Europe and US make open airspace pact

[Dreamer128]

Negotiators from the United States and the European Union have reached agreement on granting unlimited access to each other's airspace. At a meeting in Washington, the two sides also decided that an aircraft from Europe will have the right to land at any airport in the United States and vice versa.

The deal still has to be approved by the US government and the EU before it can be implemented, and a number of conditions have yet to be established. The EU wants the US to increase the maximum share permitted to foreign investors in US airlines. At present this is 25 percent, whereas investors from outside the EU are allowed a 49 percent stake in European airlines.

(rnw.nl)

[Sir Degrader]

Hmmm, I'm curious, isn't American conservatism tied in with Friedman and co.? As such, doesn't it stand to reason that government imposed caps on foreign investment are a bit anti-Friedman?

[shamrock_uk]

Yes, but that's one of the ironies of looking at American economic history and policy in general. Over the last 200 years, considering Britain, Western Europe and America as three separate entities, America has traditionally been the most protectionist economic area by far with regards to international trade. There have been 'blips' in this trend of a decade or so here and there, and of course the formation of the EEC has meant that there isn't too much to choose between them nowadays, but America has generally placed protectionism above free trade to a greater extent than Europe and a signicantly greater extent than Britain.

So vote libertarian if you want proper conservative economics

[ 11-19-2005, 09:41 AM: Message edited by: shamrock_uk ]

[Stratos]

I always thought protectionism was an old conservative tradition. The Libertarians, instead have a liberal economic policy. But I suppose it's the old "Liberal means different things in the US and Europe" at work here.

[shamrock_uk]

Interesting - I would have always associated conservatism in Britain with free markets but..now I think about it, wasn't it their support for the Corn Laws that brought down the Tory government in the late 19th century?

Meh, my memory is so sloppy these days!

But re. transatlantic terminology differences, I wonder if openly lobby-based politics actually distort intellectual divisions between American parties. In other words, as long as parties are supported by interest groups of various sorts, a protectionist policy is ensured, no matter what label they assign to themselves.

But I think this ruling is definitely a plus - closer cooperation and integration between Europe and America can only be a good thing. Hopefully it will lead to increased travel between the two and greater tolerance for cultural differences in the long-run.

[ 11-19-2005, 01:07 PM: Message edited by: shamrock_uk ]

[Lucern]

As a further complication, the groups of people under these political banners on both sides of the pond constantly alter either their goals or their discourse (that is, lie about what they're about to gain support lol).

We've got the right idea looking at what they do rather than what they say.

[Stratos]

Well, the EU have their share of lobbyists themselves.

[shamrock_uk]

Yup, and look at the bizarreness that is New Labour [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Certainly in the UK though limits on the raising of campaign funds and the fact that parties don't have to spend millions on election campaigns helps a bit

[ 11-19-2005, 06:03 PM: Message edited by: shamrock_uk ]

[Azred]

The idea that foreign investment shouldn't be allowed to invest beyond a certain limit in various US corporations/industries despite having the ability to buy as many government securities as they wish is bizarre. Under a purely capitalist system, even with some governmental limitations/controls, foreign investment would be readily allowed.

Bottom line: either the politicians want a "global" economy, even if that means some job losses due to outsourcing, or they don't.