€55 billion needed to Run Ireland - €38 billion coming in

[Duth Ealla]

There has actually been plenty of research done, most notable on the computer industry, which shows that patents don't reward the actual inventor, most often they reward a business.

ANd, besides this, why should someone be rewarded (through charging someone else for using their idea) when all they got for free and from others the ideas they used to help build that idea...knowledge is socially constructed, not discovered by one person.

Okay so we are not against Patents then in principle just the actual implementation at the moment.

knowledge is socially constructed? No its not SarahJ. There are so many instances where one person's spark changes the accepted paradigm.

So should the patents system be abolished?

[sarahj]

Okay so we are not against Patents then in principle just the actual implementation at the moment.

knowledge is socially constructed? No its not SarahJ. There are so many instances where one person's spark changes the accepted paradigm.

So should the patents system be abolished?

I don't see how your statement means that knowledge is socially constructed. It completely backs mine up - the knowledge of one person is made up of all the ideas he/she has been exposed to by others in that society.

Nope, I'm against patents. Referencing is fine but patents are completely inefficient. They limit the spread of useful ideas.

[Oblivion]

I'm against patents.

If you came up with an idea that, if patented and mass produced, could make you and your family financially secure for life.... I suspect you might have a "change of heart" on the matter.

[Left sceptical]

If you came up with an idea that, if patented and mass produced, could make you and your family financially secure for life.... I suspect you might have a "change of heart" on the matter.

Then it would be your own selfish interest acting against the best interests of society, thats hardly to be applauded.

[sarahj]

Then it would be your own selfish interest acting against the best interests of society, thats hardly to be applauded.

Exactly!

Patent laws make your interests different to those of society. If you can be rewarded for ring-fencing an idea and preventing its use, then people will do so.

If that situation is reversed and you are instead rewarded for putting the idea forward so that EVERYONE can use it, then people will do that.

It's all about the incentives.

And no, I wouldn't patent ANY idea, no matter how much I would get for it. It goes against my principles and I have no real need to have an ability to consume more than I already do.

[cd27]

I don't see how you can patent ideas either, patently absurd!

Interesting piece below by Professor Karl Whelan of UCD on how the government is possibly operating a pyramid scheme to finance itself, it's giving money to banks, who are buying Irish government bonds and the monetizing these with the European Central Bank!

The Irish Economy Blog Archive Bank Debt Versus Sovereign Debt

[20000miles]

What I was attempting to say is that the main way that countries get rich is by using govt protectionist measures...and I didn't say anything about taxation or intervention. I was talking about protectionist measures like Intellectual Property laws and how they're used to ringfence ideas which are usually the culmination of the work of many minds for the profit of an indigenous business.

How can protectionist measures make a country rich? I'm still not getting it. Protectionism weakens the division of labour and the benefits that stem from it.

In fact, you contradict yourself in your own example. Protectionist measures like intellectual property laws do indeed "ringfence ideas". How can such policies enrich a country? (Answer: they can't - protectionism only enriches those being protected at the expense of the country as a whole).

And it's not your place to comment on my knowledge of "sound economic theory".

Sorry. You seem to be displaying a lot of ignorance about these topics though.

[sarahj]

How can protectionist measures make a country rich? I'm still not getting it. Protectionism weakens the division of labour and the benefits that stem from it.

In fact, you contradict yourself in your own example. Protectionist measures like intellectual property laws do indeed "ringfence ideas". How can such policies enrich a country? (Answer: they can't - protectionism only enriches those being protected at the expense of the country as a whole).



Sorry. You seem to be displaying a lot of ignorance about these topics though.

No I'm not - I just don't hold to the same interpretation of situations as you do.

SOME protectionist policies enrich a country comparatively, some don't. For example, the U.S. protected it's home industries while colonising others and using their resources. That fact is in agreement with your assertion that protectionism enriched those being protected.

[AMCW177]

How can protectionist measures make a country rich? I'm still not getting it.

It's a two-step process.

Most of the rich countries in the world got rich in the first place by embracing protectionism until they had built the critical mass of heavy industry and workforce skills.

At that point in order to stay rich they need to embrace free trade and comparative advantage.

Obviously this only works for relatively large countries that have the population to support an internal-demand-led economy, and a big enough army to enforce the protectionism.

Small countries need to rely on education, soft skills and niche light industries and because they are small protectionism doesn't work anyway cos they just don't have the mass of internal demand to keep the ship afloat. But too many small countries instead rely on selling their natural resources combined with a bit of protectionism, and it just doesn't work.

Horses for courses.

[sarahj]

It's a two-step process.

Most of the rich countries in the world got rich in the first place by embracing protectionism until they had built the critical mass of heavy industry and workforce skills.

At that point in order to stay rich they need to embrace free trade and comparative advantage.

Obviously this only works for relatively large countries that have the population to support an internal-demand-led economy, and a big enough army to enforce the protectionism.

Yes this was the point I was trying to make, but you made it a lot moer eloquently than I did.

That and the protectionism of the imperial powers.