A co-worker sent me, a while ago, an email with a link to a page, in Portuguese, telling people about our “duty” to our country to buy Portuguese products, in order to “support national production”, because “by buying foreign products, it forces national producers to raise their prices”. The co-worker seemed, herself, to support that point of view, and I’m sure that if I talked about it in the office, most people would agree that it was a “noble” thing to do, even if they didn’t want to inconvenience themselves by paying more than they were forced to.
And yet, I could only think about an article I read a few years ago in the Ayn Rand Institute web site, called “Buy American is UN-American“. It applies, of course, whatever your country is.
Without wanting to repeat the article’s content here, the following is a translation of my reply to my co-worker, which I wrote before re-reading the article linked above:
The consumer should always choose the best product, that with the best quality/price ratio. That’s it. If we begin to choose national products, even though they’re WORSE, we’re doing 2 things:
- admitting that we’re some poor incompetent slobs who can’t do anything well;
- telling national companies that they don’t need to create or manufacture quality products, because even if they’re trash we’ll still buy them out of “patriotism”.
The result of that is:
- as consumers, we get worse and worse products, and worse and worse deals;
- internationally, our products will come to be known as shoddy, low-quality garbage, which will mean increasingly fewer exports - if any at all.
On the other hand, if we simply buy what is best and has the best relationship between quality and price, we are “encouraging” our companies to do better, and making sure they are competitive - both nationally and internationally. Besides, we’ll have better quality at lower prices.
Believe me: if you’re buying national products even though you know they are worse and more expensive than the foreign competition, you’re not “supporting your country,” you’re harming it.
Related posts:
Subscribe to this blog
I have to add here an excerpt from the linked article, which is, IMO, brilliant:
Collectivism reflects the notion that life is “a zero sum game,” that we live in a dog-eat-dog world, where one man’s gain is another man’s loss. On this premise, everyone has to cling to his own herd and fight all the other herds for a share of a fixed, static, supply of goods. And that is exactly the premise of the “Buy American” campaign. “It’s Japan or us,” is the implication. If Japan is getting richer, then we must be getting poorer.
But individualism recognizes that wealth is produced, not merely appropriated, and that man’s rise from the cave to the skyscraper demonstrates that life is not a zero-sum game—not where men are free to seek progress.
Accordingly, individualism holds that the interests of men do not conflict—provided we are speaking of self-supporting individuals who pay for what they get. Where there is free trade, the exchange of value for value, one man’s gain is another man’s gain.
I have been out of touch with philosophy for a while. It is great to see there are still thinkers out in the world.
Thanks for being there and speaking out.
I totally agree with you on this one.
Although I agree with you at the point that “the consumer should always choose the best product, that with the best quality/price ratio”, and that it is in your interest to reward smartness, ambition, and productivity, not stupidity, laziness or incompetence in the name of that called “patriotism”, there are factors to take into account other than “buying the best, wherever it may be found”.
Many multinational companies exploit workers; many of them children, in poor countries by paying lower wages than they would pay in their home countries. That is how they come to extremely low prices at high quality standards.
My opinion is by the best despite being national or not but… do not reward exploiters that take advantage of misery and disrespect UNICEF “convention on the rights of the child”.
I agree with that one, although I think it’s a completely separate subject.
I have, myself, “boycotted” evil companies in the past.
Your observations and the philosophy of individualism as they apply to the free market make perfect sense.
Ayn Rand’s logic has always been an undercurrent in my thinking and I totally agree with Michael when he said: “It is great to see there are still thinkers out in the world. Thanks for being there and speaking out. “