The Pros And Cons Of Free Trade In The United States

http://www.npr.org/2013/12/26/257255787/wave-of-illegal-immigrants-gains-speed-after-nafta. NAFTA boosted regional trade but had some undesirable effects. The Mexican government used to subsidize corn. It kept the crop price high so small farmers could stay in business. And it kept corn product prices low so poor people could eat. The trade agreement removed tariffs in order to lower costs and encourage investment between the U.S., Canada and Mexico. The Mexican government ended its corn subsidy, and the U.S. government continued to subsidize highly productive American corn producers. Seventy-five thousand Iowa farmers grew twice as much corn as three million Mexican farmers at half the cost. U.S. corn flooded Mexico. Illegal immigration led to massive militarization of the border. In Mexico, manufacturers built new factories for cars, TVs and other goods, replacing some jobs that used to be in the U.S. NAFTA benefited corporations operating in all three countries, but it led to flat or lower wages for the working classes in all three

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

The article, “Displaced People: NAFTA’s Most Important Product”, written by David Bacon for North American Congress on Latin America, discusses how economic crises have caused Mexicans to be displaced. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has caused the price of crops in Mexico to lower so much that there are no economic benefits from planting them. There are around 500,000 indigenous Mexicans from the state of Oaxaca now living in the United States as farmworkers. The article states that between 2000 and 2005, the countryside in Mexico has lost a million and a half jobs. This causes indigenous Mexicans who relied on planting crops to make money to migrate to the United States. Families that cannot migrate to the United States and are now jobless will go hungry as they search for buyers to buy the crops they grow. While the crops they grow continue to lose money value, the price of the food that they need to survive keeps increasing. After Mexico adopted NAFTA, the price of tortillas has more than doubled and companies continue to monopolize tortilla production. Poor Mexicans are left with no ability to make money and

the Mexican agricultural industry had to compete with the far more industrialized US farm industry. Even though the amount of exported products tripled since the institution of NAFTA [according to the economist], most of those exports were maize. The United States was producing a greater amount of grain products and importing them cheaply into Mexico. The amount of American imports overwhelmed the Mexican market and forced them to sell to America and Canada. The theory the United States held was NAFTA would decrease the amount of Mexican immigration. However, this hurt the Mexican economy enough until around 2008 to force millions of Mexicans into the United States, doubling the Mexican-born population to twelve million in 2013 (Sergei, M. 2014).

The new American trade policies will affect the United States in many ways. Our new president can take many different approaches to the trade policies and will probably cut or renegotiate the policies we already have. There are many ways he can do this. There will be many organizations that will be affected, some pros to the policies, and some cons.

Trade agreements are implemented among nations to improve economic activity and to facilitate trade between nations. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is one such trade agreement which was approved by the United States (U.S.) Congress in 1994 to create a free trade area between the countries of Canada, Mexico, and the U.S. (Geringer, McNett, Minor, & Bell, 2016). Labor unions, such as the United Auto Workers (UAW) and unskilled labor were strongly opposed to the NAFTA legislation and the two groups have valid arguments for their opposition. Specifically, the UAW and unskilled labor were likely to face the most downward pressure on wages as a result of competition from unskilled labor in Mexico (Conybeare & Zinkula, 1996).

Which is cost difference determines the patterns of international trade. Absolute advantage is trade benefits when each country is at least cost producer of one of the goods being traded. In the 1800s, David Ricardo developed the theory of comparative advantage to measure gains from trades. This theory is based on comparative advantage and it states each nation should specialize in production of those goods for which its relatively more efficient with a lower opportunity cost.

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

Managing the how goods and services enter or leave this country (import/export) is an important process that allows for us to control the economic status of our nation. Sometimes imposing tariffs on the goods imported balances our labor cost, resources and government supported industry. A tariff by definition is a tax or duty to be paid on a particular class of imports or exports.

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).

Correspondingly, International trade is the foundation upon which American prosperity rests. Free trade policies have built a level of competition in today’s open market that engen-ders continual modernization and leads to better paying jobs, better products, new markets, and increased savings and investment. Also, free trade allows more goods and services to reach American consumers at lower prices, thereby considerably increasing their standard of living. Likewise, the benefits of free trade continue well beyond American households. Not to men-tion, free trade helps spread the value of freedom, foster economic development in poor coun-tries, and reinforce the rule of law. The national debate over trade-related issues too often dis-regards these important benefits (Froning, 2000).

Free Trade occurs when goods and services are traded between countries without the use of import controls. For most of the late twentieth century, the prevailing wisdom has been that free trade can lead to improvements in economic welfare in the global economy. However this has not prevented regular trade disputes between countries - often when one country feels that unfair trade practices have caused the benefits from trade to become distorted. Free trade is very important to all developed countries as there are likely to be economies of scale - when producing for larger markets (foreign markets), average costs of production will be lower. There is likely to be a wider choice

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’

The principle of comparative advantage provides a simplified theory explaining why free trade is possible, even when one country has an economic disadvantage. Both the Ricardian and Heckscher-Ohlin theories rely on fixed economic assumptions of constant return and perfect competition. However, intuitively the basic principle of business is to increase returns through innovation, improving processes and technology or increasing economies of scale. Organizations understand they control pricing and are price setters, rather than price takers as suggested by perfect competition (Krugman & Obstfeld, 2003). The idea of increasing returns and imperfect competition challenge the foundations of comparative advantage.