With the Trump administration's recent repudiation of the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement, I think it would be fun to reignite a debate over the relative merits of free trade/globalization.
Are economists correct in touting the net gains to society from trade - invoking econ 101 concepts such as specialization and comparative advantage?
Do protectionists have a legitimate argument when they advocate tariffs and trade barriers to defend domestic businesses and workers from unfair foreign business practices?
To start things off, I believe we should embrace trade liberalization, while also investing significantly in helping workers displaced by trade (retraining). Our economy relies increasingly on interconnected, global supply chains. Disrupting this system for the sake of throwing a lifeline to industries already susceptible to structural decline seems unwise to me. Thoughts?
Embrace trade liberalization while investing in displaced workers. Of course that is the answer but partisanship prevents that from happening.
Couldn't have said this better myself. I think free trade has generally benefited the U.S. (and the rest of the world) but we need further impetus to re-train those left behind.
Overwhelming good if you dont ignore the few who are worse off.
This is why I am not a fan of the new "friendlier" work policies at banks - first year analysts now have time to make stupid posts like this.
And as for "Other - Other?"
With the level of controversy surrounding this topic on the national stage, I thought it would be worthwhile to discuss. Even if the answer is obvious (the consensus seems to be "trade is good, but need to invest in displaced workers to prevent a populist revolt"), wouldn't it be useful to put these thoughts out in the open so that more people can be enlightened?
In fact, the issue is probably more complex than that. For example, reasonable arguments could be made that certain countries (China) unfairly prop up certain industries (steel) with certain measures (subsidies, unlimited state credit). In such instances, the U.S. could rationally respond with defensive tariffs (it actually does in real life) to level the playing field. Obviously this is just one example, but I'm sure there are thousands of other similar situations.
Or maybe this post really is just "stupid" and that there is some universal truth that you could gift to us?
Debitis vitae debitis rerum saepe debitis et nesciunt. Quo aspernatur dolorem maxime delectus modi qui voluptatem. Nihil cum sed repudiandae fuga aut distinctio molestiae. Commodi molestias earum recusandae adipisci molestiae aliquid.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...