|
|
|
|
|
by ethbr1
727 days ago
|
|
Protectionism, like industry subsidies, is a double-edged sword. - On the one hand, as SE Asia is intimately familiar with, it can create space to create globally competitive industries. - On the other hand, it can also remove the incentive for local industries to invest and become technically competitive. IMHO, what I'd like to see would be a stricter link between protection measures and R&D investment. If an industry is protected, then it is required to prove it's improving itself + limit returns to shareholders. E.g. steadily increasing CAFE fuel efficiency standards, requirements to demonstrate decreasing costs of production (lumber and/or steel), etc. Too often, protection measures are implemented, the excess benefits are skimmed and go directly to shareholders, and the company doesn't increase its global competitiveness (e.g. US Steel). |
|