well you are certainly right in saying that economic books will say that free trade is good. its good for buisness and if you ricochet, for rich people

but for the social impacts and environmental impacts you don't see those same economic books discussing them, because frankly there's nothing good to be said about. And to install doubts in the future economists is out of the question. And i'm not even talking about the erosion of the national soveregnity for the gain of multinational companies who benifit to only a handful of people.

What I am trying to say here is that from your point of view, free trade is good. Also the same could been said for Izzy who said free trade is good for america. I agree with both of you.

But if you step outside and read in other spheres of knowledge about free trade and especially FTAA to see the other side of the medal, maybe you won't be so sure about what your books are teaching you

The best would be if one of your teachers openly criticize what the book says and not to rehash and throw the notions at his students like soooo many are doing now at uni. level. But that is unproductive at the factories we now call universities, because we don't want the students to *think*

___________________
[/IMG]http://i54.tinypic.com/ngycqo.png[/IMG]

quote:

Originally posted by occrider I don't see what social sciences has to do with economics ... especially since the topic at hand is ECONOMICS. Well if you disagree, then please explain to me how trade barriers are good??? I would especially like to see this since every economist I have talked to, and virtually every economic textbook has disagreed. Edit: And please ... if you're going to quote from social science textbooks explaining how trade barriers are good please provide sources.

Try not looking at it from a technical point of view, rather a humanitarian point of view

___________________
"This place isn't big enough for me to blow it up."
-MARCO V

quote:

Originally posted by occrider I don't see what social sciences has to do with economics ...

It's funny that the study of economics is actually ITSELF a social science

ROFL

___________________
[/IMG]http://i54.tinypic.com/ngycqo.png[/IMG]

OCCRIDER, It's true that it benefits industrialized countries, cause that's where Free Trade works best. Ofcourse, those industrialized countries like that too, but, if you look at the case of Central American countries, where poverty is great, and still farming is part of the majority of the people, in which the majority depend on, and ever since Free Trade came on, where they DO the trading with the Industries instead of the farmers, so that's where THEY get affected, ofcourse, those are interest manners and money making, so the families that do the farming, which is a big majority, get in trouble heaving no one buying from them, or companies overtaking their farms, giving them less then what they would usually get. Is nice to watch CNN en Español sometimes

___________________
Upcoming:

Michael Andrews Feat. Gary Jules - Mad World (Grayed Out Mix)

hehehe occrider mate, if you had instead taken four years of development studies, you might have a little bit of a different view . I agree with malek, it is a matter of perspective

Sorry I can't reply to you quoting various economics theories and such (maybe I can quote "A Beautiful Mind" or something ) because I have no economics background, but I do think that while free trade may benefit various TNC's and governments involved, most of the time it does not benefit the PEOPLE of the lesser developed countries, such as those who are not really industrialized and still reliant on agriculture in their economies (this is especially true if the country is in the clutches of a regime susceptible to corruption, as quite a number of countries in Africa are).

One example of this is shown in the various cases where countries such as the US can produce and export foodstuffs and textiles to countries in which they have free trade agreements with, and sell them at lower prices than the local farmers and producers in that country can. This is because the farmers in the developed countries often receive huge subsidies, a lot of the time to keep prices on their products low and thus make them easier to export (ex. that huge Farm Subsidies bill that was passed a year or two ago). Thus such products, when imported into the lesser-developed countries, will have an artificially low price when sold on the open market, one that is lower than the price that the local producer who does not have added financial support from such subsidies.

Anyways, the main reason why I'm sceptical of free trade and organizations such as the IMF and the World Bank is because in circumstances where such economic policies and agreements are plied and in use, the smaller and poorer countries have tended and continue to be heavily exploited by TNC's and the much larger countries.

Ok granted I may not know everything about the pros and cons of FTAA, especially since I'm lacking in development or social sciences as you so stated , but let me explain things from my economics perspective.

First of all, speaking from a darwinian perspective of sorts, trade barriers only hurt industries and markets as they more or less stymy the flow of competition of that market and more or less encourage inefficiencies. This is basically what happened to the American automotive industry in the 70's. American automanufacturers essentially had a long standing control of the American car markets at a time when there were trade barriers in the US. That led to widely inefficient american cars that were huge gas guzzlers. When trade barriers were dropped and the import of Japanese automobiles hit the market, they were a collosal success that deeply impacted American car sales. American cars simply could not compete against the fuel efficiency and low cost of japanese automobiles. It essentially revolutionized the automobile industry to increase efficiency, design, and lower costs if they wanted to compete with the Japanese to stay in business. Free trade essentially forces companies to compete and improve to benefit the consumer or face going out of business. I agree developing industries may not have the capabalities to compete with already established industries, however, these industries should be weaned into adulthood by government subsidies rather than trade barriers.

