In response to my weblog : http://blahsploitation.blogspot.com/20040531blahsploitationarchive.html#108605598953784480
(About LulaDeSilva's attempt to reinforce trade within BRICS)
GrahamLally wrote :
"I don't know how much of this trickled through to the UK media, but Lula has been in China last week with hundreds of Brazilian business leaders"
Heh, no, we don't hear any of that, at least not without scouring the small articles tucked away in the corner of the Guardian every day, perhaps. And newspapers just lie and depress me, so I try not to buy them any more... I'm not even sure what "Lula" is, I will look it up...
Is it an aspect of a free market network that the agents within that network will attempt to trade primarily with others of the same "status"? i.e., in this case, one could say that the developed powers - US/Eu - are of a "higher" status than developing countries - India, China, Brazil, as you mention - and as such, an equilibrium should settle in which this secondary "layer" of trade emerges. I'm thinking aloud on this one, but think of it as being in the same way that, say, mailing lists tend to develop a particular "level" of discussion - the agents of varying ability tend to flock together.
I'm also curious to see if nations that are now realising new-found democratic capitalism will achieve economies that are more "stable" in some way(s), due to "wrinkles" in a capitalist system being "ironed out" over the last X years by predominantly the US. In the same way that technology refines itself, clearing off the chaff, etc (e..g how browsers are getting more "lightweight" now, rather than feature-bloated), could a second generation of capitalist states introduce different mechanisms, while keeping the free competition aspect? How would this affect current pro-/con-capitalist argumentia?