We are beginning to witness the results of what has been excess protectionism at home in recent decades, at a global level. Is it still possible to reverse these non tradable sector inclinations? The supply side limits of these market constructs have created intense identity struggles across an entire spectrum of marginalization. More direct forms of wealth creation in our non tradable sectors, could make it possible to preserve the economic dynamism which brought so many quality of life gains for populations across the globe. In all of this, my concerns are similar to those of Mingardi who writes:
I find the scenario of a realignment around cultural issues potentially terrifying. It seems that the advocates of a closed society have an advantage in forging an alliance with advocates of a closed economy: they tend to be highly ideological and, thus, committed. On the other hand with the exception of libertarians, the preference for a free economy is rather "weak"...with the exception of libertarians, how easy is it for people that care about civil rights to forge an alliance with those who want a freer economy?Indeed, some of the focus on redistribution is also about the desire for retribution. He concludes:
The old political allegiances were confused and incoherent for a reason: it is very difficult to develop coherent ones.Is it possible to become more free in the use of knowledge and property ownership options which could accrue to the benefit of all? Should non tradable sectors become more willing to embrace free markets, they could play a considerable role in reducing the political struggle over redistribution which now threatens to unravel economic stability. Let's hope today's levels of wealth creation don't come unraveled by the excess inclinations of wealth capture and redistribution. Even though they are in need of a more inclusive and dynamic organizational approach, non tradable sectors have the capacity to contribute to future prosperity, much as tradable sectors have already made possible.