Healthcare dogmatist, get a load of this one...

Started by Lord T Hawkeye, December 04, 2009, 09:22:52 AM

Previous topic - Next topic
December 08, 2009, 03:29:53 AM #45 Last Edit: December 08, 2009, 03:32:01 AM by Virgil0211
Quote from: Lord T Hawkeye on December 08, 2009, 01:14:58 AM
The fact that a large amount is re-exported...is his entire argument...

...what?

The he's arguing that it's taking advantage of the poverty of mainland China, right? This shows that just as much, if not more, is going into Mainland China as is going out.

Also, he may want to read up on basic economics. The source of wealth, as determined by Adam Smith as far back as 1776, is trade, not necessarily production or a specific resource. So, his argument that Hong Kong isn't an example of a free market is that its wealth is based on trade rather than production or resources?

Quote from: Virgil0211 on December 08, 2009, 03:29:53 AM
The he's arguing that it's taking advantage of the poverty of mainland China, right? This shows that just as much, if not more, is going into Mainland China as is going out.

Also, he may want to read up on basic economics. The source of wealth, as determined by Adam Smith as far back as 1776, is trade, not necessarily production or a specific resource. So, his argument that Hong Kong isn't an example of a free market is that its wealth is based on trade rather than production or resources?
I have no clue what the heck the most recent argument is supposed to be.
How are exports and imports supposed to be evidence either for or against HK taking advantage of China's poverty?
Also, what evidence do they have for their original claim that "HK is taking advantage of China's poverty"?
"When the mob and the press and the whole world tell you to move, your job is to plant yourself like a tree beside the river of truth, and tell the whole world—'No. You move.'"
-Captain America, Amazing Spider-Man 537

Quote from: surhotchaperchlorome on December 08, 2009, 11:32:10 AM
I have no clue what the heck the most recent argument is supposed to be.
How are exports and imports supposed to be evidence either for or against HK taking advantage of China's poverty?
Also, what evidence do they have for their original claim that "HK is taking advantage of China's poverty"?

I'm just doing my best to parse his argument. I think he has some kind of formal thought disorder.

As far as I can grasp it, he's either criticizing two things;

1. Hong Kong is getting rich while China's staying moderately poor, therefore they're taking advantage of China.
2. Hong Kong's industry is based primarily on Chinese re-exports, so they aren't really an example of market success. (That one I'm having trouble connecting the dots on. Because free trade has allowed them to trade, it's not a good example of free trade?)