Analysis Of The Book ' Stiglitz ' A Recipient Of The Nobel Prize ' Economics, And Andrew Charlton

Main protectionist policies include tariffs, quotas, embargos and voluntary export restraints, and Adam Smith’s idea of absolute advantage has been developed further to explain international trade. In recent years, protectionism has become closely related to globalization during which the influences of trades spread almost everywhere, so people insist upon the study of social deformities generated by improper policies on international trade and the task of pointing them out with a view to remedy. There are certainly both economic and political purposes of trade

“Free trade is not working for the majority of the world. During a most recent period of rapid growth in global trade and investment — 1960 to 1998 — inequality worsened both internationally and within countries. The UN Development Program reports that the richest 20 percent of the world's population consume 86 percent of the world's resources while the poorest 80 percent consume just 14 percent. WTO rules have hastened these trends by opening up countries to foreign investment and thereby making it easier for production to go where the labor is cheapest and most easily exploited and environmental costs are low. This pulls down wages and environmental standards in developed countries that have to compete globally.”

In conclusion, the topic of free trade is difficult to debate and often controversial as it has advantages but also disadvantages. Nonetheless, the drawbacks outweigh the benefits as it one, contravenes basic moral ideologies, two, makes the rich, richer, and the poor, poorer, and three, jeopardizes our declining environment. All in all, free trade will neither support nor sustain our country to be ethical, prosperous or

In Stiglitz’s view, the developing countries are not developed enough to compete with the developed countries. Trade policy will be beneficial in an economy where there is a good risk market, full employment, and a mature economy. In an economy with full employment, if a worker lose his job, he can find a new job easily. Or, in a mature economy, a worker can move from low productivity job to a higher one with the benefit of higher wages. However, these conditions do not exists in a developing countries. So, if a worker lose his job, he will be unemployed and that is a huge barrier for economic growth.

There is a lot of debate around the notion of global free trade and whether it is advantageous or disadvantageous for the economic and social human rights, especially labour rights. Economic, social, and labour rights are socio-economic human rights, such as the right to education, right to housing, right to adequate standard living, right to work, and the right to health. Socio-economics focuses on how economic activity affect and is shaped by social process. In general it analyzes how societies progress, languish, or regress because of their local or regional economy, or the global economy. Global free trade is always associated with the debate of sweatshops. Sweatshops are characterized as low-wage, labor-intensive manufacturing facilities. They have existed throughout the world in multiple places at distinctive times, however now they tend to be concentrated in developing countries with large populations of

In Chapter Three of the Globalization Paradox, the author Dani Rodrick deconstructs the argument for free trade and suggests that free trade and prosperity don’t always go hand in hand. The argument, first put forward by Henry Martyn when he linked international trade to technological progress and concretized by David Ricardo when he produced his famous theory of comparative advantage, has many limitations. One assumption it makes is that laborers who lose their jobs in one industry will get employed by another. However, in the real world, the labor force is hardly that flexible and most of the workers who are let go remain unemployed for long periods of time. The argument for free trade also fails to calculate the true cost of producing a good, as many of the external costs generated (like environmental degradation) aren’t included in the calculation.

Imagine yourself wondering what exactly fair trade means in sociology. One might think that fair trade includes trading good for a better price while others typically think fair trade is when fair prices are paid to producers in developing countries. In this paper I will discuss the summary of the “fair trade” movie, discuss why a sociologist would be interested in the given subject, and what my overall reactions include.

