New Shun 1730
Chapter 1359 The Wealth of Nations (II)
The core of this booklet is of course the 2.0 version.
But because it is actually the plus version, some currency issues are mixed in.
The content of the booklet is basically logically self-consistent and sounds quite reasonable.
At least, George III and other core members of the royal party cannot refute it.
The core content of this booklet can be roughly divided into six points.
The first point:
Currency issues.
Why are European products not competitive enough when the UK, and even the whole of Western Europe, trade with China?
Excluding technical factors, currency factors are also key issues.
The booklet still needs to learn from history:
There was such a country.
It is the issuer of the world's currency, and it has the right to issue the world's currency.
From the Baltic Sea, to the jungles of West Africa, to the coast of India, to China, the world is using the currency it issues.
Even later, some latecomers, when issuing their own currencies, were also bound and exchanged with the currencies they issued.
An economic turmoil in this country may lead to a worldwide war, and even directly affect the other side of the ocean, causing currency chaos and government financial collapse in the ancient country on the other side of the ocean.
There was once such a country.
Its fleet, from Europe to America, from America to Asia, the huge warships made all other countries pale in comparison, and the invincible fleet made the navies of all countries in the world tremble.
It and another mortal enemy country divided the world, and all latecomers tried to resist this division of the two powers.
There was once such a country.
It was extremely enthusiastic about its own values and promoted it all over the world.
Relying on money, words, cannons, and warships, it promoted its values to all parts of the world.
And it implemented the honorary naturalization system, and the "barbarians" who recognized its values could obtain honorary citizenship.
There was once such a country.
Its own domestic productivity was insufficient, but it forced the areas it influenced and controlled to use its own products.
And tried to do everything possible to prevent the goods of latecomers from entering its control. In order to suppress the latecomers, it did not hesitate to organize a powerful ocean-going fleet that was unmatched in the world.
There was such a country.
It had some advanced technologies in its own country, which were strictly blocked from the outside world. Anyone who tried to spread these new technologies would be severely punished...
But in the end, the country still declined.
This country is called Spain.
Because there are too many gold and silver mines, domestic prices continue to rise, which eventually led to a price revolution throughout Europe.
As the issuer of the world's currency, Spain must spend this money to buy things.
So, the price revolution began to spread from Spain. Because Spain's products are the issuer of the world's currency, they lack sufficient competitiveness.
Even if it has superior technologies such as "Merino sheep", it still cannot stop its decline.
And an important factor in its decline is the currency problem.
Now, Britain, and even Europe, lack sufficient competitiveness in the face of Dashun's products.
There are certainly technical factors in this.
However, the monetary factor is also extremely important. Otherwise, a trade that lasts for a year and a half and has high freight costs would not have such high profits.
So, how to solve the lack of competitiveness of domestic products caused by this monetary problem?
The solutions to this problem in the era of sovereign currency and legal tender and the era of precious metals are of course different on the surface.
This booklet prescribes a prescription for Britain or Europe, which is to completely abolish tariffs and expand imports.
Strive to make two-thirds of the silver and gold in Europe and America flow to China within 20 years.
By fully liberalizing precious metal controls and tariffs, let the Chinese use cotton, porcelain, metal, silk, tea, etc. to absorb the silver and gold in Europe.
The sooner the better.
In this way, 20 years later, the silver deposits in Europe and America will be greatly reduced.
Originally, one tael of silver in Britain could buy 60 kilograms of corn flour.
And 20 years later, when two-thirds of the silver in Europe flows into China, one tael of silver can buy 120 kilograms of corn flour, or even more.
If we can achieve that 1 tael of silver can buy 200 jin of corn flour or sorghum rice.
Then, under the same technology, the manufacturing industries of Europe and Britain will be competitive.
At that time, because the amount of silver deposited in Dashun increases, the corn flour that can be bought by 1 tael of Dashun silver will decrease, or at least to a level similar to that of the two countries.
Then, we can know what industries are suitable for Britain to develop.
Only after the "currency exchange rate" problem is removed, we can have the real, relative and absolute advantage industries that the British are good at.
Otherwise, it is not clear.
Therefore, it is absolutely correct to liberalize tariffs and control of precious metals.
Not only should we liberalize, but we should also encourage imports and consumption, especially encourage the British to consume Chinese products.
This is not harming Britain, but saving Britain.
