Sunday showdown: Both parties look to sway fence-sitters for this weekend's healthcare vote 
Click to Print
Include Comments
Buy American? Fair trade? Free trade?
Some of my friends “buy American” (Group A).
Some buy “fair-trade” coffee (Group B).
Some do both (Group AB).
And then there are those selfish guys who buy free trade (Group 0).
The first three groups pay a higher price for lower quality. How does that make sense? Don’t such acts promote waste of scarce resources around the world at considerable cost to the perpetrators themselves? Are such people a living proof that economics is based on faulty assumptions? Not at all!
Choices made by people in the first three groups are all examples of rational human behavior as much as the ones made in the last group. You make additional sacrifices because you attach additional value to a product based on location and/or method of production. As a supporter of economic freedom, I fight for your consumer right to make any choice without coercion—even if I see it as wrong (hurting the poor despite your good intentions) or inefficient. And I also fight for your right to engage in discussion for the purpose of finding out the truth and/or promoting your beliefs. So here are a few questions for you:
- Group A: We have heard arguments that free trade promotes the health of our national economy. I assume that your choice is a result of patriotic feelings and/or self-interest (preserving your own job). Shouldn’t you also buy only American coffee? We have millions of unemployed people—perhaps we should subsidize them to grow it for us even if it costs $10 per cup? How exactly does your behavior promote your goals?
- Group B: We have witnessed many distinguished economists’ efforts trying to convince us that free trade is a necessary condition for lifting people in the underdeveloped nations out of misery. I assume that your choice is a result of your desire to help the poor farmers in Third World countries. Do you also buy only fair-trade bananas? Clothes? Shoes? Laptops? Do you only fly on planes made by fair-trade parts? Do you think that this is the most efficient (it’s about Christ’s exhortation to us to be good stewards) way to spend your money to achieve your goals?
- Group AB: “The rarest of all human qualities is consistency,” wrote Jeremy Bentham. How do you reconcile in your mind doing both at the same time?
- Group 0: How can you sleep at night? Don’t your choices promote “exploitation?”
back to top74 Comments to “Buy American? Fair trade? Free trade?”
The first three groups pay a higher price for lower quality.
My well-used American made car and I beg to differ.
Report comment to moderator
I don’t think you understand the argument here. The post does not claim that all American products are inferior and more expensive than foreign ones. It points to those cases when you buy the American good even if there are better or cheaper alternatives.
Report comment to moderator
Group O here.
I try to choose from the best and cheapest. I suppose those are two reasons I don’t vote for Democrats and don’t like Republicans (RINOs) who go along to get along.
Report comment to moderator
Oh, I also sleep very well, thank you!
Report comment to moderator
As long as businesses here in the states are overtaxed, while imports get a free pass, there isn’t any such thing as “free trade”….
Report comment to moderator
In defense of Group B – fair trade coffee is a small, easily made decision to make some contribution to just treatment of workers. The stereotype is the exploited coffee worker on the plantation under nearly slave-like conditions… at least buying fair trade makes an economic incentive to treat workers better.
That being said, I probably fall mostly as a free-trader.
Report comment to moderator
5
are you saying that our government is the opposite of protectionist?
Report comment to moderator
I’m saying there’s a reason that all our manufacturing jobs are moving overseas.
Maybe I’m all wet, but it seems to me that the wealthy are smart like that. If the government wants to tax them too much, then they go somewhere they aren’t taxed to death, and they’ll share their wealth with someone else.
Report comment to moderator
Mostly a free trader, but I totally get the fair trade coffee issue … and since we have a sizeable number of Central American friends, I see their faces in the exploitation of coffee growers in their home countries. Having said that, we haven’t totally made the jump because at the end of the day, fruit and veggies and milk win out over ideals … but it is a goal and a target to be fair trade only on coffee, mainly because of all our CA friends.
Report comment to moderator
Cars/Trucks – Group A
Coffee – Group Z (I don’t drink coffee)
But if I did drink coffee, it would be Group O. I thought free market was fair trade. Silly me.
And I echo Mr. Buckles’ sentiments in post #4.
Report comment to moderator
I think “Buy American” is somewhat silly – unless you are convinced it comes with better quality. But then, that’s a “free trade” issue – picking the best quality at the best price.
I have no reason to really believe a job in Michigan is of greater value and should be preserved instead of a job in whatever other country (especially when that 1 MI job could be replaced by 10 other jobs in the developing world)… in fact, putting the true global poor to work by considering buying the products made in those countries seems like a reasonable way to go about alieviating true poverty – which is why I have NO problem with companies relocating to find the most cost-effective labor. It puts the poorest of the poor to work – since the cheapest labor comes in places where the wages are lowest, and therefore the people are probably the poorest. Having jobs in those areas seems like a good thing for everyone, I’d say. Consumers get lower prices, companies get higher profits, and the poorest countries “grow their economies” – which is to say the poorest people get jobs and earn a living.
Report comment to moderator
I buy American cars and trucks because I’m convinced they are the best for the money.
Toyota’s recent troubles have done little to change my opinion.
Report comment to moderator
I drink RANGER Coffee. A hot cup of that Joe is as close to an actual RANGER tab ol’ Sawgunner will ever come.
Seriously, Ranger coffee is not for the squeamish. It is fully leaded as they say.
There are other times when my harken to my inner leftist pinko. I buy over-priced inferior bean coffee made by a worker owned and operated cooperative in Nee-aragua all of whose employees are indigenous mountain dwellers who wear organic clothes, use no pesticides, practice holistic medicine, eat granola and live affirming and openly LGBT lifestyles and get health benefits for their partners whether they’re married or not.
Report comment to moderator
I dont know if Venezuela grows and exports coffee or not, but what better way to support Hugo? (Beyond merely tanking up your greenhouse gas-producing SUV at a Citgo, that is)
Report comment to moderator
Scott, I’m driving an American car for the first time in 20 years (my first car was an American one), a Chevy Classic. This one is 10 years newer than the wrecked Toyota, and while it is a nice, dependable car, I’d take my older Toyota Corolla back in a heartbeat. This one has a lot less power, and a lot less in the way of driver-friendly features. Nowhere near as good visibility, for instance, and no logical way to change the time on the clock (and alas, the drivers manual doesn’t help).
And I drove my Corolla for 10 years, close to 100,000 miles, with very little beyond standard maintenance. Let’s see, one battery, one set of tires, one new radiator (at the end of the l0 years), a few belts and hoses. The driver’s window stopped working, and the passenger door handle broke, but I never had a major repair on the car unless you count the radiator when it was 15 years old and had 160,000 miles, only had it break down twice (a broken fan belt and a radiator leak), it started well in Chicago winters when newer American cars wouldn’t, and overall it was simply a superb car.
This newer car is just a car, pretty and a gift from God, and I love it because my sister-in-law did. But it’s nowhere near as good a car as the much older Corolla it replaced. (Plus it has stupid running lights, and I can’t decide when to lock and unlock the doors on my own–even its “luxury” features are idiotic!) So, I’ll be back to foreign again when it’s time to replace this one.
Report comment to moderator
SeanMt, we do have an obligation to consider national security issues whether a product is food, energy or a manufactured product. Our area helped win WWII, because of steel production. When we no longer have that industry, because foreign governments are willing to subsidize their workers, what will happen should we need it for defense?
China starved its own people to be able to make steel and compete. It is an interesting and horrifying story.
Report comment to moderator
There are a number of non-economic criteria in my purchase decisions.
For instance, going out, I like to buy local as opposed to the franchise.
Some products I do not buy because of advertising that is exploitative or demeaning (so our daughter never came near Guess jeans).
Some products I buy because the extra money (on my side) will in some way help the producer (e.g. coffee, sometimes).
And sometimes I buy it because it’s on sale. (Ah-h-h-h, economic rationality).
But as I’ve haunted the precincts of advertising, I figure all this makes sense — advertising is fundamentally about helping the buyer add in these non-economic values.
Report comment to moderator
Buy American (or Canadian in my case ) is rather silly in many manufactured products since the parts come from many areas. In Ontario, we assemble Toyota, Honda, Hyundai GM – Chevrolet and Pontiac, Ford, and Chrysler (more cars than Michigan) but the parts come from every corner of the globe. For example, the Toyota Camry, Corolla, and RAV4 are all made in Ontario with steel manufactured in both Canada and the US whereas some “domestic” manufactures use Asian steel products.
Free Trade is also an oxymoron. Free trade should occur on an equal playing field with each country specializing in products they have some expertise in whether by geography or history. However, when rules and regulations concerning workplace safety, labor laws, pollution etc differ from region to region we don’t have free trade. The EU with standardized rules for all countries can have internal free trade which allow for specialization according to country.
Fair Trade is an ambiguous term which for the consumer centers on coffee and other plantation type produce.
