Free market reforms hurting Iraqi economy.

Kidicious · July 10, 2003, 16:23

I read in the San Fransisco Chronicle today that a flood of imports are killing what is left of the Iraqi domestic economy. I had not realized the extent of the importation of goods before. Not only is the money that the US is pumping into Iraq not creating jobs, but it is actually causing massive job losses.

Imran Siddiqui · July 10, 2003, 16:25

Could perhaps the Iraqi economy be suffering from lack of order in the domestic region? It's kinda hard to run a business when things haven't quieted down yet.

But *gasp* no! It's the 'evil' free market!

Solly · July 10, 2003, 16:25

I think we know that the war was a success when the whining lefties are no longer going on about imperialism, about hundreds of thousands of American-killed Iraqis, or about how there weren't weapons there anyway.

Free trade

Evil!

Kidicious · July 10, 2003, 16:26

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Could perhaps the Iraqi economy be suffering from lack of order in the domestic region? It's kinda hard to run a business when things haven't quieted down yet.

But *gasp* no! It's the 'evil' free market!

Christ does it matter. Even if there were perfect order there's no way that Iraqis are going to be able to compete.

MichaeltheGreat · July 10, 2003, 16:26

Uhhhh, how do you have "massive job losses" when you start out with 60% unemployment, then have a war that ends employment for the rest? (since so many jobs were government/military based)

How do you have thing "produced" in a "domestic economy" where there's no money, no banking system, and nobody was getting paid?

Blaming the current transitional state of the Iraqi economy on market reforms is just ridiculous.

Imran Siddiqui · July 10, 2003, 16:27

Quote:

Even if there were perfect order there's no way that Iraqis are going to be able to compete.

Bull... prove it.

Kidicious · July 10, 2003, 16:29

Quote:

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Uhhhh, how do you have "massive job losses" when you start out with 60% unemployment, then have a war that ends employment for the rest? (since so many jobs were government/military based)

Is it too much to expect to keep the jobs they had?

Quote:

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
How do you have thing "produced" in a "domestic economy" where there's no money, no banking system, and nobody was getting paid?

Believe it or not all economic activity did not cease in Iraq, but the domestic industry is now failing completely because they can't compete with the imports.

Kidicious · July 10, 2003, 16:30

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Quote:

Even if there were perfect order there's no way that Iraqis are going to be able to compete.

Bull... prove it.

I can't help you Imran

Imran Siddiqui · July 10, 2003, 16:31

You are such a fool, and it becomes more and more obvious with every post you make

.

Arrian · July 10, 2003, 16:31

Quote:

Is it too much to expect to keep the jobs they had?

If their jobs were the result of bloated government/military spending, yeah.

-Arrian

Kidicious · July 10, 2003, 16:33

Quote:

Originally posted by Arrian
If their jobs were the result of bloated government/military spending, yeah.

-Arrian

Is it too much to expect Iraq to have a lower unemployment rate under the occupation than it did under Sadam and sactions?

Velociryx · July 10, 2003, 16:35

In short, this soon after the dust settles? yes. It IS too much to expect.

For chrissakes, let's get the damned water and lights turned back on before we start doomsaying about unemployment rates, eh?

-=Vel=-

Solly · July 10, 2003, 16:36

What do you recommend Kidicious?

Hand Iraq back over to a dictator who murders and tortures his people at will?

Besides, we have seen no evidence of this increase in unemployment? Reputable source please.

Additionally, which industries are affected? Why?

Felch · July 10, 2003, 16:36

For the last time, YES!

There is chaos in Iraq. In order for the free market to work, you need law and order. You don't seem to grasp that. We apologize because you don't understand what you're arguing about.

Sava · July 10, 2003, 16:38

What a great plan... let Iraqi's compete in the world market... AFTER we bomb the sh1t out of their infrastructure so they can't do sh1t. That's fair.

"free trade" deals with Iraq are just deals to allow American corporations to profit off of this war.

Az · July 10, 2003, 16:39

Oh, yeah baby! Iraqi traders have been buying everything they can lately around here, Since there is no import tax. it's been in the papers lately. In Jordan, Syria, and here, too, via the Jordanians. cars, consumer goods, everything.

Kidicious · July 10, 2003, 16:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Boddington's
What do you recommend Kidicious?

Hand Iraq back over to a dictator who murders and tortures his people at will?

Besides, we have seen no evidence of this increase in unemployment? Reputable source please.

Additionally, which industries are affected? Why?

I think the domestic industries should be protected and there should be new industries created. That way the money that is being injected into the economy can circulate and create jobs.

I'll give you some quotes out of the SF Chronicle in another post.

Imran Siddiqui · July 10, 2003, 16:40

Quote:

There is chaos in Iraq. In order for the free market to work, you need law and order.

