>>> People without a market for their labor or goods can't take their
>>> "clothing money" and reallocate it to education or medicine.
>>> They have
>>> gone from almost no money to no money at all.
>
>> ???
>
> Read my last two sentences *together*.

I still fail to see how supplying free clothes will cause people to go 
from having almost no money to no money.

> An economy is like an ecosystem.
> You might say, "if we kill off all the rabbits, the coyotes will eat the
> rats."
> But the foxes are eating the rats. I guess the foxes will eat the crickets.
> But the robins are eating the crickets ...
>
> Then you might say, "we're not killing the rabbits, we're adding more
> rabbits."
> I guess those new rabbits will eat crickets.
> But the robins are eating the crickets ...
>
> An economy, like an ecosystem, can survive a little turbulence (at least
> for a while, history indicates ruin or violent revolution are inevitable).
>
> However, too much turbulence will collapse the system. Rising
> unemployment and income disparity are indicators that this is happening
> right now.

I'm not saying that what I mentioned was the only additional factor to 
consider, it was just one example of why you can't simply say "unlimited 
free clothes equals closed textile industry equals bad for the economy". 
At minimum stating that opinion makes it sound like you haven't 
considered anything else.

Post a reply to this message