Report comment to moderator
16
KI
Defense is often used to justify agricultural subsidies. Britain has demonstrated over the last 150 years that a domestic food supply is not necessary for victory just a secure supply route. Agricultural subsidies are perhaps the greatest waste of taxpayers money yet over-representation of rural areas and apple pie nostalgia will prevent its repeal.
Report comment to moderator
The other side of this issue (in a manner of speaking) interests me more.
I’ve heard it argued that government regulation is unnecessary because the free market will eventually punish bad actors. In other words, if Evil, Inc. exploits workers, as people find out about this they will instead buy from Good Corp.
But this is manifestly untrue.
It is also, of course, a caricature. But the fact that “Fair Trade” is such a small niche is a more realistic example of the free market’s amorality.
Most people would agree with the biblical principle that the laborer is worthy of his reward. But when confronted with the idea that impoverished coffee growers are underpaid, people would still rather have coffee at $7 a pound.
Even when it is well known that Walmart will kill locally owned Mom & Pop shops with roots in the community, people would rather have $15 dress shoes.
Even when it is widely decried that Bank of America took a bailout, paid outrageous bonuses, and jacked credit card rates, people would rather have free checking accounts.
The free market does not correct abuses or weed out bad actors. If I could find a way to pay coffee growers nothing and charge only $6 a pound for decent coffee, I would profit handsomely. And Tokarev’s approach — “if fairness is important to people, they’ll pay extra for it in an economic exchange” — necessarily results in immoral practices supported by the vast majority of consumers, and certain insignificant niches paying a self-righteousness tax.
Report comment to moderator
JJF, are you suggesting that governments should fix fair prices for all goods?
Report comment to moderator
16&19
special interests of producers could lobby government to use the “national security” argument on almost anything
Report comment to moderator
“Free Trade is also an oxymoron”
but are we worse of if we let products come here with no restrictions that are subsidized by foreign governments?
Report comment to moderator
Harris 17: “Some products I do not buy because of advertising that is exploitative or demeaning (so our daughter never came near Guess jeans).”
I can see how that could help achieve your goals – to gently persuade producers not to rely on sex to sell their product.
But does fair trade work to help poor farmers in the long run? The question in the post reminds that there are alternative ways to use our money to do it.
Report comment to moderator
I have no reason to really believe a job in Michigan is of greater value and should be preserved instead of a job in whatever other country
That seems to sum up a widely held sentiment among the global-oriented promoters of free trade-at-any-cost. It’s certainly the perspective of corporations who move their operations overseas and the politicians who make it possible for them to deduct their moving expenses from their taxes while doing so. I happen to think it’s one of the most un-patriotic ideas around, regardless of how popular it may be.
I am not a citizen of the world; I am a citizen of the United States. When we forget the value of our own citizens, and view them as just another consumer/laborer/employer on the planet, then we’ve forgotten what made us Americans in the first place.
I’m afraid that the globalist economic perspective will turn out to be one of the worst enemies of our freedom. When corporations, politicians, and the people who support them embrace the globalist perspective, it should not surprise anyone that, in the marketplace of ideas, Socialism turns out to be competitive at home.
Report comment to moderator
so, DJ, you’d rather buy American coffee
Report comment to moderator
No.
But I am saying that the unfettered markets approach favored by Tokarev is unworkable.
Report comment to moderator
Reader asks
But does fair trade work to help poor farmers in the long run?
To the extent that it creates a market for those goods, yes. The hidden difficulty that you may be pointing to is the manner in which Fair Trade items can foster a sort of dependency relationship; being the well-meaning latte-sipping liberal I create a captive market for these goods and so lock the producer into economically unproductive relationship. In the long run the producer is at risk.
That said, fair trade items may also be a step for building economic capacity in a very impoverished setting. it expands the place for commerce in a way that pure commodity-oriented production does not (this is same rationale for buying local rather than from franchises). In this light, it appears more as a step in a chain of development rather than an endpoint.
And though Dr T did not mention it, another aspect to all of this is the role of agricultural tariffs in the US and Europe. There are numerous examples here, most centered on treating developing world economies as sources for raw materials or commodities rather than finished products. Again, Fair Trade items of a manufactured variety (say, cotton garments) are a way of getting around these economic barriers.
Report comment to moderator
JJF, so what is your approach and why would it work better than free markets or government fixing of fair prices?
Report comment to moderator
Harris, look at the countries that have become wealthy and point to the ones that have succeeded because of having such fair trade “step in a chain of development.”
Report comment to moderator
28
wouldn’t it be better to educate people and vote for the abolition of “these economic barriers”?
Report comment to moderator
My approach is well regulated free markets.
Are you conceding that free markets are amoral, and even favor those who can get away with immorality, or are you just declining to argue the point?
Report comment to moderator
wouldn’t it be better to educate people and vote for the abolition of “these economic barriers”?
Oh, yes, it would be better, but there are immense political practicalities here. In the US, we subsidize our farmers, thereby lowering costs and so pricing exports out of the market. Changing subsidies is always a difficult piece of politics, as you well know.
As to fair trade — we may be talking at two different levels. At the national level (.01% of global trade), fair trade is virtually invisible. Its impact in working with the South and the very poor lies at a local level. Fwiw, researching this theme over lunch found an interesting monograph, The dynamics of Fair Trade as a mixed-form market, Becchetti and Huybrechts (2007). They analyze fair trade as a mixed form market, revealing how complex the economics are (some participate as NGOs and are altruistic in nature, others deal with trust economies –fascinating in itself – and others participate on a for-profit basis).
Report comment to moderator
32
that’s too vague to be an answer. what regulations? please give specific examples so we can argue points
Report comment to moderator
33
glad you think it’s better
I believe the post argues that trying to fix it by feel-good acts may be wasteful. so yes, educating people to vote for the right policies may be difficult but shouldn’t we be persistent and consistent it if it’s the right thing?
Report comment to moderator
Reader appears to be arguing that there are only two choices complete free trade or complete regulation. Certain trade and labor policies can be targeted whereas other sectors can have free trade. A pragmatic lookout is needed.
When gov’t protection results in a few people benefiting whereas the rest of America suffers higher prices, free trade is a better solution. For example, US citrus farms in Florida (more corporate than family) benefit from a tariff on foreign fruit creating the absurd result of cheaper tangerines and mandarins in Canada.
However, if foreign steel is produced by violating the rights of labor, ignoring health and safety and excessive pollution than a tariff is appropriate, since this would qualify as an unequal playing field.
Report comment to moderator
“violating the rights of labor, ignoring health and safety and excessive pollution”
let’s be pragmatic then
it raises 3 questions: what are the rights of labor, what is the right amount of safety, and how much pollution is excessive?
Report comment to moderator
Unless products are manufactured under same rules and regulations, they should be subjected to a tariff. Again the EU is a good example of how standard rules across a wide variety of countries allows each country to become efficient at what they do best.
Report comment to moderator
No. Then we move from a general philosophy discussion to a specific policy discussion. We’re not ready to go there yet.
We’re still talking general philosophy. Again, do you conceding that free markets are amoral, and even favor those who can get away with immorality, or are you prepared to argue that point?
Report comment to moderator
I’m not so sure about the emphasis on education, Reader, particularly in the context of FT. The communities that are supported by FT or Alternative Trading Organizations are among the poorest. Education of any sort is a huge expense, a luxury. Steps that look very small, small to the point of insignificance, nonetheless can have a profound impact on the well-being of a family or village.
Even were you to file it under the species of “charity” FT would be preferable to direct grants for all kinds of basic conservative reasons (Dutch disease, dependency etc.) There are also some other studies I ran across that suggest that FT is often not the golden key to poverty. So if we were to have a (national) policy discussion, we would make room for FT activities, but they would necessarily only be one part. It would be false to put all your eggs in that basket.
I think we would both agree that the best development policies would be those that are local in character, that develop the sinews of basic economic life. I see FT at best as helpig develop those sort of skills and economies at a micro level.
Report comment to moderator
If you want something longer with more specifics, I’d welcome your response to my post #20.
Report comment to moderator
38
you share your belief – that’s fine. would you like to add some argument to try and persuade us too?
Report comment to moderator
39
my itro text says they are amoral. but I am a reader, not a disciple of the authors of that text, so reading other sources I see good arguments that show how markets reward virtue when governments protect private property – hard work, thrift, honesty. is that philosophical enough
Report comment to moderator
40
again from my intro text – the only things that have worked in history to improve life for the worker is investment in capital, both physical and human.
it seems what we need is the following environment – incentives for entrepreneurs to innovate and support of education for the poor.
why not buy cheap free trade coffee and donate the saved dollars to a private charitable fund sponsoring private schools for those farmers’ children and microloans for the parents?
Report comment to moderator
“Walmart will kill locally owned Mom & Pop shops”
it’s because the local consumer values what he gets from Walmart above the alternative Mom & Pop shops. who died and made you pope to tell him he’s wrong?
is that specific enough
Report comment to moderator
One doesn’t have to be pope to argue that something is bad for a community.
