FEE free trade experiment

I went to a F.E.E. (fee.org) event today at Ashland University and we did an exercise to study the benefits of free trade. We did this with candy, rubber duckies, puzzle erasers, sour patch twirlers and sweet tart suckers. We were broken up in to four teams. Green, yellow, orange and red were the colors (if I remember correctly.) We had four votes. The trades were graded on a happiness scale of one to five. One being completely dissatisfied and disappointed with what you have and four being completely satisfied and happy.

1. The teams traded amongst itself.

2. The teams traded with another team.

3. The teams traded with everyone.

We took four votes. Any one with more that six brain cells can figure out that people were more satisfied with what they have as they kept trading. Happiness went up as we traded. The first vote was taken with out trading at all and the last trade was taken after we had traded with everyone. It was remarkable how quickly satisfaction went up with each trade.

I fumbled my way through a Rothbard quote while trying to articulate a life and death situation. I couldn't find the right words because we were using candy and rubber duckies. As much as some people needed the rubber duckies I couldn't articulate a need because there was none. Here is the quote:

"If tariffs and restraints on trade are good for a country, then why not indeed for a state or region? The principle is precisely the same. In America's first great depression, the Panic of 1819, Detroit was a tiny frontier town of only a few hundred people. Yet protectionist cries arose-fortunately not fulfilled-to prohibit all "imports" from outside of Detroit, and citizens were exhorted to "buy only Detroit." If this nonsense had been put into effect, general starvation and death would have ended all other economic problems for Detroit's."

It was very interesting to me that we got to work out the problems of the world in the sense of today. As more and more countries adopt protectionist policies that punish citizens, manufacturers and take away our freedom to choose. We got to see how this would work if we started rolling back all of these policies towards a free and prosperous world. In the real world this would look much different...

Shopping only local, would mean that the only local shop, would only get local food, from local suppliers. This would limit your choice of food and you could die in the off season or at the very least have a poor diet if you have the capabillities of creating processed unhealthy food. Travel a little further north and south and you have a sustainable living situation for everyone. You can get most of the food and supplies that you need most of the time, but you lack some food that is out of season, innovation and competition. In a world wide market you have competition from emerging countries and emerging minds and so on....

Limited tools of exchange was another part of the experiment. I heard someone say "this wouldn't work in the real world because we would have currency, it would make it harder to trade." The opposite would be true. When most people are trying to get rid of their bouncy balls, the price would go down. When people are giving away everything they had for one rubber ducky, the price would increase. Supply and demand. The only thing that was seemingly scarce in the game was the ring pop. This was found and hoarded for the rest of the game. To he or she the ring pop was the most valuable thing in our world of candy, erasers, bouncy balls and rubber duckies.

The barter system does not allow the liberty to choose. If you are a vegetarian and you trade meat for vegetables (if you are an extremely unethical vegetarian) and the person who gives you vegetables decides that they don't eat meat anymore, you can't get vegetables from them. If you want a berry pie and you only have something to trade with that they don't want, you don't get the pie. Not to mention the time and energy you could spend searching for food and supplies could be disastrous.

Currency gives you choice, freedom, accessibility, simplicity and the ability to budget for the future with something that will not spoil. Which is why when I was in prison things that were used for trade were ramen noodles, cigarettes and books. This changed the way I thought about currency for the rest of my life.

This was a fascinating experiment. I am glad FEE is fighting for the truth and putting it in the face of students, professors and anyone willing to listen and learn.