scott <sco### [at] scottcom> wrote:
> > Rich countries are dumping free clothing by the ton to poor countries,
> > especially in Africa. Some *African* sociologists are pleading the rich
> > countries to stop that because they are killing the local textile economy
> > with it.

> You'd need to weigh up what was better, having a local textile economy 
> with a group of people unable to afford clothes, or no local textile 
> economy but everyone gets clothes. I don't know for sure what the answer 
> would be, but I suspect it's better that everyone gets free clothes 
> (some proportion of the ones who worked in the textile companies would 
> find other jobs). It seems the majority of Africans agree otherwise 
> there wouldn't be the "problem".

The problem is the overabundance. It's not a question of "either everybody
gets free clothes or nobody does."

Helping the poor who cannot afford clothes is ok. Saturating the market
with free stuff that even the people who could afford it otherwise is not,
because that kills even the little economy that there could be.

The best way to help a nation is not to give it as much free stuff as it
wants. It's to help it get its economy running.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

> Helping the poor who cannot afford clothes is ok. Saturating the market
> with free stuff that even the people who could afford it otherwise is not,
> because that kills even the little economy that there could be.

But the people who can afford the clothes in the first place will simply 
buy other things instead, so some other economy will be increased to 
match the decrease in textiles.

> The best way to help a nation is not to give it as much free stuff as it
> wants. It's to help it get its economy running.

Why wouldn't giving them free clothes help the economy? People would 
have more to spend on things like education and medicine rather than 
being trapped only barely being able to afford clothes and food.

Post a reply to this message

"scott"  wrote in message news:51fa48dc$1@news.povray.org...

>> Helping the poor who cannot afford clothes is ok. Saturating the market
>> with free stuff that even the people who could afford it otherwise is 
>> not,
>> because that kills even the little economy that there could be.

> But the people who can afford the clothes in the first place will simply 
> buy other things instead, so some other economy will be increased to match 
> the decrease in textiles.

How many of those "other things" can be produced locally with limited means?

>> The best way to help a nation is not to give it as much free stuff as it
>> wants. It's to help it get its economy running.

> Why wouldn't giving them free clothes help the economy? People would have 
> more to spend on things like education and medicine rather than being 
> trapped only barely being able to afford clothes and food.

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. Please, think this one through before 
making a half-dozen posts.

-Shay

Post a reply to this message

>> But the people who can afford the clothes in the first place will
>> simply buy other things instead, so some other economy will be
>> increased to match the decrease in textiles.
>
> How many of those "other things" can be produced locally with limited
> means?

Builders, teachers, cleaners, doctors, nurses etc all will be more in 
demand if people have more money to spend on education and medicine. 
Even imported good need an infrastructure to deliver them, so demand for 
drivers, packers etc.

> People without a market for their labor or goods can't take their
> "clothing money" and reallocate it to education or medicine.

What else would they do with the money if they didn't need to spend it 
on clothes anymore?

> They have
> gone from almost no money to no money at all.

???

Post a reply to this message

"scott"  wrote in message news:51fa561a$1@news.povray.org...

>> 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*.

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.

-Shay

Post a reply to this message

Am 01.08.2013 14:35, schrieb scott:

> ???

Economy in the era of globalization is a clusterfuck of epic 
proportions, and it is probably wise to think thrice (at least) before 
making any assertions about how things work and how they don't.

Post a reply to this message

>> ???
>
> Economy in the era of globalization is a clusterfuck of epic
> proportions, and it is probably wise to think thrice (at least) before
> making any assertions about how things work and how they don't.

I haven't seen a valid argument yet why giving out free clothes will 
make their society worse off. The arguments so far seem to revolve 
around it being better that a huge number of people cannot afford to buy 
clothes, but so long as there is a healthy textile industry and rich 
people don't get free clothes that's ok.

Post a reply to this message

>>> 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

scott wrote:

>>> ???
>>
>> Economy in the era of globalization is a clusterfuck of epic
>> proportions, and it is probably wise to think thrice (at least)
>> before making any assertions about how things work and how they
>> don't.
> 
> I haven't seen a valid argument yet why giving out free clothes will
> make their society worse off. The arguments so far seem to revolve
> around it being better that a huge number of people cannot afford to
> buy clothes, but so long as there is a healthy textile industry and
> rich people don't get free clothes that's ok.

Well, the reason is the same as the reason why schools shouldn't use 
microsoft's "free" educational software licenses.

Wealth, health, and happiness of a society have nothing to do with how 
much money people do not need to spend on something. So, giving them 
something for free doesn't help them at all, it just makes them 
dependent. Of course, for big industrial cothing companies, this means 
mission accomplished.

Post a reply to this message

scott <sco### [at] scottcom> wrote:
> I haven't seen a valid argument yet why giving out free clothes will 
> make their society worse off. The arguments so far seem to revolve 
> around it being better that a huge number of people cannot afford to buy 
> clothes, but so long as there is a healthy textile industry and rich 
> people don't get free clothes that's ok.

You seem to still have this false dichotomy. I will quote myself:

The problem is the overabundance. It's not a question of "either everybody
gets free clothes or nobody does."

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message