You make my point for me. Most consumers place little or no monetary value on non-tangible benefits. Almost everyone would agree that as a neighbor, they’d rather have Peterson’s Footwear. It’s been in town since 1912, owned by the same family. They go to church with you; they go to school with you; they care about what happens to the neighborhood; they support local causes; they know people.
But when you want a pair of loafers, Walmart undersells them by $10. So most people buy from Walmart. They don’t even place a $10 value on the non-tangible benefits of Peterson’s Footwear remaining in the community.
Similarly, most people place little or no monetary value on the way a distant and faceless corporation treats its employees. If Walmart can undersell Target by using child slaves in Bangladesh, most people will buy from Walmart to save $2.50.
Given this amoral environment of the free market, immorality that one can get away with is rewarded by the market. And in a global market, there is plenty of opportunity for getting away with immorality.
A bit too philosophical, in that you said both yes and no.
I think your belief that markets reward virtue is naïve. Look at our current economy. Whom does the market reward more? Thrifty people who work hard and honestly? Or people who bundle and resell assets they know are toxic?
To use another example, let’s say you work hard and honestly to make Widgets and sell them globally for $10. Your costs are $5 in labor, $2 in materials, and $1 in overhead. You make a $2 profit per unit.
I, on the other hand, set up a sweat shop in an impoverished third world country, so my labors costs are $2 per unit. I buy my materials through Hamas. They have trouble finding buyers and need money to buy guns, so I’m able to negotiate down to $1 in materials. I’ll put my overhead up to $3 a unit to account for third world conditions, but my total costs are still only $6. I can undersell you by $2 and still make the same profit per unit.
Which one of us will the market reward?
Report comment to moderator
“But when you want a pair of loafers, Walmart undersells them by $10. So most people buy from Walmart.”
again I have to ask if you think yourself superior in some sense to these people to want to make it a rule that takes away their freedom to choose? or do you just want the freedom to talk to them to persuade them?
Report comment to moderator
“Walmart can undersell Target by using child slaves in Bangladesh”
actually it’s UN own studies that show how when “sweatshops” are closed in Bangladesh, those kids become prostitutes
Report comment to moderator
“no monetary value on the way a distant and faceless corporation treats its employees”
and that’s how impersonal market exchange prevents discrimination
Report comment to moderator
jjf, think about it – cases like enron show how well the market works to reward virtue and punish cheating
Report comment to moderator
#42
There’s no argument necessary. Your country, in cooperation with like minded countries, sets up a market with mutually agreed rules and regulations. Those on the outside of this market are subject to tariffs. In that way you avoid situations as outlined by JJF, but it appears you think economic choices should be made without reference to any standards you may have … a rather odd position for a Christian.
Report comment to moderator
Are you being ironic?
The market didn’t punish Enron. The market rewarded Enron quite handsomely for years and years. The chief instigators of the problem (Kenneth Lay and Jeffrey Skilling) would have escaped on golden parachutes, too, if not for government oversight that investigated their company and charged them with fraud.
The government punished Lay and Skilling. Who did the market punish? The thousands of innocent employees whose retirement accounts evaporated.
Even if this is true, does that make using sweatshops a moral choice?
By this moral reasoning (at least it keeps them from something worse), I could open an underage brothel and would be morally justified because otherwise these kids would starve.
The impersonal market does not prevent discrimination. You raise another great example of my point.
The impersonal market was not sufficient to end discrimination in the Civil-Rights era South. It required government intervention to say that restaurants must serve blacks.
I do not want to take away people’s freedom to shop at Walmart. I bring it up as an example of the amorality of the free market. Because most people place little economic value on intangible benefits, the unregulated market will eliminate them.
What’s your response to my hypothetical Widget thought experiment?
Report comment to moderator
why not buy cheap free trade coffee and donate the saved dollars to a private charitable fund sponsoring private schools for those farmers’ children and microloans for the parents?
As I understand it, the extra charge is there not as surplus piece of charity, but largely reflects the cost of distribution. this at least, would be the model of ATO, where the distribution function is taken over substantially by an NGO. Here, the extra money is similar to the surcharge on other artisanal goods (Whole Paycheck any one?).
You mention microloans, I see FT as simply the next step: it’s what gets bought with the results of your loans.
I suppose, we can also think of FT as a type of distributed subsidy, or perhaps a kind of price support. This of course has sorts of other arguments attached to it, doesn’t it?
Report comment to moderator
and when was the last time a tariff helped the poor or the domestic consumers?
Report comment to moderator
i just checked fortune 500. no enron
Report comment to moderator
what’s wrong with sweat? unless you come from privileges, your grandfathers worked in a sweatshop. and because there was no one to boycott it, now you have a much better live
Report comment to moderator
were there any local government rules that supported “discrimination in the Civil-Rights era South”?
Report comment to moderator
The poor and the domestic consumer are not exactly the same thing. The latter has far more economic power — the rural poor, the object of FT, less so.
Report comment to moderator
when you fly on a plane, do you know which parts were produced by people of different skin color or religion? do you care? that’s how the market helps solve the problem of discrimination. no one ever said it can do it all perfectly in one day, did they?
Report comment to moderator
and when was the last time direct subsidies or price supports created a healthy economic sector and solved long term poverty problems?
Report comment to moderator
True. But what’s your point?
Absent government regulation and intervention, Ken Lay and Jeff Schilling would have profited by millions of dollars for their conduct.
Thousands of faithful and hardworking employees saw their retirement accounts evaporate.
If this is your best example of the market rewarding moral conduct, I am not impressed. I might equally argue that since Alexander’s empire fell, history also punishes immoral conduct.
This is an outrageous equivocation. There is nothing wrong with good, honest sweat. But There is something wrong with exploiting poor workers. A “sweatshop” does not mean just “work at which you sweat,” and you know that.
So far you have argued that there’s nothing wrong with child labor sweatshops because (1) it keeps them from prostitution, and (2) there’s nothing wrong with hard work. Do these not strike you as incredibly flimsy arguments? I don’t know your religious conviction, but since this is a Christian blog, I think it appropriate to quote Scripture.
God seems to take a dim view of your notion that whatever the free market doles out to the poor ought to be good enough for them.
Report comment to moderator
Re: long-term poverty. That sort of solution still evades. The general practice has been to move to the city. (The number of the drastically poor in the world has substantially declined with this urbanization).
As to subsidies, I will simply plead ignorance here as to their application in community development among the very poor of the South. My sense is that the externalities of disrupted communities is far worse than the support — but this is an admittedly subjective.
Underneath, the question would seem to be what sort of assistance do we provide for such communities? Economics/FT is only one part. Other development tools have been concentration on the women in the societies (your education piece, btw), as well as infrastructure development (potable water being critical), but also road to market. These are profoundly small scale tools, very distributed. Their use is advocated by William Easterly in the White Man’s Burden.
Report comment to moderator
being a Christian brings promise of glorious afterlife. to help the needy here and now, good intentions are not enough. one needs to study economic theory and history among other things. it seems that once upon a time Europe and America were sweatshops, they were followed by Japan, S.Korea, Taiwan. now China is a giant sweatshop and for the first time the Chinese are getting somewhere. we may not like it, but it may be unavoidable phase of development. and as easterly points out, reduction of poverty does not happen from outside…
Report comment to moderator
A higher price for lesser quality? Who on Earth told you that was the case? Many fair trade coffee growers put out a product that far exceeds free trade offerings, and they do it at comparable prices. You should do a bit more research or drink some more coffee, because you outright stated that fair trade costs more and has lesser quality, and this is simply not true.
Report comment to moderator
if a superior product is sold at “comparable prices” does it need “fair” trade? would it not beat its competition under free trade?
