It seems that the Globalization means the trend of the world change to a more integrated and independent world (Anwar, 2002). However, it appears there is a debate about the benefits and cost of the free trade. This article will discuss the disadvantages firstly such as the dilution of culture, and then it will move on to the benefits part such as the accelerate development of economy. Additionally, the benefit sector of the UK during the Globalization will be discussed such as the falling price of products, and the failure sectors also have been illustrated such as the increased income inequality.
Although there are several benefits globalization has brought to the world, there are still several concerns relate to the free trade. Firstly,
…show more content…
Firstly, the benefits refer to the economic one. It seems it has accelerated the entire economic development (Dobbs et al., 2015). For example, according to the points of Baek and Shi (2016), the expansion of the world economy is contributing to many nations’ successful economic development such as China and other rapidly developing Asian nations. Secondly, free trade, perhaps improved the economic efficiency of the world, which might because it has provided the opportunities for free capital investment. This may approve the capital flow to more profitable place (Anwar, 2002), while this may also accompany with higher risk and more uncertainty of the financial market. However, many people may often debate that the benefits of free trade are not divided into the equal ones in the world, it more seems that the advantages are absorbed by a few specific groups (Baek and Shi, 2016). Thirdly, it also provides opportunities for each country to focus more on specific industries and use resources more effectively according to the Hechscher-Ohlin model, which might because that different nations could exchange various products they need with other countries more convenient in the free trade. Fourthly, foreign investment may also accompany with the new knowledge and technology, which could benefit the host nations (Anwar, 2002). However, this could increase the competition of countries to gain the foreign investment which might cause the problem of nations reduce or revoke their regulations in order to attract investment from other
Free trade comes with its share of pros and cons. It is responsible for increased economic growth, better business environments, encourages investment
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 number of policies that can be examined for both their benefits and flaws. Several trade policies exist as options to the United States, among these fair trade and free trade policies dominate the world economic market. In order to achieve economic growth the United States has a duty to maintain a global trade policy that benefits both domestic workers and industry. While free trade gives opportunities to large industries and wealthy corporate investors the American worker suffers job instability and lower wages. However fair trade policies that protect America’s workers do not help foster wide economic growth. The United States must then engage in economic trade policies that both protect the United States founding principles and secure for tomorrow greater economic stability.
These countries should consider embracing free trade in order to fully benefit in many areas for their economy. There are several pros and cons to consider regarding free trade. Free trade fully removes any hassles of taxes and other government restrictions that limit international trading opportunities. Free trade vastly improves upon the economic wellbeing of all nations involved in international trading. Since free trade also allows each nation involved to specialize and create specific commodities, free trade can run efficiently and inexpensively compared to other complicated
Few governments will argue that the exchange of goods and services across international borders is a bad thing. However, the degree to which an international trading system is open may come into contest with a state’s ability to protect its interests. Free trade is often portrayed in a good light, with focus placed on the material benefits. Theoretically, free trade enables a distribution of resources across state lines. A country’s workforce may become more productive as it specializes in products that it has a comparative advantage. Free trade minimizes the chance that a market will have a surplus of one product and not enough of another. Arguably, comparative specialization leads to efficiency and growth.
Free trade does add wealth to the economy in a country such as America. The main reasons to support free trade are to have a higher standard of living as it allows people to improve their living standard where they can consume better quality products and services at less expensive price. With the increases of standard of living, the people who are in the state of poverty will begin to experience better lifestyles and they will not be discriminated by the richer as now they are almost equally financial stable as the normal working people.
While free trade has certainly changed with advances in technology and the ability to create external economies, the concept seems to be the most benign way for countries to trade with one another. Factoring in that imperfect competition and increasing returns challenge the concept of comparative advantage in modern international trade markets, the resulting introduction of government policies to regulate trade seems to result in increased tensions between countries as individual nations seek to gain advantages at the cost of others. While classical trade optimism may be somewhat naïve, the alternatives are risky and potentially harmful.