If Britain can make Britain's prices and surpluses not much within 10 years through the rapid, unique silver outflow and trade deficit in the world, then Britain will outperform other European countries.
And the premise of this truth is the fundamental issue of the debate between "mercantilism" and "free trade".
Is currency wealth?
What is wealth?
Is it currency?
Or is currency just an equivalent of national wealth, and national wealth is created by labor?
And this is exactly the core content of Free Trade 1.0:
[The so-called national wealth refers to all the necessities and conveniences of life that are supplied to the people for annual consumption].
Then, let's not talk about the outflow of silver to the price revolution that has been stabilized around the world 20 years later.
Just say that if tariffs are completely liberalized and imports of goods are increased, then has the national wealth of Britain increased or decreased?
For a British person, he now has 30 taels of silver in his hand, so is this 30 taels of silver wealth?
If, because of the liberalization of imports, cotton cloth, tea, etc., are madly reduced in price.
Then, has the 30 taels of silver in his hand, or in other words, the [all necessities and conveniences of life] that he can have increased?
If so, if the whole UK is completely liberalized and imports are encouraged, can it be considered that the [necessities and conveniences] represented by silver and gold in the UK have increased?
So, can it be said that if imports are liberalized and tariffs are abolished, it can be regarded as an increase in the national wealth of the UK?
Therefore, even if this 2.0plus version can be self-consistent and logically self-consistent, it is still based on the core of the 1.0 version of "what is national wealth".
From this, continue to extend.
Now, there is the "Corn Law" in the UK. In 1688, the first version of the Corn Law was introduced in the UK.
Since then, the British government needs to give certain subsidies to export oats, wheat, etc., so as to reward exports and agricultural development.
And if this method of accelerating the outflow of silver is adopted, the weekly salary of agricultural employees is close to 12 shillings to meet food, clothing, housing and transportation.
Twenty years later, two-thirds of the silver will flow to China, and with the entry of consumer goods such as cotton cloth and tea from China, agricultural workers will only need to pay 5 shillings per week to meet their food, clothing, housing and transportation.
At that time, will it be necessary to subsidize agricultural products such as oats in order to gain competitiveness?
The above is the first step of this shock awakening method, creating a shock on the currency issue, thereby solving the problem of the purchasing power gap between the East and the West in silver that began in the mid-Ming Dynasty.
This is also the basis for European manufacturing to gain a competitive advantage.
In the era of sovereign currency and legal tender paper currency, the shock method is manifested as an extremely harsh "tight fiscal policy", which is the currency plan of Bolivia's shock.
In the era of precious metal currency, it should be reflected as an extremely harsh "trade deficit", through massive imports, quickly consuming the country's deposits and alleviating "inflation".
Article 2:
Britain should completely abolish any control over the economy.
Cancel subsidies for indigo grass to southern plantations in North America; cancel subsidies for flax production and canvas production in northern states.
Cancel any protection for domestic industries, especially abolish the "Cotton Act", which is a serious measure that distorts economic operations by administrative order.
We must strike hard at industries that have been protected by the cancellation of subsidies and import tariffs.
If cotton cloth practitioners in Manchester dare to oppose, they should be arrested by the army and transferred to plantations.
These "vested interests" should not harm the country's industrial transformation.
The British government has no future in protecting Manchester's cotton textile industry with high tariffs.
It is impossible for Manchester's cotton textile industry to make rapid technological progress.
Anyone who thinks that giving protection and subsidies to Manchester's cotton cloth will make Manchester the center of the cotton textile industry is an idiot who does not understand economics.
The protection and subsidies for Manchester can only allow these "lazy" "vested interests" to produce inferior cotton cloth under the protection of the "21-year Act".
Of course, this also includes the manufacturing subsidies in New England, North America, including the 6-penny linen subsidy bill and the 3-penny canvas bill for the textile industry, which should all be abolished.
If the manufacturing subsidies in New England continue to exist, the gap between the already poor New England and the southern states will become increasingly larger. In the end, one southern state will be richer than the entire northern state.
Learn from history.
Why can China export cotton cloth?
From an economic point of view, because China does not impose high tariffs on woolen cloth, nor does it provide export subsidies for cotton cloth, so after sufficient competition, China can export cotton cloth.
In contrast, Britain has the Oriental Cotton Cloth Prohibition Order, cotton industry subsidies and raw cotton import tax rebate exemptions. This is the root cause of Manchester's impossibility to become a cotton textile center, and it is also a clear proof that no one in Britain understands economics at this time.