Report comment to moderator
; ϩ Ϫ ϫ Ϭ ϭ Ϯ ϯ ϰ ϱ ϲ x1510; ϳ ϴ ϵ ϶ Ϸ ϸ Ϲ Ϻ ϻ ϼ x1520; Ͻ Ͼ Ͽ Ѐ Ё Ђ Ѓ Є Ѕ І x1530; Ї Ј Љ Њ Ћ Ќ Ѝ Ў Џ А x1540; Б В Г Д Е Ж З И Й К x1550; Л М Н О П Р С Т У Ф x1560; Х Ц Ч Ш Щ Ъ Ы Ь Э Ю x1570; Я а б в г д е ж з и x1580; й к л м н о п р с т x1590; у ф х ц ч ш щ ъ ы x1599; ь x1100
; э ю я ѐ ё ђ ѓ є ѕ і x1110; ї ј љ њ ћ ќ ѝ ў џ Ѡ x1120; ѡ Ѣ ѣ Ѥ ѥ Ѧ ѧ Ѩ ѩ Ѫ x1130; ѫ Ѭ ѭ Ѯ ѯ Ѱ ѱ Ѳ ѳ Ѵ x1140; ѵ Ѷ ѷ Ѹ ѹ Ѻ ѻ Ѽ ѽ Ѿ x1150; ѿ Ҁ ҁ ҂ ҃ ҄ ҅ ҆ ҇ ҈ x1160; ҉ Ҋ ҋ Ҍ ҍ Ҏ ҏ Ґ ґ Ғ x1170; ғ Ҕ ҕ Җ җ Ҙ ҙ Қ қ Ҝ x1180; ҝ Ҟ ҟ Ҡ ҡ Ң ң Ҥ ҥ Ҧ x1190; ҧ Ҩ ҩ Ҫ ҫ Ҭ ҭ Ү ү x1199; Ұ x1200
; ұ Ҳ ҳ Ҵ ҵ Ҷ ҷ Ҹ ҹ Һ x1210; һ Ҽ ҽ Ҿ ҿ Ӏ Ӂ ӂ Ӄ ӄ x1220; Ӆ ӆ Ӈ ӈ Ӊ ӊ Ӌ ӌ Ӎ ӎ x1230; ӏ Ӑ ӑ Ӓ ӓ Ӕ ӕ Ӗ ӗ Ә x1240; ә Ӛ ӛ Ӝ ӝ Ӟ ӟ Ӡ ӡ Ӣ x1250; ӣ Ӥ ӥ Ӧ ӧ Ө ө Ӫ ӫ Ӭ x1260; ӭ Ӯ ӯ Ӱ ӱ Ӳ ӳ Ӵ ӵ Ӷ x1270; ӷ Ӹ ӹ Ӻ ӻ Ӽ ӽ Ӿ ӿ Ԁ x1280; ԁ Ԃ ԃ Ԅ ԅ Ԇ ԇ Ԉ ԉ Ԋ x1290; ԋ Ԍ ԍ Ԏ ԏ Ԑ ԑ Ԓ ԓ x1299; Ԕ x1300
; ԕ Ԗ ԗ Ԙ ԙ Ԛ ԛ Ԝ ԝ Ԟ x1310; ԟ Ԡ ԡ Ԣ ԣ Ԥ ԥ Ԧ ԧ Ԩ x1320; ԩ Ԫ ԫ Ԭ ԭ Ԯ ԯ Ա Բ x1330; Գ Դ Ե Զ Է Ը Թ Ժ Ի Լ x1340; Խ Ծ Կ Հ Ձ Ղ Ճ Մ Յ Ն x1350; Շ Ո Չ Պ Ջ Ռ Ս Վ Տ Ր x1360; Ց Ւ Փ Ք Օ Ֆ ՙ ՚ x1370; ՛ ՜ ՝ ՞ ՟ ՠ ա բ գ դ x1380; ե զ է ը թ ժ ի լ խ ծ x1390; կ հ ձ ղ ճ մ յ ն շ ո x1400
; չ պ ջ ռ ս վ տ ր ց ւ x1410; փ ք օ ֆ և ֈ ։ ֊ x1420; ֍ ֎ ֏ ֑ ֒ ֓ ֔ ֕ ֖ x1430; ֗ ֘ ֙ ֚ ֛ ֜ ֝ ֞ ֟ ֠ x1440; ֡ ֢ ֣ ֤ ֥ ֦ ֧ ֨ ֩ ֪ x1450; ֫ ֬ ֭ ֮ ֯ ְ ֱ ֲ ֳ ִ x1460; ֵ ֶ ַ ָ ֹ ֺ ֻ ּ ֽ ־ x1470; ֿ ׀ ׁ ׂ ׃ ׄ ׅ ׆ ׇ x1480; א ב ג x1490; ד ה ו ז ח ט י ך כ 1499; ל 1500
Report comment to moderator
; ϩ Ϫ ϫ Ϭ ϭ Ϯ ϯ ϰ ϱ ϲ x1010; ϳ ϴ ϵ ϶ Ϸ ϸ Ϲ Ϻ ϻ ϼ x1020; Ͻ Ͼ Ͽ Ѐ Ё Ђ Ѓ Є Ѕ І x1030; Ї Ј Љ Њ Ћ Ќ Ѝ Ў Џ А x1040; Б В Г Д Е Ж З И Й К x1050; Л М Н О П Р С Т У Ф x1060; Х Ц Ч Ш Щ Ъ Ы Ь Э Ю x1070; Я а б в г д е ж з и x1080; й к л м н о п р с т x1090; у ф х ц ч ш щ ъ ы x1099; ь x1100
; э ю я ѐ ё ђ ѓ є ѕ і x1110; ї ј љ њ ћ ќ ѝ ў џ Ѡ x1120; ѡ Ѣ ѣ Ѥ ѥ Ѧ ѧ Ѩ ѩ Ѫ x1130; ѫ Ѭ ѭ Ѯ ѯ Ѱ ѱ Ѳ ѳ Ѵ x1140; ѵ Ѷ ѷ Ѹ ѹ Ѻ ѻ Ѽ ѽ Ѿ x1150; ѿ Ҁ ҁ ҂ ҃ ҄ ҅ ҆ ҇ ҈ x1160; ҉ Ҋ ҋ Ҍ ҍ Ҏ ҏ Ґ ґ Ғ x1170; ғ Ҕ ҕ Җ җ Ҙ ҙ Қ қ Ҝ x1180; ҝ Ҟ ҟ Ҡ ҡ Ң ң Ҥ ҥ Ҧ x1190; ҧ Ҩ ҩ Ҫ ҫ Ҭ ҭ Ү ү x1199; Ұ x1200
; ұ Ҳ ҳ Ҵ ҵ Ҷ ҷ Ҹ ҹ Һ x1210; һ Ҽ ҽ Ҿ ҿ Ӏ Ӂ ӂ Ӄ ӄ x1220; Ӆ ӆ Ӈ ӈ Ӊ ӊ Ӌ ӌ Ӎ ӎ x1230; ӏ Ӑ ӑ Ӓ ӓ Ӕ ӕ Ӗ ӗ Ә x1240; ә Ӛ ӛ Ӝ ӝ Ӟ ӟ Ӡ ӡ Ӣ x1250; ӣ Ӥ ӥ Ӧ ӧ Ө ө Ӫ ӫ Ӭ x1260; ӭ Ӯ ӯ Ӱ ӱ Ӳ ӳ Ӵ ӵ Ӷ x1270; ӷ Ӹ ӹ Ӻ ӻ Ӽ ӽ Ӿ ӿ Ԁ x1280; ԁ Ԃ ԃ Ԅ ԅ Ԇ ԇ Ԉ ԉ Ԋ x1290; ԋ Ԍ ԍ Ԏ ԏ Ԑ ԑ Ԓ ԓ x1299; Ԕ x1300
