Kasz216 said:
fmc83 said:
Kasz216 said:
Which is protectionism.
You can be pro-protetionism.... that's fine.
However in the international community that's seen as cheating and unfair to pooerer countries... and the EU is by far the biggest offender.
|
While I agree, that this might be cheating and unfair to poorer countries, I wouldn't say, that the USA is a poorer country. Can you still call it cheating then?
It's not, that the airplane sector is, where we take poor Africans something away. It helps to create more competition => freer market => cheaper prices, in the end bigger markets for everyone AND higher commodity prices for poor countries.
So this is hardly the typical kind of subsidies and except for the USA nobody in the international community would call it cheating, if you think through it.
I agree with you, that the EU generally gives away large sums to protect industries and this is most of the times cheating and unfair. But in the Airbus case it's just not. But now as we agreed on the definition, the question from my first posts still stands:
Do think a country (or a country-union) should do nothing to break a monopoly? And if you think it should, shouldn't the WTO agree that they are needed sometimes?
|
Yes. It's still cheating. It's illegal and anti-free trade you know.
|
I'm actually disappointed now. I thought you could do more, than just repeat slogans you've heard. I'm still surprised how definite you think laws are...
