We're hearing ever more voice calling on us to 'buy Canadian', an echo of the 1930's protectionism that accompanied the Great Depression and even contributed to its deepening.
I take issue with the buy Canadian idea though on certain basic economic grounds. Canada is a geographically large country. Would it really make sense for, let's say, a Vancouverite to buy a product from Halifax when the same product is produced in Seattle? If we insist on buy Canadian, then certainly we ought to expect the Vancouverite to fork out extra cash to pay not just for the cost of the product itself, but the transportation cost of shipping the product cross-country to Vancouver just to keep to the whole buy Canadian philosophy. Add to that that taxes would have to increase too to build and maintain more highways to allow for the flow of all these extra goods. In other words, we'd be promoting a more inefficient economy just for the opportunity to beat our chests in nationalistic pride. Are we willing too to help the poor who'd be faced with the bill of having to pay these extra private sector costs for transportation along with the tax increase to maintain the infrastructure necessary to handle the increased cross-Canada traffic?
All of these costs add up: private transport costs, extra taxes to maintain a busier infrastructure, and additional taxes to help the poor who'd be hurt by this provision.
Alternatively, we could follow a buy local philosophy. In this case, the Vancouverite would buy from Seattle instead of Halifax. This would create jobs for Seatle residents, true. Bear in mind though that the New Yoker who wants to buy the same product would save on transport costs by buying it from Halifax. So it would balance itself out in the end. Or things we do best we export to the US, and things they do best we import. The traffic caused by shipping a product from Seattle to Vancouver is minuscule compared to the cost of transporting it from Halifax to Vancouver. This saves private transport costs, less of a tax burden on infrastructural development, and from an environmental standpoint, more efficient use of resources. The increased efficiency would also help fight inflation and avoid the creation of make-work jobs for truck drivers or pilots, etc. shipping products cross-country that could otherwise have been bought right across the border.
For these and other reasons, I lean more in favour of a buying locally over buying nationally. It just makes more sense when looked at objectively. The only reason I could see people supporting buying nationally would be for the opportunity to beat their nationalistic chests without having to actually analyze the impact of their policy on the economy in a rational manner.
I take issue with the buy Canadian idea though on certain basic economic grounds. Canada is a geographically large country. Would it really make sense for, let's say, a Vancouverite to buy a product from Halifax when the same product is produced in Seattle? If we insist on buy Canadian, then certainly we ought to expect the Vancouverite to fork out extra cash to pay not just for the cost of the product itself, but the transportation cost of shipping the product cross-country to Vancouver just to keep to the whole buy Canadian philosophy. Add to that that taxes would have to increase too to build and maintain more highways to allow for the flow of all these extra goods. In other words, we'd be promoting a more inefficient economy just for the opportunity to beat our chests in nationalistic pride. Are we willing too to help the poor who'd be faced with the bill of having to pay these extra private sector costs for transportation along with the tax increase to maintain the infrastructure necessary to handle the increased cross-Canada traffic?
All of these costs add up: private transport costs, extra taxes to maintain a busier infrastructure, and additional taxes to help the poor who'd be hurt by this provision.
Alternatively, we could follow a buy local philosophy. In this case, the Vancouverite would buy from Seattle instead of Halifax. This would create jobs for Seatle residents, true. Bear in mind though that the New Yoker who wants to buy the same product would save on transport costs by buying it from Halifax. So it would balance itself out in the end. Or things we do best we export to the US, and things they do best we import. The traffic caused by shipping a product from Seattle to Vancouver is minuscule compared to the cost of transporting it from Halifax to Vancouver. This saves private transport costs, less of a tax burden on infrastructural development, and from an environmental standpoint, more efficient use of resources. The increased efficiency would also help fight inflation and avoid the creation of make-work jobs for truck drivers or pilots, etc. shipping products cross-country that could otherwise have been bought right across the border.
For these and other reasons, I lean more in favour of a buying locally over buying nationally. It just makes more sense when looked at objectively. The only reason I could see people supporting buying nationally would be for the opportunity to beat their nationalistic chests without having to actually analyze the impact of their policy on the economy in a rational manner.