; ԕ Ԗ ԗ Ԙ ԙ Ԛ ԛ Ԝ ԝ Ԟ x1310; ԟ Ԡ ԡ Ԣ ԣ Ԥ ԥ Ԧ ԧ Ԩ x1320; ԩ Ԫ ԫ Ԭ ԭ Ԯ ԯ Ա Բ x1330; Գ Դ Ե Զ Է Ը Թ Ժ Ի Լ x1340; Խ Ծ Կ Հ Ձ Ղ Ճ Մ Յ Ն x1350; Շ Ո Չ Պ Ջ Ռ Ս Վ Տ Ր x1360; Ց Ւ Փ Ք Օ Ֆ ՙ ՚ x1370; ՛ ՜ ՝ ՞ ՟ ՠ ա բ գ դ x1380; ե զ է ը թ ժ ի լ խ ծ x1390; կ հ ձ ղ ճ մ յ ն շ ո x1400
; չ պ ջ ռ ս վ տ ր ց ւ x1410; փ ք օ ֆ և ֈ ։ ֊ x1420; ֍ ֎ ֏ ֑ ֒ ֓ ֔ ֕ ֖ x1430; ֗ ֘ ֙ ֚ ֛ ֜ ֝ ֞ ֟ ֠ x1440; ֡ ֢ ֣ ֤ ֥ ֦ ֧ ֨ ֩ ֪ x1450; ֫ ֬ ֭ ֮ ֯ ְ ֱ ֲ ֳ ִ x1460; ֵ ֶ ַ ָ ֹ ֺ ֻ ּ ֽ ־ x1470; ֿ ׀ ׁ ׂ ׃ ׄ ׅ ׆ ׇ x1480; א ב ג x1490; ד ה ו ז ח ט י ך כ 1499; ל x1500
Report comment to moderator
; ߑ ߒ ߓ ߔ ߕ ߖ ߗ ߘ ߙ ߚ x2010; ߛ ߜ ߝ ߞ ߟ ߠ ߡ ߢ ߣ ߤ x2020; ߥ ߦ ߧ ߨ ߩ ߪ ߫ ߬ ߭ ߮ x2030; ߯ ߰ ߱ ߲ ߳ ߴ ߵ ߶ ߷ ߸ x2040; ߹ ߺ ߽ ߾ ߿ ࠀ ࠁ ࠂ x2050; ࠃ ࠄ ࠅ ࠆ ࠇ ࠈ ࠉ ࠊ ࠋ ࠌ x2060; ࠍ ࠎ ࠏ ࠐ ࠑ ࠒ ࠓ ࠔ ࠕ ࠖ x2070; ࠗ ࠘ ࠙ ࠚ ࠛ ࠜ ࠝ ࠞ ࠟ ࠠ x2080; ࠡ ࠢ ࠣ ࠤ ࠥ ࠦ ࠧ ࠨ ࠩ ࠪ x2090; ࠫ ࠬ ࠭ ࠰ ࠱ ࠲ ࠳ x2099; ࠴ x2100
; ࠵ ࠶ ࠷ ࠸ ࠹ ࠺ ࠻ ࠼ ࠽ ࠾ x2110; ࡀ ࡁ ࡂ ࡃ ࡄ ࡅ ࡆ ࡇ ࡈ x2120; ࡉ ࡊ ࡋ ࡌ ࡍ ࡎ ࡏ ࡐ ࡑ ࡒ x2130; ࡓ ࡔ ࡕ ࡖ ࡗ ࡘ ࡙ ࡚ ࡛ x2140; ࡞ ࡠ ࡡ ࡢ ࡣ ࡤ ࡥ ࡦ x2150; ࡧ ࡨ ࡩ ࡪ ࡰ x2160; ࡱ ࡲ ࡳ ࡴ ࡵ ࡶ ࡷ ࡸ ࡹ ࡺ x2170; ࡻ ࡼ ࡽ ࡾ ࡿ ࢀ ࢁ ࢂ ࢃ ࢄ x2180; ࢅ ࢆ ࢇ ࢈ ࢉ ࢊ ࢋ ࢌ ࢍ ࢎ x2190; x2199; ࢘ x2200
; ࢙ ࢚ ࢛ ࢜ ࢝ ࢞ ࢟ ࢠ ࢡ ࢢ x2210; ࢣ ࢤ ࢥ ࢦ ࢧ ࢨ ࢩ ࢪ ࢫ ࢬ x2220; ࢭ ࢮ ࢯ ࢰ ࢱ ࢲ ࢳ ࢴ ࢵ ࢶ x2230; ࢷ ࢸ ࢹ ࢺ ࢻ ࢼ ࢽ ࢾ ࢿ ࣀ x2240; ࣁ ࣂ ࣃ ࣄ ࣅ ࣆ ࣇ ࣈ ࣉ ࣊ x2250; ࣋ ࣌ ࣍ ࣎ ࣏ ࣐ ࣑ ࣒ ࣓ ࣔ x2260; ࣕ ࣖ ࣗ ࣘ ࣙ ࣚ ࣛ ࣜ ࣝ ࣞ x2270; ࣟ ࣠ ࣡ ࣣ ࣤ ࣥ ࣦ ࣧ ࣨ x2280; ࣩ ࣪ ࣫ ࣬ ࣭ ࣮ ࣯ ࣰ ࣱ ࣲ x2290; ࣳ ࣴ ࣵ ࣶ ࣷ ࣸ ࣹ ࣺ ࣻ x2299; ࣼ x2300
; ࣽ ࣾ ࣿ ऀ ँ ं ः ऄ अ आ x2310; इ ई उ ऊ ऋ ऌ ऍ ऎ ए ऐ x2320; ऑ ऒ ओ औ क ख ग घ ङ च x2330; छ ज झ ञ ट ठ ड ढ ण त x2340; थ द ध न ऩ प फ ब भ म x2350; य र ऱ ल ळ ऴ व श ष स x2360; ह ऺ ऻ ़ ऽ ा ि ी ु ू x2370; ृ ॄ ॅ ॆ े ै ॉ ॊ ो ौ x2380; ् ॎ ॏ ॐ ॑ ॒ ॓ ॔ ॕ ॖ x2390; ॗ क़ ख़ ग़ ज़ ड़ ढ़ फ़ य़ ॠ x2400
; ॡ ॢ ॣ । ॥ ० १ २ ३ ४ x2410; ५ ६ ७ ८ ९ ॰ ॱ ॲ ॳ ॴ x2420; ॵ ॶ ॷ ॸ ॹ ॺ ॻ ॼ ॽ ॾ x2430; ॿ ঀ ঁ ং ঃ অ আ ই ঈ x2440; উ ঊ ঋ ঌ এ ঐ x2450; ও ঔ ক খ গ ঘ ঙ চ ছ জ x2460; ঝ ঞ ট ঠ ড ঢ ণ ত থ দ x2470; ধ ন প ফ ব ভ ম য র x2480; ল শ ষ স হ x2490; ় ঽ া ি ী ু ূ ৃ 1499; ৄ x2500
Report comment to moderator
; ஹ ா ி ீ ு ூ x3010; ெ ே ை ொ ோ ௌ x3020; ் ௐ x3030; ௗ x3040; ௦ ௧ ௨ ௩ ௪ x3050; ௫ ௬ ௭ ௮ ௯ ௰ ௱ ௲ ௳ ௴ x3060; ௵ ௶ ௷ ௸ ௹ ௺ x3070; ఀ ఁ ం ః ఄ అ ఆ ఇ ఈ x3080; ఉ ఊ ఋ ఌ ఎ ఏ ఐ ఒ x3090; ఓ ఔ క ఖ గ ఘ ఙ చ ఛ x3099; జ x3100
; ఝ ఞ ట ఠ డ ఢ ణ త థ ద x3110; ధ న ప ఫ బ భ మ య ర x3120; ఱ ల ళ ఴ వ శ ష స హ x3130; ఼ ఽ ా ి ీ ు ూ ృ ౄ x3140; ె ే ై ొ ో ౌ ్ x3150; ౕ ౖ ౘ x3160; ౙ ౚ ౝ ౠ ౡ ౢ x3170; ౣ ౦ ౧ ౨ ౩ ౪ ౫ ౬ x3180; ౭ ౮ ౯ x3190; ౷ ౸ ౹ ౺ ౻ ౼ ౽ ౾ ౿ x3199; ಀ x3200
