But there are also some more general arguments concerning the production of uneven
geographical development that need to be integrated into this account. Capital is always in
motion and much of that motion is spatial: commodity exchange (as opposed to the buying
and selling of assets) always entails change of location and spatial movement. The market
is spatialized (as Krugman now recognizes) and how that spatiality works has consequences
for uneven geographical development. One of the laws of the market, for example,
is that “there is nothing more unequal than the equal treatment of unequals”. The equality
presupposed in market exchange produces spiraling inequalities between regions and
spaces insofar as these regions and spaces possess differential endowments. The outcome
is that rich regions grow richer and poor regions grow relatively poorer. The relaxation of
state regulatory controls throughout the capitalist world (unevenly according to political
circumstances) has produced a “neo-liberal” phase of capitalist development in which the
inequalities of wealth and power have grown markedly.