be listened to when you advocate for rules). We should not hope that any opportunistic "protection" would bring in the money we would not be able to earn by our efforts. It would just not work.

PtitSeb said...

The headline number is completely misleading. What it means is "conditional on taxes being implemented, should they be at the level of Europe or at the level of the country". And 80% said Europe...

The right number seems to be 65%(see LE SOUHAIT À L’ÉGARD D’UNE ÉVOLUTION DE CES TAXES)