I agree that we need trade. We aren’t like cows that can find all they need to eat simply wandering around in a field. My concern is about the weaknesses of trade, especially between countries.

If there were an effective world government that could step in to address shortcomings of the economic system, I would be much more comfortable. While trade helps us deal with local shortages, I am not confident that it will do well if there is a shortage of an important commodity worldwide.

Historically, there have been times when self-sufficiency existed for smaller groups. Even today, there are isolated groups that have very limited contact with others. But this is a much higher risk and challenging existence than a world with trade.

The thing that I find frustrating about most conventional analysis of trade is that it uses the nation-state as the basic unit. We’re one humanity on one planet. Why do we begrudge payment to others for things we decide (maybe even rationally decide) we want or need?

I wish we could look at trade outside the confines of nations. Trade works quite nicely, thank you, when we limit it to those with whom we share some artificial boundary.

Cheerio,
- Thomas

Since international trade has risks, a prudent country would maintain the ability to meet its own needs. It should either meet its own needs directly or have clear plans for how to do so. The best way to be prepared is to maintain significant capacity in essential sectors of the economy so that skills can be maintained. Production of essentials can then be ramped up quickly if imports aren’t available. While this may seem extreme, it won’t seem so if there is a major shock to the supply of food, clothing, or shelter.

The question you should ask yourself is “Would you bet your life on the current system of international trade?”

Eric