This deformed subsidy and legal restrictions will only distort the British economy, making it unhealthy and unable to find industries that belong to Britain and have real and absolute advantages.
As for whether this set of rhetoric is right...
Yes and no.
At this time, economics was just starting out. Economics at this time could not even explain the current world, but could only explain history.
Under the British tariff protection and raw cotton indigo subsidies, did Manchester become a place where a group of vested interests lived? Or did it become the world's cotton textile center in the 19th century?
This is a matter of the future. Since it has not happened yet, it will definitely be criticized. This kind of tariff protection will definitely turn Manchester into a group of lazy people with no possibility of technological progress.
As for China's cotton cloth industry...
Then I can only say that the "relative advantage" theory is completely correct.
Because of the tax policy of Emperor Hongwu, it was a kind of tax at that time, which could not be converted into silver, and of course it could not be converted into silver.
Therefore, the Songjiang cloth that Huang Daopo first issued developed rapidly because of the "cloth" in the kind tax.
People in other places have to pay taxes and weave cotton by themselves, so it is better to bring grain to Songjiang to exchange for cotton cloth.
This is the relative advantage of the rice, silk, mulberry and cotton industries in the Yangtze River Delta region, which created demand under the unified national market and created demand by levying kind taxes, which made the cotton textile industry in Songjiang area develop rapidly in the Ming Dynasty.
It can even be said that the development of the cotton textile industry in Songjiang area in the Ming Dynasty is a typical practice of "relative advantage".
It is the same day's work, I grow rice and I pick mulberry leaves, which are faster than Songjiang. And Songjiang is indeed faster at weaving cotton cloth than me.
Then why do I grow rice, pick mulberry leaves, and spin cotton cloth? Why don't I pick more mulberry leaves and spin silk, and go to Songjiang to exchange cotton cloth?
I am good at spinning silk, and he is good at spinning cotton.
I work 365 days a year, and he also works 365 days a year. I spin silk for these 365 days because I spin silk faster; he spins cotton for these 365 days because he spins cotton faster. Then I exchange with him.
I work 365 days a year, 300 days spinning silk, 65 days spinning cotton; he works 365 days a year, 300 days spinning cotton, 65 days spinning silk. We don't exchange, each pays tax.
Which has a higher total output?
Regardless of whether these things are taxed or not, they have not gone into a black hole, evaporated, or disappeared after being taxed.
Social division of labor, regional division of labor, relative advantage, and the increase in the total output of the entire Yangtze River Delta under the condition of unchanged labor volume can be regarded as a textbook-like relative advantage practice.
Although, the policy makers unconsciously promoted history. He could not have considered these issues at all.
Even "consumption" is distorted, and it is the exchange of consumer goods that is facilitated by the in-kind tax.
But at least, it is more representative of free trade than Manchester, which developed by relying on high tariff protection and the collapse of India?
Is Manchester also qualified to talk about free trade? Gandhi led a self-spinning movement, which was at the level of technology in the 20th century. He destroyed 246 textile factories in Manchester in one year. Is he also qualified to talk about free trade?
The development of the cotton industry in Songjiang Prefecture in the Ming Dynasty was indeed benefited by the "in-kind tax". It is really something that no one expected that the in-kind tax gave birth to a result that best conformed to the "comparative advantage" and "relative advantage" in free trade in the 16th century.
You'll Also Like
-
Fishing Druid in Another World
Chapter 480 3 hours ago -
Star Lords: My Starfleet is a Billion Points Stronger
Chapter 344 3 hours ago -
I signed in to the Ice Emperor Palace at the beginning, and I became invincible!
Chapter 882 3 hours ago -
At the beginning, he had a very high level of understanding, and quietly cultivated himself to becom
Chapter 122 3 hours ago -
The Witch of the Roll Never Gives Up
Chapter 274 3 hours ago -
The Nameless of the Common Clans
Chapter 693 3 hours ago -
New Shun 1730
Chapter 1517 3 hours ago -
Villain: I forcibly marry the protagonist's master at the beginning, I am invincible
Chapter 445 3 hours ago -
Watch the movie "Collapse of the Stars", and the second creation will save the world!
Chapter 170 13 hours ago -
1 level 1 gold entry, I am invincible in the sea
Chapter 92 13 hours ago