; ಁ ಂ ಃ ಄ ಅ ಆ ಇ ಈ ಉ ಊ x3210; ಋ ಌ ಎ ಏ ಐ ಒ ಓ ಔ x3220; ಕ ಖ ಗ ಘ ಙ ಚ ಛ ಜ ಝ ಞ x3230; ಟ ಠ ಡ ಢ ಣ ತ ಥ ದ ಧ ನ x3240; ಪ ಫ ಬ ಭ ಮ ಯ ರ ಱ ಲ x3250; ಳ ವ ಶ ಷ ಸ ಹ ಼ x3260; ಽ ಾ ಿ ೀ ು ೂ ೃ ೄ ೆ x3270; ೇ ೈ ೊ ೋ ೌ ್ x3280; ೕ ೖ x3290; ೝ ೞ ೠ ೡ ೢ ೣ x3299; x3300
; ೦ ೧ ೨ ೩ ೪ ೫ ೬ ೭ ೮ x3310; ೯ ೱ ೲ ೳ x3320; ഀ ഁ ം x3330; ഃ ഄ അ ആ ഇ ഈ ഉ ഊ ഋ ഌ x3340; എ ഏ ഐ ഒ ഓ ഔ ക ഖ x3350; ഗ ഘ ങ ച ഛ ജ ഝ ഞ ട ഠ x3360; ഡ ഢ ണ ത ഥ ദ ധ ന ഩ പ x3370; ഫ ബ ഭ മ യ ര റ ല ള ഴ x3380; വ ശ ഷ സ ഹ ഺ ഻ ഼ ഽ ാ x3390; ി ീ ു ൂ ൃ ൄ െ േ ൈ x3400
; ൊ ോ ൌ ് ൎ ൏ x3410; ൔ ൕ ൖ ൗ ൘ ൙ ൚ ൛ ൜ x3420; ൝ ൞ ൟ ൠ ൡ ൢ ൣ ൦ x3430; ൧ ൨ ൩ ൪ ൫ ൬ ൭ ൮ ൯ ൰ x3440; ൱ ൲ ൳ ൴ ൵ ൶ ൷ ൸ ൹ ൺ x3450; ൻ ർ ൽ ൾ ൿ ඁ ං ඃ x3460; අ ආ ඇ ඈ ඉ ඊ උ ඌ ඍ ඎ x3470; ඏ ඐ එ ඒ ඓ ඔ ඕ ඖ x3480; ක ඛ ග ඝ ඞ ඟ ච ඡ ජ x3490; ඣ ඤ ඥ ඦ ට ඨ ඩ ඪ ණ 1499; ඬ x3500
Report comment to moderator
; ྡ ྡྷ ྣ ྤ ྥ ྦ ྦྷ ྨ ྩ ྪ x4010; ྫ ྫྷ ྭ ྮ ྯ ྰ ྱ ྲ ླ ྴ x4020; ྵ ྶ ྷ ྸ ྐྵ ྺ ྻ ྼ ྾ x4030; ྿ ࿀ ࿁ ࿂ ࿃ ࿄ ࿅ ࿆ ࿇ ࿈ x4040; ࿉ ࿊ ࿋ ࿌ ࿎ ࿏ ࿐ ࿑ ࿒ x4050; ࿓ ࿔ ࿕ ࿖ ࿗ ࿘ ࿙ ࿚ x4060; x4070; x4080; x4090; က ခ ဂ ဃ x4099; င x4100
; စ ဆ ဇ ဈ ဉ ည ဋ ဌ ဍ ဎ x4110; ဏ တ ထ ဒ ဓ န ပ ဖ ဗ ဘ x4120; မ ယ ရ လ ဝ သ ဟ ဠ အ ဢ x4130; ဣ ဤ ဥ ဦ ဧ ဨ ဩ ဪ ါ ာ x4140; ိ ီ ု ူ ေ ဲ ဳ ဴ ဵ ံ x4150; ့ း ္ ် ျ ြ ွ ှ ဿ ၀ x4160; ၁ ၂ ၃ ၄ ၅ ၆ ၇ ၈ ၉ ၊ x4170; ။ ၌ ၍ ၎ ၏ ၐ ၑ ၒ ၓ ၔ x4180; ၕ ၖ ၗ ၘ ၙ ၚ ၛ ၜ ၝ ၞ x4190; ၟ ၠ ၡ ၢ ၣ ၤ ၥ ၦ ၧ x4199; ၨ x4200
; ၩ ၪ ၫ ၬ ၭ ၮ ၯ ၰ ၱ ၲ x4210; ၳ ၴ ၵ ၶ ၷ ၸ ၹ ၺ ၻ ၼ x4220; ၽ ၾ ၿ ႀ ႁ ႂ ႃ ႄ ႅ ႆ x4230; ႇ ႈ ႉ ႊ ႋ ႌ ႍ ႎ ႏ ႐ x4240; ႑ ႒ ႓ ႔ ႕ ႖ ႗ ႘ ႙ ႚ x4250; ႛ ႜ ႝ ႞ ႟ Ⴀ Ⴁ Ⴂ Ⴃ Ⴄ x4260; Ⴅ Ⴆ Ⴇ Ⴈ Ⴉ Ⴊ Ⴋ Ⴌ Ⴍ Ⴎ x4270; Ⴏ Ⴐ Ⴑ Ⴒ Ⴓ Ⴔ Ⴕ Ⴖ Ⴗ Ⴘ x4280; Ⴙ Ⴚ Ⴛ Ⴜ Ⴝ Ⴞ Ⴟ Ⴠ Ⴡ Ⴢ x4290; Ⴣ Ⴤ Ⴥ Ⴧ x4299; x4300
; Ⴭ ა ბ გ დ ე ვ ზ x4310; თ ი კ ლ მ ნ ო პ ჟ რ x4320; ს ტ უ ფ ქ ღ ყ შ ჩ ც x4330; ძ წ ჭ ხ ჯ ჰ ჱ ჲ ჳ ჴ x4340; ჵ ჶ ჷ ჸ ჹ ჺ ჻ ჼ ჽ ჾ x4350; ჿ ᄀ ᄁ ᄂ ᄃ ᄄ ᄅ ᄆ ᄇ ᄈ x4360; ᄉ ᄊ ᄋ ᄌ ᄍ ᄎ ᄏ ᄐ ᄑ ᄒ x4370; ᄓ ᄔ ᄕ ᄖ ᄗ ᄘ ᄙ ᄚ ᄛ ᄜ x4380; ᄝ ᄞ ᄟ ᄠ ᄡ ᄢ ᄣ ᄤ ᄥ ᄦ x4390; ᄧ ᄨ ᄩ ᄪ ᄫ ᄬ ᄭ ᄮ ᄯ ᄰ x4400
; ᄱ ᄲ ᄳ ᄴ ᄵ ᄶ ᄷ ᄸ ᄹ ᄺ x4410; ᄻ ᄼ ᄽ ᄾ ᄿ ᅀ ᅁ ᅂ ᅃ ᅄ x4420; ᅅ ᅆ ᅇ ᅈ ᅉ ᅊ ᅋ ᅌ ᅍ ᅎ x4430; ᅏ ᅐ ᅑ ᅒ ᅓ ᅔ ᅕ ᅖ ᅗ ᅘ x4440; ᅙ ᅚ ᅛ ᅜ ᅝ ᅞ ᅟ ᅠ ᅡ ᅢ x4450; ᅣ ᅤ ᅥ ᅦ ᅧ ᅨ ᅩ ᅪ ᅫ ᅬ x4460; ᅭ ᅮ ᅯ ᅰ ᅱ ᅲ ᅳ ᅴ ᅵ ᅶ x4470; ᅷ ᅸ ᅹ ᅺ ᅻ ᅼ ᅽ ᅾ ᅿ ᆀ x4480; ᆁ ᆂ ᆃ ᆄ ᆅ ᆆ ᆇ ᆈ ᆉ ᆊ x4490; ᆋ ᆌ ᆍ ᆎ ᆏ ᆐ ᆑ ᆒ ᆓ 1499; ᆔ x4500
Report comment to moderator
; ᎉ ᎊ ᎋ ᎌ ᎍ ᎎ ᎏ ᎐ ᎑ ᎒ x5010; ᎓ ᎔ ᎕ ᎖ ᎗ ᎘ ᎙ x5020; Ꭰ Ꭱ Ꭲ Ꭳ Ꭴ Ꭵ Ꭶ x5030; Ꭷ Ꭸ Ꭹ Ꭺ Ꭻ Ꭼ Ꭽ Ꭾ Ꭿ Ꮀ x5040; Ꮁ Ꮂ Ꮃ Ꮄ Ꮅ Ꮆ Ꮇ Ꮈ Ꮉ Ꮊ x5050; Ꮋ Ꮌ Ꮍ Ꮎ Ꮏ Ꮐ Ꮑ Ꮒ Ꮓ Ꮔ x5060; Ꮕ Ꮖ Ꮗ Ꮘ Ꮙ Ꮚ Ꮛ Ꮜ Ꮝ Ꮞ x5070; Ꮟ Ꮠ Ꮡ Ꮢ Ꮣ Ꮤ Ꮥ Ꮦ Ꮧ Ꮨ x5080; Ꮩ Ꮪ Ꮫ Ꮬ Ꮭ Ꮮ Ꮯ Ꮰ Ꮱ Ꮲ x5090; Ꮳ Ꮴ Ꮵ Ꮶ Ꮷ Ꮸ Ꮹ Ꮺ Ꮻ x5099; Ꮼ x5100