Besides, the right to specialist brings the right to join in some level of business area a free market plan that unites exchanging with the embellishments of one's decision, paying gratefulness to national edge.
All nations can get the benefits of free trade by being specialized in producing goods they have a comparative advantage and then trade them with goods produced by other nations in the world. This is evidenced by comparative advantage theory. Trade depends on many factors, country's history, institution, size and. geographical position and many more. Also, the countries put trade barriers for the exchange of their goods and services with other nations in order to protect their own company from foreign competition, or to protect consumers from undesirable products, or sometimes it may be inadvertent.
Free trade is a form of economic policy which allows countries to import and export goods among each other with no government interference. In recent years there has been a general consensus in economist’s stance on free trade. They view free trade as an asset. Free trade allows for an abundance of goods with increased varieties and increased availability. The products become cheaper for consumers and no one company monopolizes an industry. The system of free trade has been highly controversial. While free trade benefits consumers it has the potential to hurt manufacturers and businesses thus creating a debate between supporters of free trade and those with antagonistic positions.
While free trade is supposed to mean that governments do not interfere with trade by applying policies to affect trade, all governments do intervene in trade to give their country an increased financial advantage. The effects of the government policies are further discussed as well as how those policies affect free trade.
”Free trade policies have created a level of competition in today's open market that engenders continual innovation and leads to better products, better-paying jobs, new markets, and increased savings and investment” (Denise Froning). Though Free trade plays a huge role in the economy today because of what and where it is used. Free trade allows for traders to trade across national boundaries and other countries without government interference. Meaning that traders have very few regulations that allow for them to do this without the government intervening. Free trade makes things for traders much easier and also allows for many more jobs in the US, such as exporting jobs, or jobs in the auto industry and plants. Though there are many other types of trade policies, none give more benefits than that of free trade. Free trade is not determined by artificial prices that may or may not reflect the true environment of supply and demand.
Free trade can be defined as the free access of the market by individuals without any restriction or any trade barriers that can obstruct the trade process such as taxes, tariffs and import quotas. Free trade in its own way unites and brings people together. Most individuals love the concept of free trade because it gives them the ability to move freely and interact in the market. The whole idea of free trade is that it lowers the price for goods and services by promoting competition. Domestic producers will no longer be able to rely on government law and other forms of assistance, including quotas which essentially force citizens to buy from them. The producers will have to enter the market and strive into to obtain profit.
Functionalism: The discord that interest in one reach, (for instance, trade) pushes coordinated effort in distinctive extents. In principle, the pills issue, movement issues, et cetera are all tended to fortnightly
It is widely accepted that there are a lot of benefits globalization brought to our life. Firstly, advanced transportation system makes different places of the world closer. Considerable amount of exciting tourists can visit remote villages in the corner of the earth. Secondly, new telecommunication, such as internet and TV, makes people’s common life colorful. Fans in China who are interested in Manchester United can also share their joy with their counterparts in United Kingdom, when the team won a game. Moreover, we can buy the popular products of high quality made in other countries, such as automobiles of Volkswagen and furniture of IKEA. Finally, globalization can lead to cooperation in trade between different countries. Even though globalization can bring so many conveniences to us, we still worry about its severe negative aspects.
Proponents have a strong belief in free markets and limited governments intervention. According to Preble (2010), globalization has led to the creation of jobs, higher living standards and a higher variety of goods available to consumers. International trade is one of the driving forces behind globalization. Countries specialize in specific goods wherein it has a comparative advantage. This results in a higher efficiency and productivity and ultimately leading to an improvement of the living standards. As a consequence, export increases. Hereto, more jobs are created, a higher variety of goods are available and international competition has increased. This results in lower prices, keeping the inflation in check (Preble, 2010). Furthermore, Preble (2010) states that the increase of trade in goods and services, foreign direct investment and cross-border investment have been important for the success of globalization. Other important benefits, mentioned by the proponents of globalization, are the promotion of information exchange and high understanding of a variety of cultures. Globalization has led to a world where “democracy has triumph over autocracy” (BBC News, 2000, as stated in Preble, 2010, p. 334).