International Trade and The Global Economy

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

Free trade provides opportunity, it provides growth, and it provides struggling nations a chance. With free trade, markets open across national borders and the consumer ultimately benefits from higher quality goods at fair market prices. The producers of such goods now have larger markets to sell to allowing for the opportunity at increased sales, giving the consumer a greater variety of goods that can more individually meet specific demands. Free trade implementation to the United States foreign policy is a developing and revolutionary mindset that will bring prosperity to all parties involved. The United States will benefit from free trade because the market to purchase U.S. made goods and services will increase dramatically

The pro free-trade camp in this country has tried to sell free trade generally, and the WTO in particular, on the grounds that free trade in other countries is a good idea. When other countries drop their trade barriers, American companies export more, and consequently create more export-related jobs. All true enough, but what free-traders fail to talk about, and their silence is deafening, is that free trade in the United States is a good idea.

Impressed by this worldwide supply chain and the international entanglement of markets we now want to discuss some of the bases of global trade, its implications and the advantages and disadvantages of such an evolution. The major reason behind international expansion and the import of goods is the search for minimum labour cost at a certain quality level or the highest quality for a certain price. Products are bought from the best and cheapest producers whereas transportation costs often play a secondary role. Domestic producers, paying wages many times higher than in developing countries, cannot always fulfil the requirements. Products, which only require low skilled workers, are already produced and imported from abroad since many years. Moreover, as the workers in low-wage areas gets more educated, foreign companies challenge more and more the local white-collar workforce. Isn't this evolution a major threat to our local labour market?

The author of the article what’s so great about free trade anyway? Lives in Oxford England and is reminding the audience about what is so great about free trade because in his words “suddenly it has few supporters” Although the examples are specific to his region, the overall theories and concepts sound as though they are more written from a global perspective.

The United States has for over two centuries been involved in the growing world economy. While the U.S. post revolutionary war sought to protect itself from outside influences has since the great depression and world war two looked to break trade restrictions. The United States role in the global economy has grown throughout the 20th century and as a result of several historical events has adopted positions of both benefactor and dependent. The United States trade policy has over time shifted from isolationist protectionism to a commitment to establishing world-wide free trade. Free trade enterprise has developed and grown through organizations such as the WTO and NAFTA. The U.S. in order to obtain its free trade desires has implemented a

The reason that free trade improves the economies of all participants is due to the concept of comparative advantage. According to Econlib.org, “A person has a comparative advantage at producing something if he can produce it at lower cost than anyone else.” Crucially, the word “cost” here means opportunity cost, defined by Investopedia as “the benefit one forfeits by choosing an alternative option.” In other words, the person has a comparative advantage if he gives up the least to produce the good. This means that one person can be better at producing everything than another, but it would still be advantageous for both parties to trade. If both produce the product that provides them comparative

Free trade, the ever present driving force behind our national and world economy, is a trade policy embroiled in controversy. It is considered by most economists to be an almost perfect trade policy, barring a few negative effects. Free trade has been shown to increase production, output and income levels in an economy. However, there are many people that view free trade as destroyer of economies and a catalyst of poverty. Critics of free trade have pointed out that in the short-run, free trade causes a loss of jobs which in turn causes a rise in poverty levels. It is interesting to note that the argument for free trade and the argument against free trade are inverses of each other. Proponents of free trade see it as a tool to stimulate an economy while detractors see it as a policy which exacerbates poverty, causes dependency and reduces economic stability.

Free trade is a policy by which a government does not discriminate against imports or interfere with exports by applying tariffs (to imports) or subsidies (to exports) or quotas. According to the law of comparative advantage, the policy permits trading partners’ mutual gains from

Free Trade is the concept we use when referring to selling of products between countries without tariffs, fees, or trade barriers. Free Trade simply is the absence of government interference or numerous restrictions, which has been labeled as laissez fair economics. Free Trade grants easier access to goods and services, promote faster growth for the economy, and also allows for the outsourcing of production of goods, which hurts the economy. Many believe that the free trade hurts developed countries and nations, due to the loss of jobs by international competition and can reduce the country’s GDP. Overall, free trade agreement with other countries can save time and money and increase participating countries 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.

The Smith’s original theory of comparative advantage is commonly used to describe international trade and support the need for free trade policies. The theory uses the concept comparative advantages in production to show the logic of specialization in production and use of resources. But despite the benefits associated with comparative advantages, free trade policies are usually questioned, and nations try to avoid full specialization in their production. Palley’s observation on the modern international market contrasts Smith’s original theory, by showing that it does not consider new international market realities.

Nowadays, the international trade is very important for a growth economy, specially with advanced technologies that facilitate communication. To obtain financial and technological resources for economic growth, the nation needs certainly to participate in world trade. International trade of developing countries leads to high growth and significant changes in the commodity structure by reflecting changes in the economy. The countries in all over the world are economically interdependent. No any nation can exist in economic isolation. If the economy of one nation crashed, other nations in the world will probably be unstable as well. And that would be worse if that nation among to developed nations.

One way of examining the winners and losers of free trade is through the Stolper-Samuelson theorem. Wolfgang F. Stolper and Paul A. Samuelson explain that owners of abundant factors benefit from free trade while owners of scarce factors lose. This owes to the principle of comparative advantage, whereby, when trade expands, national markets transfer land, labor, and capital toward those industries relying on abundant factors, which produce commodities more efficiently. These industries become export industries. Conversely, those industries relying on scarce factors will lose land, labor, and capital in favor of purchase of these goods abroad, where factors are more abundant (Stolper and Samuelson). Thus, these