Unfortunately life’s events have overtaken me and I can’t attend BACO’s special assembly on the EPA tonight (July 8, 2008) at the British Colonial Hilton from 7 to 9pm.

However, if I could be there and had the opportunity to ask a question I would simply restate Mr. Tim Swanson’s position from his recent article for the Ludwig von Mises Institute, titled How Long Does a Free-Trade Agreement Need to Be?

He states:

Perhaps the most onerous aspect of managed trade: it (un)intentionally outlaws competition. It only benefits the incumbents — their special interests — and prevents newcomers from entering the market. FTAs routinely erect trade barriers that stymie alternative, international, and even domestic competitors from participating under the new stipulations. It creates a privileged caste system that superficially appears to be noble, yet in practice disgraces the spirit of free markets.

So the question remains, just how long should an all-encompassing, tariff-busting, labor-liberalizing FTA be?

How about 16 words?

Regulated trade between the individuals, companies, and institutions within our respective countries will be illegal henceforth.

I am sure that creative essayists could synthesize the main idea even more concisely, but the point remains, current FTAs are bloated behemoths containing a slew of provisions that sully the spirit and message of the centuries-old anti-protectionist movement.

Read his entire article here…

To state the obvious, 400 pages for the Bahamas EPA offer is ridiculous.

Hopefully The Bahamas has taken a cue from other countries in the world in wanting to delay signing on to the EPA, but take this all one step further and consider unilaterally dropping our perceived barriers to trade and forget these expensive expeditions known as FTA’s.