The discussion would revolve around this continuing debate on globalization which is, without a doubt, the controlling capitalistic trend in the world today. But there is a hotly debated contest on how globalization should continue. This is a contest between free trade and fair trade. Free trade and fair trade have been in constant tug of war pulled from each side by economists and politicians. Both carry an ideological approach to what world commercial activity should be. But it is also flavoured by nationalism and politics because the issue directly stirs the potential economic power of its participants whether it is a developed or a third-world country. It is not surprising then that this debate is rife with vicious arguments from each side. In this paper, we would create a case for fair trade as better form of globalization with the rationale that free trade globalization has only made global markets become reckless and abusive.
Proponents of free trade argue that trade between countries should be eliminated of barriers and preferential policies, particularly those that favour countries or specific industries. It is their belief that a business would fail or succeed depending on how it can adapt on a free and open market, without having to depend on special government protections that protect industries or workers. Thus, proponents want to eliminate subsidies and tariffs and are opposing regulations that force companies to pay extra just to do business in foreign markets.
Advocates of fair trade, on the other hand, make working conditions a priority in establishing trade relations. For instance, a fair trade advocate will want to demand an increase of wage rates of workers to improve their livelihood. Thi...
... middle of paper ...
...s that could support the thrust toward new capitalism. The author builds on the arguments of globalization supporters that say that the richest countries tend to be the most open to the rest of the world if you look at their trade practices and investments. This is because, according to Rodrik, these countries have big governments that have extensive reach and effective regulation. They also have the widest, social safety nets.
In conclusion, fairer trade should be the object if globalization should continue to the future. A fairer trade protects trading itself and not let organizations abuse it. It may seem like protectionism. But a measured form of protectionism means there is a balance between government regulations and openness of the market. Fairness is the only foreseeable solution against globalization’s trilemma of democracy, independence and openness.
Fair trade should give protection to governments from exploitation. For example, small farmers can be protected by giving government food sovereignty. An article from the Chicago Democratic Socialist Organization proposed, “The agreement must return to governments the ability to safeguard food sovereignty by protecting family and small-scale subsistence farmers” (Chicago Democratic Socialist). Rewriting the agreement can protect the small farms and retain jobs for farm workers. The article further addressed an issue discussed previously, “Large-scale importation of basic grains into Mexico is a major cause of the economic collapse of rural communities, which forces millions of undocumented migrants to seek work in the USA” (Chicago Democratic Socialist). Therefore, it would solve problems both in the US and Mexico. It will take efforts of the many to renegotiate NAFTA, and many other terms needs to be added. The general direction should focus on protecting the interest of the general public by restricting corporate powers. Fair trade will reduce the problems caused by
...ystem primarily responsible for promoting global competition. Free trade also promotes shifts in production so as to fit the “comparative advantage” model. Though free trade is widely practiced concerns with how to regulate free trade, something supposedly unregulated, countries have to subject themselves to the controversial institutions of the IMF and WTO. Fair trade policies while potentially creating smaller markets support workers’ rights in both the U.S. and developing nations. Though the pros and cons of globalization continue to be debated the United States can no longer escape its role in the global economy nor can it impose policies that are detrimental to the United States founding ideals. However policies that play towards the advantages of both free and fair trade could stimulate a healthy domestic economy that is also competitive in the global market.
As Ian Fletcher pointed out in Free Trade Doesn’t Work: What Should Replace it And Why, nations need a well-chosen balance between openness and closure toward the larger world economy (Fletc...
The commercial activity has been, over the centuries, linked to human activity, due to the need to obtain satisfactory. The evolution of trade throughout history presents issues of immense importance to understand the current configuration of trade, However, for the purposes of this research we will be observing what is free trade so we can understand and interpret every point that we will be talking about in this investigation. Free Trade is an economic concept, referring to the sale of products between countries, duty-free and any form of trade barriers. Free trade involves the elimination of artificial barriers (government regulations) to trade between individuals and companies from different countries.
Welcome to college! You can only afford to maintain two of the next three options: adequate sleep, a social life, and good grades. In Dani Rodrik’s new book- The Globalization Paradox, a similar triangle is evinced. The author presents us with a “trilemma” consisting of Hyperglobalization, Democratic politics, and the Nation-State. You can efficiently balance two of these three triangle “corners”– but no more than two. Rodrik claims our current worldview on globalization is that the more of it- the merrier. Yet this is flawed thinking in the fact that bigger globalization isn’t necessarily better globalization, instead we need to strive for “smart” globalization over “maximum” globalization. Rodrik uses a vast amount of real world events, past and present theories, and statistics as evidence. In this essay I will first give a brief overview of Rodrik’s main argument and his evidence supporting it. Moreover, I will attempt to compare Rodrik’s argument(s) to Friedman’s. Finally, I will analyze the specific claim Rodrik makes (and one I found most interesting) concerning hyperglobalization’s hindrance on national democracies.
