Ideology (was Re: Profit and Loss

[Mike Weaver]

>Why does the author turn to the
>famines that occurred around 1900 to make claims that free
>trade is not good policy? Isn't it because free trade, trade
>was higher in 1900 then it is today? Isn't it because
>markets were more open then? If there was more trade then
>why are we now talking about this new "globalization" thing.

Read the books, or at least browse them before you try arguing against 
them, else it looks like you are wriggling on the hook.


>If Iraq and Cuba, to name but two
>examples, were able to trade freely with the world and with
>the USA life would better for all involved.

Dropping trade sanctions is not the same as promoting 'free trade', which 
is about the free flow of capital more than actual goods.