According to Richard N (2006), the free movement of goods due to free market or trade has led to globalization. Though the effects have been assumed to benefit all, there is a large inequality among the poor and the rich both within the countries among the nations. Capitalism is contributed to technological advancement, which has then influenced free trade. The uncontrolled globalization has resulted in more developed societies becoming rich. The rich economies are able to exploit the market by producing at lower price due to their level of technology and advancement in research. They are also able to protect their economy through export subsidies and production subsidies to their farmers. This translates to lower prices for their goods in the global market hence controlling it. The poor countries despite having comparative advantage in production of some commodities they also suffer from competitive advantage from the developed countries they are forced to sell their commodities at a lower price than their expected. They suffer a lot in global trade, which is mainly controlled by the wealthier nations. There are regulations, which restrict the flow of goods in the world market from poor societies. This makes

Those economically disadvantaged (poor) within a country generally gain from a loose trade. A loose trade is generally a strong positive contributor to poverty reduction. This allows people to exploit their productive potential, assists economic growth, restrains illogical policy interventions and helps to insulate against shocks. This corresponds with a new World Bank study which, used data from 80 countries over four decades, confirmed that openness boosts economic growth and that the incomes of the poor rose one-for-one with overall growth.

2009). This in itself shows the high standards of sustainability can be made from free trade (Gidney, M. 2009). Fair trade provides two key benefits that can help with the current world economic crisis. First it provides sustained benefits for producers that can help maintain their business through fluctuations of the world market (Gidney, M. 2009). Second, fair trade helps to maintain fair prices, additional social premium, and long-term partnerships that help provide better living standards for millions of people in over 60 countries (Gidney, M. 2009).

Throughout the years, there has been a constant controversy over whether the World Trade Organization should enforce global free trade. The primary idea is to establish in which all are happy. Although there are many advocates for trade liberalization, as well as many who oppose. I believe free trade may be advantageous for both large and small-industrialized countries, but it does not favor the smaller developing countries needs primarily.

Globalization is the proximate and multidimensional set of political, economic, social, and technological integration around the globe. The increasing interconnectedness among countries can be seen through the prism of globalization. Essentially, the lives of people living in distant cities like Bangalore and Silicon Valley are brought closer as a result of this phenomenon. Drivers of this adjacent include; the expansion of trade, technological exchange, labor movement and investments (Stearns 2017). The discourse of globalization encompasses several multidisciplinary themes. The paper, however, concentrates on the economic factors, “which, entails the closer economic integration of countries of the world through increased flow of goods, services, capital and even labor.” (Stiglitz 2007: 4). The paper focuses on economic globalization and elucidates whether the globalization has reduced poverty and inequality or had reproduced the reversed implications. Meanwhile, the paper reveals if the developing world has benefited from the set. This seems to be the central question that policymakers, development economists, and politicians have been grappling with for years. The paper is presented in three parts. Part one reflects on the historical context of the problem statement. The second part compiles literature and juxtaposes with cases to corroborate the globalization-poverty-inequality triangle. Finally, the conclusion represents the author’s viewpoint on the

Globalization is defined as a worldwide development, the process of spreading ideas. More recently, globalization has become more focused on economics, the spreading of capitalism and opening international trade. Globalization through the past 50 years has developed a bad reputation, one that does not benefit countries the way people thought it would. Joseph E. Stiglitz, in his book, Globalization and Its Discontents, stresses that modern globalization is a good thing, but has not been done correctly in the past few decades. The ideas behind globalization have the potential to benefit the world, specifically developing countries. Stiglitz goes into detail about how the problem falls with the misguided attempts of the international economic institutions to solve developing countries’ economic problems. Something has gone very wrong with globalization, and the purpose of this book is to shed some light on where it went wrong. Stiglitz presents the problems with the international economic institutions’ damaging policies and their effects using ethnographic field work and historically comparative methods.

The fair trade concept, based on the idea of both economic activity and social development, is replete with ethical and sustainable echoes. Ransom (2002 p 20) asks, 'can the

The international trade of goods across the world accounts for approximately 60% of the world Gross Domestic Product (The World Bank, 2014). A great proportion of goods transactions occur every second. The primary question is whether international trade benefits a country as an entirety, and, if so, why would a country implement protective trade policies to restrict particular exports? To address this question, this essay aims to explore the impact of trade on various economic stakeholders, including consumers, producers, labour and government and, furthermore, will compare models and theories with reality to ascertain the true winner/ loser in the international trade market.