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.
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.
In order for international trade to work well, governments must allow the world market to determine how goods are sold, manufactured and traded for all to economically prosper. While all nations may have the capability to produce any goods or services needed by their population, it is not possible for all nations to have a comparative advantage for producing a good due to natural resources of the country or other available resources needed to produce a good or service. The example of trading among states comprising the United States is an example of how free trade works best without the interve...
”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 to 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 with the market. The whole idea of free trade is that it lowers the price of 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.
Following the Great Recession, the world has been facing complex global transformations. Dani Rodrik’s “The Globalization Paradox: Democracy and the Future of the World Economy” portrays the challenges of the implications that our current model of globalization relies upon. Rodrik’s work reveals both the implications and connections of the relationships between markets, the states, and globalization in the currently changing world. Throughout the book, Rodrik argues the validity of five key points: markets require regulatory institutions, such institutions take on a variety of forms, societies should orient their market-supporting institutions to their own unique needs, markets that are responsive to democracy can avoid institutional convergence, and a world that is responsive to democracy will not reach full globalization. This book has made me question the long term sustainability of the already evolving economic globalization process. Rodrik explains that the process of globalization must be managed so that the entire world can benefit.
International free trade has become the foundation of neoliberal globalization. The main organizations for carrying out free trade are World Trade Organization (WTO) established on 1995, International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank (WB). The main aim was to promote development and trade. Trade has become the lens through which development is perceived, rather than the other way round . The concept of trade evolved right from Adam Smith and David Ricardo who introduced the concept of comparative advantage which compares the productiveness across countries. Here countries make use of their natural resources, climate, skills etc. According to Paul Krugman trade reflects arbitrary or temporary advantages resulting from economies of scale or shifting leads in close technological races. Thus comparative advantage can be created through technological innovations. Globalization is propelled by economics but shaped by politics; the same applies to free trade both in developed and developing countries. Since developed countries focuses on capital intensive goods and developing countries on labour intensive goods especially agricultural commodities, there is always a difference in ‘real’ terms. But developing countries like China, India, Korea has been shifting to manufactured and service products for exports since 1970’s. According to Paul Samuelson trade has a strong influence on income distribution, since wages are smaller for labour intensive goods and in low wage countries this has a major influence on the wages on high income countries when products are exported from low wage countries to high wage countries. But Paul Krugman states that this relationship cannot be quantified. When we look into the current global scenario income ...
Free trade is a policy that relies on the concept of comparative advantage that when comparing two countries one of those countries will have the capability to make a product that is better than the other country. So it is best if each country focuses its efforts and resources into one product to increase the economic activity for both countries. The determination of who produces a product better is based on the open market without intervention from a government who may try to control a trade by imposing government protective measures such as tariffs. The World Trade Organization has been tasked with monitoring free trade, but it has been noted that their policing has not been effective to stop such interventions. Free trade not only relies on a laissez-faire approach but also on assumptions of conditions. The assumptions used by many for economic theories are not always accurate but rather the justification for using the assumptions is so that economic theories can be applied for the greater good of an economy.
Globalization is a term that is difficult to define, as it covers many broad topics in the global arena. However, it can typically be attributed to the advancement of economic, social, and cultural interactions among the companies, citizens, organizations, and governments of nations; globalization also focuses on the interactions and integration of countries (The Levin Institute 2012). Many in the Western world promote globalization as a positive concept that allows growth and participation in a global community. Conversely, the negative aspects rarely receive the same level of attention. Globalization appears to be advantageous for the privileged few, but the benefits are unevenly distributed. For example, the three richest people in the world possess assets that exceed the Gross National Product of all of the least developed countries and their 600 million citizens combined (Shawki and D’Amato 2000). Although globalization can provide positive results to some, it can also be a high price to pay for others. Furthermore, for all of those who profit or advance from the actions related to globalization, there are countless others who endure severe adverse effects.
Using 1997 financial crisis and other examples, discuss how globalization is important to the modern business journalism. Introduction