Chapter 3 Of The Globalization Paradox Summary

Others view trade in a negative terms, arguing that is creates incentive for the united states companies to move jobs overseas at the price of American workers. Free trade lowers the price of goods at the shopping mall; opens foreign nations to american businesses, products, services and admits the united states to the global supply chain that brings new product, new jobs, and added economic growth to our shores.

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

Economist have been debating between free trade and protectionism for decades. This debate has been most recently reiterated through President Donald Trump’s announcement that his administration would be taking steps to limit free trade in the United States. The opinion piece “Beware the Trump Trade Trap” by Liz Mair, argues that free trade is positively linked to a country’s prosperity, although most of the population may disagree with this. Mair argues that protectionism would limit consumption, however, it is important to also expand upon these ideas and to remember that free trade encourages prosperity, comparative advantage, and improves economic growth.

Part II. Allowing free trade between countries can be beneficial, but it also imposes costs. Use the ITT Tech Virtual Library to research costs and benefits of allowing free trade. Discuss aspects of international trade that some may consider unfair. For example: i. Distribution of costs and benefits of free trade. In other words, does everyone share in the gains and the costs equally? ii. iii. Competing with different labor restrictions (or lack of), such as slave or child labor. Differences in environmental standards. Answers vary.

“Free trade is not passé, but is an idea that has irretrievably lost its innocence” (Krugman, 1987, p.132). In his article, Is Free Trade Passé, Paul Krugman writes that the classical trade theory has been replaced with a new trade theory. The classical trade theory is based on constant returns to scale and perfect competition, is driven by comparative advantage, and endorses free trade. This classical theory emphasized the idea that trade was brought about by differences in tastes, technology, or factor endowments between countries (Krugman, 1987). However, the new theory of international trade is driven by increasing returns to scale, also known as economies of scale, and leads to imperfect competition (Carbaugh, 2011).

"The free trade argument states that, if each nation produces what it does best and permits trade, over the long run all will enjoy lower prices and higher levels of output, income, and consumption that could be achieved in isolation."

Voluntary trade between individuals and countries has existed ever since the creation of civilization. The trade between nations, specifically individuals in nations, is primarily composed of both importing and exporting products for the purposes of this paper. In our current time, there is a trend towards an interdependent global market known as globalization. This trend is partially a result of increases in the technology of communication and transportation, as well as the relaxing of national tariffs on foreign made products since the 1940’s. There remains much debate between those opposing this trend and trade-liberalist that advocate for even more free trade than already exists. The liberalists argue that free trade presents the most efficient form of a global economy, forcing companies to compete with each other on the world market and thus passing the benefits onto consumers. On the opposing side, dissenters argue that free trade eliminates jobs, lowers domestic employment levels and takes advantage of less developed countries and their citizenship. This paper will examine each side’s arguments and work to examine the topic as a whole. According to existing microeconomic theory, free trade will offer far more positives to the world than negatives.

It is commonly believed that free trade between nations is a mutually beneficial arrangement for all parties involved; indeed, this is held to be an absolute truth. Though free trade is undoubtedly the most effective form of commerce between countries from a purely economic standpoint, increasingly we find that our so-called "free trade agreements" are horribly unbalanced. Indicative of these fiascoes is the North American

Economic analysts say trading among other countries with no stipulations improve global efficiency in resource allocation (Tupy, 2005). Free Trade delivers goods and services to those who value them most and allows partners to gain from specializing in the producing those goods and services they do best; according to Tupy’s findings, Economists call that the law of comparative advantage. Tupy also states when producers create goods they are comparatively skilled at i.e. Germans producing beer and the French producing wine, those goods increase in abundance and quality. Trade allows consumers to benefit from more efficient production methods, for example, without large markets for goods and services, large production runs would not be economical. Large production runs, in turn, are instrumental to reducing product costs while lower production

“If trade is good for a country, it must be good for everyone in the country.”

The liberal approach to free trade is heavily associated with the fundamentals of capitalism. Free trade is therefore beneficial to the minority who are capable of manufacturing their goods in societies that have more unskilled labourers and in turn can be compensated less. The labourers in the nations that have the technology to do something better but not necessarily cheaper are at the greatest disadvantage within a liberal free trade political economy.

The theory of comparative advantage explains the benefit of free trade. According to this theory by David Ricardo in the early 19th century, “Both countries will be better off if each specializes in the industry where it has a comparative advantage, and if the two trade with one another.” (Citation) International trade opens up markets to foreign supplier, and domestic companies need to improve their efficiency, boost productivity, and lower cost to increase competitiveness instead of enjoying monopolies or oligopolies that enabled them to keep prices well above marginal costs. On the other hand, international trade also offers domestic companies bigger demands and broader markets; therefore more jobs relevant to export have been created. Furthermore, jobs in the US supported by goods exports pay 13-18 percent more than the US national average (ustr.gov).

Free trade has long be seen by economists as being essential in promoting effective use of natural resources, employment, reduction of poverty and diversity of products for consumers. But the concept of free trade has had many barriers to over come. Including government practices by developed countries, under public and corporate pressures, to protect domestic firms from cheap foreign products. But as history has shown us time and time again is that protectionist measures imposed by governments has almost always had negative effects on the local and world economies. These protectionist measures also hurt developing countries trying to inter into the international trade markets.

Adam Smith, author of The Wealth of Nations, shows support for free trade and emphasises it as a trade policy which ought to be adopted. Krugman and Obstfeld back Smith's support by stating that the efficiency of trade is increased by free trade and accumulates the national income of countries. Free trade is a theory which suggests that each nation benefits in specialising in an economic activity from which it gains absolute advantage, enjoying absolute superiority over other nations in a specif economical activity (Peng). With free trade follows opportunity, replacing regulation and growth of economic activity. (Rugmann and Collinson).

There have been dissenters to the view that trade liberalisation always provides benefits. Muhammad Yunus, a Nobel Peace Prize winner, assumed that income inequality was a murky reality from trade liberalisation, pointing ‘ninety-four percent of the world income goes to 40 percent of the population while sixty percent of people live on only 6 percent of world income’. Stiglitz then warmed that the fast-moving trade liberalization without any ‘safety nets, with insufficient reciprocity and assistance on the part of developed countries, can contribute to an increase in poverty’. Likewise, Krugman and Obstfeld employed the theory of the second best, explaining that free trade can only work ‘if all other markets are working properly’. If they are not, it entails governmental intervention to pacify the effect of market failure.