; Ꮽ Ꮾ Ꮿ Ᏸ Ᏹ Ᏺ Ᏻ Ᏼ Ᏽ x5110; ᏸ ᏹ ᏺ ᏻ ᏼ ᏽ ᐀ x5120; ᐁ ᐂ ᐃ ᐄ ᐅ ᐆ ᐇ ᐈ ᐉ ᐊ x5130; ᐋ ᐌ ᐍ ᐎ ᐏ ᐐ ᐑ ᐒ ᐓ ᐔ x5140; ᐕ ᐖ ᐗ ᐘ ᐙ ᐚ ᐛ ᐜ ᐝ ᐞ x5150; ᐟ ᐠ ᐡ ᐢ ᐣ ᐤ ᐥ ᐦ ᐧ ᐨ x5160; ᐩ ᐪ ᐫ ᐬ ᐭ ᐮ ᐯ ᐰ ᐱ ᐲ x5170; ᐳ ᐴ ᐵ ᐶ ᐷ ᐸ ᐹ ᐺ ᐻ ᐼ x5180; ᐽ ᐾ ᐿ ᑀ ᑁ ᑂ ᑃ ᑄ ᑅ ᑆ x5190; ᑇ ᑈ ᑉ ᑊ ᑋ ᑌ ᑍ ᑎ ᑏ x5199; ᑐ x5200
; ᑑ ᑒ ᑓ ᑔ ᑕ ᑖ ᑗ ᑘ ᑙ ᑚ x5210; ᑛ ᑜ ᑝ ᑞ ᑟ ᑠ ᑡ ᑢ ᑣ ᑤ x5220; ᑥ ᑦ ᑧ ᑨ ᑩ ᑪ ᑫ ᑬ ᑭ ᑮ x5230; ᑯ ᑰ ᑱ ᑲ ᑳ ᑴ ᑵ ᑶ ᑷ ᑸ x5240; ᑹ ᑺ ᑻ ᑼ ᑽ ᑾ ᑿ ᒀ ᒁ ᒂ x5250; ᒃ ᒄ ᒅ ᒆ ᒇ ᒈ ᒉ ᒊ ᒋ ᒌ x5260; ᒍ ᒎ ᒏ ᒐ ᒑ ᒒ ᒓ ᒔ ᒕ ᒖ x5270; ᒗ ᒘ ᒙ ᒚ ᒛ ᒜ ᒝ ᒞ ᒟ ᒠ x5280; ᒡ ᒢ ᒣ ᒤ ᒥ ᒦ ᒧ ᒨ ᒩ ᒪ x5290; ᒫ ᒬ ᒭ ᒮ ᒯ ᒰ ᒱ ᒲ ᒳ x5299; ᒴ x5300
; ᒵ ᒶ ᒷ ᒸ ᒹ ᒺ ᒻ ᒼ ᒽ ᒾ x5310; ᒿ ᓀ ᓁ ᓂ ᓃ ᓄ ᓅ ᓆ ᓇ ᓈ x5320; ᓉ ᓊ ᓋ ᓌ ᓍ ᓎ ᓏ ᓐ ᓑ ᓒ x5330; ᓓ ᓔ ᓕ ᓖ ᓗ ᓘ ᓙ ᓚ ᓛ ᓜ x5340; ᓝ ᓞ ᓟ ᓠ ᓡ ᓢ ᓣ ᓤ ᓥ ᓦ x5350; ᓧ ᓨ ᓩ ᓪ ᓫ ᓬ ᓭ ᓮ ᓯ ᓰ x5360; ᓱ ᓲ ᓳ ᓴ ᓵ ᓶ ᓷ ᓸ ᓹ ᓺ x5370; ᓻ ᓼ ᓽ ᓾ ᓿ ᔀ ᔁ ᔂ ᔃ ᔄ x5380; ᔅ ᔆ ᔇ ᔈ ᔉ ᔊ ᔋ ᔌ ᔍ ᔎ x5390; ᔏ ᔐ ᔑ ᔒ ᔓ ᔔ ᔕ ᔖ ᔗ ᔘ x5400
; ᔙ ᔚ ᔛ ᔜ ᔝ ᔞ ᔟ ᔠ ᔡ ᔢ x5410; ᔣ ᔤ ᔥ ᔦ ᔧ ᔨ ᔩ ᔪ ᔫ ᔬ x5420; ᔭ ᔮ ᔯ ᔰ ᔱ ᔲ ᔳ ᔴ ᔵ ᔶ x5430; ᔷ ᔸ ᔹ ᔺ ᔻ ᔼ ᔽ ᔾ ᔿ ᕀ x5440; ᕁ ᕂ ᕃ ᕄ ᕅ ᕆ ᕇ ᕈ ᕉ ᕊ x5450; ᕋ ᕌ ᕍ ᕎ ᕏ ᕐ ᕑ ᕒ ᕓ ᕔ x5460; ᕕ ᕖ ᕗ ᕘ ᕙ ᕚ ᕛ ᕜ ᕝ ᕞ x5470; ᕟ ᕠ ᕡ ᕢ ᕣ ᕤ ᕥ ᕦ ᕧ ᕨ x5480; ᕩ ᕪ ᕫ ᕬ ᕭ ᕮ ᕯ ᕰ ᕱ ᕲ x5490; ᕳ ᕴ ᕵ ᕶ ᕷ ᕸ ᕹ ᕺ ᕻ 1499; ᕼ x5500
Report comment to moderator
; ᝲ ᝳ x6010; ក ខ គ ឃ ង x6020; ច ឆ ជ ឈ ញ ដ ឋ ឌ ឍ ណ x6030; ត ថ ទ ធ ន ប ផ ព ភ ម x6040; យ រ ល វ ឝ ឞ ស ហ ឡ អ x6050; ឣ ឤ ឥ ឦ ឧ ឨ ឩ ឪ ឫ ឬ x6060; ឭ ឮ ឯ ឰ ឱ ឲ ឳ ឴ ឵ ា x6070; ិ ី ឹ ឺ ុ ូ ួ ើ ឿ ៀ x6080; េ ែ ៃ ោ ៅ ំ ះ ៈ ៉ ៊ x6090; ់ ៌ ៍ ៎ ៏ ័ ៑ ្ ៓ x6099; ។ x6100
; ៕ ៖ ៗ ៘ ៙ ៚ ៛ ៜ ៝ x6110; ០ ១ ២ ៣ ៤ ៥ ៦ ៧ ៨ x6120; ៩ ៰ ៱ ៲ x6130; ៳ ៴ ៵ ៶ ៷ ៸ ៹ x6140; ᠀ ᠁ ᠂ ᠃ ᠄ ᠅ ᠆ x6150; ᠇ ᠈ ᠉ ᠊ ᠋ ᠌ ᠍ ᠏ ᠐ x6160; ᠑ ᠒ ᠓ ᠔ ᠕ ᠖ ᠗ ᠘ ᠙ x6170; ᠠ ᠡ ᠢ ᠣ ᠤ x6180; ᠥ ᠦ ᠧ ᠨ ᠩ ᠪ ᠫ ᠬ ᠭ ᠮ x6190; ᠯ ᠰ ᠱ ᠲ ᠳ ᠴ ᠵ ᠶ ᠷ x6199; ᠸ x6200
; ᠹ ᠺ ᠻ ᠼ ᠽ ᠾ ᠿ ᡀ ᡁ ᡂ x6210; ᡃ ᡄ ᡅ ᡆ ᡇ ᡈ ᡉ ᡊ ᡋ ᡌ x6220; ᡍ ᡎ ᡏ ᡐ ᡑ ᡒ ᡓ ᡔ ᡕ ᡖ x6230; ᡗ ᡘ ᡙ ᡚ ᡛ ᡜ ᡝ ᡞ ᡟ ᡠ x6240; ᡡ ᡢ ᡣ ᡤ ᡥ ᡦ ᡧ ᡨ ᡩ ᡪ x6250; ᡫ ᡬ ᡭ ᡮ ᡯ ᡰ ᡱ ᡲ ᡳ ᡴ x6260; ᡵ ᡶ ᡷ ᡸ x6270; ᢀ ᢁ ᢂ ᢃ ᢄ ᢅ ᢆ ᢇ ᢈ x6280; ᢉ ᢊ ᢋ ᢌ ᢍ ᢎ ᢏ ᢐ ᢑ ᢒ x6290; ᢓ ᢔ ᢕ ᢖ ᢗ ᢘ ᢙ ᢚ ᢛ x6299; ᢜ x6300
; ᢝ ᢞ ᢟ ᢠ ᢡ ᢢ ᢣ ᢤ ᢥ ᢦ x6310; ᢧ ᢨ ᢩ ᢪ ᢰ x6320; ᢱ ᢲ ᢳ ᢴ ᢵ ᢶ ᢷ ᢸ ᢹ ᢺ x6330; ᢻ ᢼ ᢽ ᢾ ᢿ ᣀ ᣁ ᣂ ᣃ ᣄ x6340; ᣅ ᣆ ᣇ ᣈ ᣉ ᣊ ᣋ ᣌ ᣍ ᣎ x6350; ᣏ ᣐ ᣑ ᣒ ᣓ ᣔ ᣕ ᣖ ᣗ ᣘ x6360; ᣙ ᣚ ᣛ ᣜ ᣝ ᣞ ᣟ ᣠ ᣡ ᣢ x6370; ᣣ ᣤ ᣥ ᣦ ᣧ ᣨ ᣩ ᣪ ᣫ ᣬ x6380; ᣭ ᣮ ᣯ ᣰ ᣱ ᣲ ᣳ ᣴ ᣵ x6390; ᤀ x6400
