The supply side occupation

On Wednesday Occupy Oakland protesters temporarily shut down the Port of Oakland in an effort "to halt 'the flow of capital' at the port, a major point of entry for Chinese exports to the U.S." Protesters shouted, "Take the Port! We got sold out!"

Sold out? Possibly. But by whom?

As a business owner who imports cheap Chinese products (wood flooring) through our West Coast ports I feel I have some light to shed on this issue for the protesters. You see, I import cheap Chinese wood because my customers want me to, not because I want to.

What the Occupiers fail to understand is basic economics. The fact is, I don't dictate to the market what to buy – rather the market dictates to me what to sell. And right now the market wants cheap, but quality, hardwood floors.

My company carries domestically made hardwood flooring too, and it is great product – higher quality than a lot of the Chinese imports I carry. But due to the fact that producing hardwood flooring is a very labor intensive process, low labor rates overseas generally ensure that overseas suppliers can produce the same quality at a lower cost than we can domestically. And when consumers go out shopping and are presented with similar quality products at two different price points, which price point do you suppose they most often choose? Bingo.

What most surprises me about the Occupy Oakland port blockade is that a group of individuals who would normally rail against supply-side economics is so quick to resort to, well, supply-side tactics. Supply-side economics is the economic school of thought that argues that economic growth can best be maximized by lowering barriers for people to produce and supply goods and services. Opponents of supply-side economics argue that focusing on demand creation is a better strategy for creating economic growth. And the Occupy Oaklanders would fall securely into that latter camp.

Which makes it all the more amusing that they are resorting to their own form of supply-side economics in order to achieve their goal of increasing domestic production. Rather than persuading consumers to purchase higher-cost American goods (focusing on demand), they are instead focusing on supply in forcibly shutting down the supply of low-cost Chinese goods into our country, effectively forcing American consumers to buy American.

If there is one thing that bothers me more than any other when it comes the political realm, it is the use of force to achieve desired ends, whether that force is being imposed by the left, the right, or the center. And it is the use of force that each side (left and right) decries when the other uses it, but justifies in their own use. Both are wrong.

So where does this leave us? As a business owner, I would much rather purchase and sell mostly American made goods. Frankly they are easier to manage, quicker to get, and (contrary to what the Occupiers might believe) give me a better return on investment. But again, I don't dictate to the market, the market dictates to me. It would not do my customers or my employees any good if I chose to supply goods based on emotion that not enough consumers would buy, rather than based on what the market wants.

If the Occupiers want to change the world, the best thing they could do is stop using force to achieve their ends, and instead take a page from one my domestic suppliers and start peacefully persuading and educating their fellow Americans to change their purchasing habits. Until they realize that they will continue to alienate a large swath of the American public, hurting their own cause.