So wait... there is chaos in Iraq, so we should close off imports and hope that domestic businesses will sprout up while chaos is around them?

MichaeltheGreat · July 10, 2003, 16:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Kidicious

Christ does it matter. Even if there were perfect order there's no way that Iraqis are going to be able to compete.

It depends on the product - if it's Color TV's or DVD players, they're a ways behind the curve, but there's a hell of a lot of mundane manufactured products in a normal consumer economy.

Solly · July 10, 2003, 16:43

It's a shame that the left seems to dominate the infant industry argument. Some of it is plausible and even sensible.

However, during debate it's best to consider it in a rather more stable - yet developing - country, rather than one that has just seen the removal of a dictator and sizeable proportion of its law- and order-enforcers with it.

So let's separate the issue from that of Iraq yeah.

Kidicious · July 10, 2003, 16:46

The Chronicle wasn't specific. Measurements are impossible, but it speculates that hundreds of factories have been closed. They say Textile plants, clothing factories and agriculture have been particularly hard hit.

Bottling and beverage industries have also been hard hit.

Velociryx · July 10, 2003, 16:48

And it should be noted that with the sheer amount of oil Iraq is sporting, there is scant need for them to even try and catch up with regards to DVD players and such....they don't HAVE to compete in those markets, cos they have the ace of spades (oil), and it will get them anything they need, ultimately.

The situation WILL NOT improve markedly until the Iraquis are put in charge of their own destinies. In the immediacy, that means arming some and putting them on patrol with our boys to restore order.

It means getting the lights and water back on YESTERDAY, and then getting the medical infrastructure working tripletime.

After that, we can start thinking in terms of protecting and growing new industries, but attempting to do any of that stuff before the basics are in place is a lesson in futility. In short, the economy WILL continue to suffer until and unless the basics are in place and some sense of order is restored.

We're not there yet.

-=Vel=-

MichaeltheGreat · July 10, 2003, 16:49

Quote:

Originally posted by Kidicious

Is it too much to expect to keep the jobs they had?

You mean the jobs in the military, intelligence services, and doled out by Baath party patronage to those who were Baath loyalists?

Quote:

Believe it or not all economic activity did not cease in Iraq, but the domestic industry is now failing completely because they can't compete with the imports.

Nearly all ceased, and domestic economic output will rebound over time.

Kidicious · July 10, 2003, 16:50

Quote:

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat

It depends on the product - if it's Color TV's or DVD players, they're a ways behind the curve, but there's a hell of a lot of mundane manufactured products in a normal consumer economy.

I can see the reason for wanting the Iraqis to have these products that they couldn't afford before, but every dollar spent on these goods are dollars that could be spent on Iraqi products, and when it is spent on Iraqi products it has a multiplier effect and it is much better for the economy

Kidicious · July 10, 2003, 16:53

Quote:

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
You mean the jobs in the military, intelligence services, and doled out by Baath party patronage to those who were Baath loyalists?

We better find a subsititute for it, because Iraq depended it.

MichaeltheGreat · July 10, 2003, 17:01

Well, you could argue Chicago depended on Capone, too.

The need to find a substitute is a given.

DanS · July 10, 2003, 17:02

I can see the reason for wanting the Iraqis to have these products that they couldn't afford before, but every dollar spent on these goods are dollars that could be spent on Iraqi products, and when it is spent on Iraqi products it has a multiplier effect and it is much better for the economy

You keep repeating crap like this, but it just isn't true. I understand little about economics but it doesn't even pass my sniff test!

The fact is that dinars buy domestic products while dollars buy imported products. It is rubbish to say that "every dollar spent on Iraqi goods", because no dollars are spent on Iraqi goods!

Kidicious · July 10, 2003, 17:06

Quote:

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Well, you could argue Chicago depended on Capone, too.

You're missing the point, which is that many jobs need to be created to make up for the jobs that have been lost and the jobs that didn't exist. Importing goods is the way to lose jobs, not create them.

Kidicious · July 10, 2003, 17:08

Quote:

Originally posted by DanS
I can see the reason for wanting the Iraqis to have these products that they couldn't afford before, but every dollar spent on these goods are dollars that could be spent on Iraqi products, and when it is spent on Iraqi products it has a multiplier effect and it is much better for the economy

You keep repeating crap like this, but it just isn't true. I understand little about economics but it doesn't even pass my sniff test!

The fact is that dinars buy domestic products while dollars buy imported products. It is rubbish to say that "every dollar spent on Iraqi goods", because no dollars are spent on Iraqi goods!

You're point is that dollars aren't in circulation in Iraq? What do you think the military spends? Do you have another point?

Berzerker · July 10, 2003, 17:09

Quote:

Free market reforms hurting Iraqi economy.

Quote:

Blaming the current transitional state of the Iraqi economy on market reforms is just ridiculous.

I think you mean "kidiculous".