; ᤁ ᤂ ᤃ ᤄ ᤅ ᤆ ᤇ ᤈ ᤉ ᤊ x6410; ᤋ ᤌ ᤍ ᤎ ᤏ ᤐ ᤑ ᤒ ᤓ ᤔ x6420; ᤕ ᤖ ᤗ ᤘ ᤙ ᤚ ᤛ ᤜ ᤝ ᤞ x6430; ᤠ ᤡ ᤢ ᤣ ᤤ ᤥ ᤦ ᤧ ᤨ x6440; ᤩ ᤪ ᤫ ᤰ ᤱ ᤲ x6450; ᤳ ᤴ ᤵ ᤶ ᤷ ᤸ ᤹ ᤺ ᤻ x6460; ᥀ ᥄ ᥅ ᥆ x6470; ᥇ ᥈ ᥉ ᥊ ᥋ ᥌ ᥍ ᥎ ᥏ ᥐ x6480; ᥑ ᥒ ᥓ ᥔ ᥕ ᥖ ᥗ ᥘ ᥙ ᥚ x6490; ᥛ ᥜ ᥝ ᥞ ᥟ ᥠ ᥡ ᥢ ᥣ 1499; ᥤ x6500
Report comment to moderator
; ᭙ ᭚ ᭛ ᭜ ᭝ ᭞ ᭟ ᭠ ᭡ ᭢ x7010; ᭣ ᭤ ᭥ ᭦ ᭧ ᭨ ᭩ ᭪ ᭫ ᭬ x7020; ᭭ ᭮ ᭯ ᭰ ᭱ ᭲ ᭳ ᭴ ᭵ ᭶ x7030; ᭷ ᭸ ᭹ ᭺ ᭻ ᭼ ᭽ ᭾ ᮀ x7040; ᮁ ᮂ ᮃ ᮄ ᮅ ᮆ ᮇ ᮈ ᮉ ᮊ x7050; ᮋ ᮌ ᮍ ᮎ ᮏ ᮐ ᮑ ᮒ ᮓ ᮔ x7060; ᮕ ᮖ ᮗ ᮘ ᮙ ᮚ ᮛ ᮜ ᮝ ᮞ x7070; ᮟ ᮠ ᮡ ᮢ ᮣ ᮤ ᮥ ᮦ ᮧ ᮨ x7080; ᮩ ᮪ ᮫ ᮬ ᮭ ᮮ ᮯ ᮰ ᮱ ᮲ x7090; ᮳ ᮴ ᮵ ᮶ ᮷ ᮸ ᮹ ᮺ ᮻ x7099; ᮼ x7100
; ᮽ ᮾ ᮿ ᯀ ᯁ ᯂ ᯃ ᯄ ᯅ ᯆ x7110; ᯇ ᯈ ᯉ ᯊ ᯋ ᯌ ᯍ ᯎ ᯏ ᯐ x7120; ᯑ ᯒ ᯓ ᯔ ᯕ ᯖ ᯗ ᯘ ᯙ ᯚ x7130; ᯛ ᯜ ᯝ ᯞ ᯟ ᯠ ᯡ ᯢ ᯣ ᯤ x7140; ᯥ ᯦ ᯧ ᯨ ᯩ ᯪ ᯫ ᯬ ᯭ ᯮ x7150; ᯯ ᯰ ᯱ ᯲ ᯳ x7160; ᯼ ᯽ ᯾ ᯿ ᰀ ᰁ ᰂ x7170; ᰃ ᰄ ᰅ ᰆ ᰇ ᰈ ᰉ ᰊ ᰋ ᰌ x7180; ᰍ ᰎ ᰏ ᰐ ᰑ ᰒ ᰓ ᰔ ᰕ ᰖ x7190; ᰗ ᰘ ᰙ ᰚ ᰛ ᰜ ᰝ ᰞ ᰟ x7199; ᰠ x7200
; ᰡ ᰢ ᰣ ᰤ ᰥ ᰦ ᰧ ᰨ ᰩ ᰪ x7210; ᰫ ᰬ ᰭ ᰮ ᰯ ᰰ ᰱ ᰲ ᰳ ᰴ x7220; ᰵ ᰶ ᰷ ᰻ ᰼ ᰽ ᰾ x7230; ᰿ ᱀ ᱁ ᱂ ᱃ ᱄ ᱅ ᱆ ᱇ ᱈ x7240; ᱉ ᱍ ᱎ ᱏ ᱐ ᱑ ᱒ x7250; ᱓ ᱔ ᱕ ᱖ ᱗ ᱘ ᱙ ᱚ ᱛ ᱜ x7260; ᱝ ᱞ ᱟ ᱠ ᱡ ᱢ ᱣ ᱤ ᱥ ᱦ x7270; ᱧ ᱨ ᱩ ᱪ ᱫ ᱬ ᱭ ᱮ ᱯ ᱰ x7280; ᱱ ᱲ ᱳ ᱴ ᱵ ᱶ ᱷ ᱸ ᱹ ᱺ x7290; ᱻ ᱼ ᱽ ᱾ ᱿ ᲀ ᲁ ᲂ ᲃ x7299; ᲄ x7300
; ᲅ ᲆ ᲇ ᲈ x7310; Ა Ბ Გ Დ Ე Ვ Ზ Თ Ი x7320; Კ Ლ Მ Ნ Ო Პ Ჟ Რ Ს Ტ x7330; Უ Ფ Ქ Ღ Ყ Შ Ჩ Ც Ძ Წ x7340; Ჭ Ხ Ჯ Ჰ Ჱ Ჲ Ჳ Ჴ Ჵ Ჶ x7350; Ჷ Ჸ Ჹ Ჺ Ჽ Ჾ Ჿ ᳀ x7360; ᳁ ᳂ ᳃ ᳄ ᳅ ᳆ ᳇ x7370; ᳐ ᳑ ᳒ ᳓ ᳔ x7380; ᳕ ᳖ ᳗ ᳘ ᳙ ᳚ ᳛ ᳜ ᳝ ᳞ x7390; ᳟ ᳠ ᳡ ᳢ ᳣ ᳤ ᳥ ᳦ ᳧ ᳨ x7400
; ᳩ ᳪ ᳫ ᳬ ᳭ ᳮ ᳯ ᳰ ᳱ ᳲ x7410; ᳳ ᳴ ᳵ ᳶ ᳷ ᳸ ᳹ ᳺ x7420; ᴀ ᴁ ᴂ ᴃ ᴄ ᴅ ᴆ x7430; ᴇ ᴈ ᴉ ᴊ ᴋ ᴌ ᴍ ᴎ ᴏ ᴐ x7440; ᴑ ᴒ ᴓ ᴔ ᴕ ᴖ ᴗ ᴘ ᴙ ᴚ x7450; ᴛ ᴜ ᴝ ᴞ ᴟ ᴠ ᴡ ᴢ ᴣ ᴤ x7460; ᴥ ᴦ ᴧ ᴨ ᴩ ᴪ ᴫ ᴬ ᴭ ᴮ x7470; ᴯ ᴰ ᴱ ᴲ ᴳ ᴴ ᴵ ᴶ ᴷ ᴸ x7480; ᴹ ᴺ ᴻ ᴼ ᴽ ᴾ ᴿ ᵀ ᵁ ᵂ x7490; ᵃ ᵄ ᵅ ᵆ ᵇ ᵈ ᵉ ᵊ ᵋ x7499; ᵌ x7500
Report comment to moderator
x250; û ü ý þ ÿ Ā ā Ă ă Ą x260; ą Ć ć Ĉ ĉ Ċ ċ Č č Ď x270; ď Đ đ Ē ē Ĕ ĕ Ė ė Ę x280; ę Ě ě Ĝ ĝ Ğ ğ Ġ ġ Ģ x290; ģ Ĥ ĥ Ħ ħ Ĩ ĩ Ī ī x299; Ĭ x300
; ĭ Į į İ ı IJ ij Ĵ ĵ Ķ x310; ķ ĸ Ĺ ĺ Ļ ļ Ľ ľ Ŀ ŀ x320; Ł ł Ń ń Ņ ņ Ň ň ʼn Ŋ x330; ŋ Ō ō Ŏ ŏ Ő ő Œ œ Ŕ x340; ŕ Ŗ ŗ Ř ř Ś ś Ŝ ŝ Ş x350; ş Š š Ţ ţ Ť ť Ŧ ŧ Ũ x360; ũ Ū ū Ŭ ŭ Ů ů Ű ű Ų x370; ų Ŵ ŵ Ŷ ŷ Ÿ Ź ź Ż ż x380; Ž ž ſ ƀ Ɓ Ƃ ƃ Ƅ ƅ Ɔ x390; Ƈ ƈ Ɖ Ɗ Ƌ ƌ ƍ Ǝ Ə Ɛ x400
; Ƒ ƒ Ɠ Ɣ ƕ Ɩ Ɨ Ƙ ƙ ƚ x410; ƛ Ɯ Ɲ ƞ Ɵ Ơ ơ Ƣ ƣ Ƥ x420; ƥ Ʀ Ƨ ƨ Ʃ ƪ ƫ Ƭ ƭ Ʈ x430; Ư ư Ʊ Ʋ Ƴ ƴ Ƶ ƶ Ʒ Ƹ x440; ƹ ƺ ƻ Ƽ ƽ ƾ ƿ ǀ ǁ ǂ x450; ǃ DŽ Dž dž LJ Lj lj NJ Nj nj x460; Ǎ ǎ Ǐ ǐ Ǒ ǒ Ǔ ǔ Ǖ ǖ x470; Ǘ ǘ Ǚ ǚ Ǜ ǜ ǝ Ǟ ǟ Ǡ x480; ǡ Ǣ ǣ Ǥ ǥ Ǧ ǧ Ǩ ǩ Ǫ x490; ǫ Ǭ ǭ Ǯ ǯ ǰ DZ Dz dz x499; Ǵ x500
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!