Second of all, you are only speaking from the industry side of things. The people who benefit from free trade the most are the consumers. If you install trade barriers you are essentially forcing consumers to purchase products that are above market price. Thus although you may be aiding in a few manufacturers in that particular industry, you are hurting the entire consumer market. Instead of spending $12,000 on a car and $3000 on a whatever else in an efficient economy, they can now only spend $15,000 on that car. What happens then is that you end up hurting every single other industry in the country as a result. By instituting trade barriers a government is more or less influencing consumer demand and it can't know for sure what effect it will have. Again subsidies is a far better choice if you're trying to develop an industry since you're not influencing market demands. Now if a country cannot remain competitive in an industry then perhaps it should exit that industry. At any rate, new industries should crop up from the increased capability of consumer spending. My economics on globalization isn't the greatest so perhaps I should do more reading into the matter.

At any rate, even if you disagree with me and say that these hurt Central American countries why would they sign the agreement? They must have SOME educated economists and finance ministers right? And I don't doubt that some people are hurt and put out of business, but when you take a look at the big picture, their economy as a WHOLE is better off and that's what matters right?

Again I agree completely with what you said, its good on paper. But in the reality of the Americas where you have the richest(USA) and poorest(Haiti) countries, how do you expect them to compete with each other?

quote:

Originally posted by occrider Ok granted I may not know everything about the pros and cons of FTAA, especially since I'm lacking in development or social sciences as you so stated , but let me explain things from my economics perspective. First of all, speaking from a darwinian perspective of sorts, trade barriers only hurt industries and markets as they more or less stymy the flow of competition of that market and more or less encourage inefficiencies. This is basically what happened to the American automotive industry in the 70's. American automanufacturers essentially had a long standing control of the American car markets at a time when there were trade barriers in the US. That led to widely inefficient american cars that were huge gas guzzlers. When trade barriers were dropped and the import of Japanese automobiles hit the market, they were a collosal success that deeply impacted American car sales. American cars simply could not compete against the fuel efficiency and low cost of japanese automobiles. It essentially revolutionized the automobile industry to increase efficiency, design, and lower costs if they wanted to compete with the Japanese to stay in business. Free trade essentially forces companies to compete and improve to benefit the consumer or face going out of business. I agree developing industries may not have the capabalities to compete with already established industries, however, these industries should be weaned into adulthood by government subsidies rather than trade barriers.

but then again, ever heard of a brand of car made in Peru? or Salvador? I guess not... these countries simply can't compete in anything in the high-tech, service-orientied, financial, education, health, manufacturing of "complex" goods, etc.

The only thing they're good or could get better at (poor countries) is growing the bananas, coffee and sugar us north american all cherich. And since your same economic laws state that if you're good at one thing, you gotta put emphasis on it and export it. So coffee growers will stay coffee growers forever.

quote:

Second of all, you are only speaking from the industry side of things. The people who benefit from free trade the most are the consumers. If you install trade barriers you are essentially forcing consumers to purchase products that are above market price. Thus although you may be aiding in a few manufacturers in that particular industry, you are hurting the entire consumer market. Instead of spending $12,000 on a car and $3000 on a whatever else in an efficient economy, they can now only spend $15,000 on that car. What happens then is that you end up hurting every single other industry in the country as a result. By instituting trade barriers a government is more or less influencing consumer demand and it can't know for sure what effect it will have. Again subsidies is a far better choice if you're trying to develop an industry since you're not influencing market demands. Now if a country cannot remain competitive in an industry then perhaps it should exit that industry. At any rate, new industries should crop up from the increased capability of consumer spending. My economics on globalization isn't the greatest so perhaps I should do more reading into the matter.

in most countries, there's simply no consumers... it would take generations to buy that Ford car, or two years of salary to get that PC we all take for granted. Rich countries consumer might and will benefit but as for the rest, I'm really not sure.

quote:

At any rate, even if you disagree with me and say that these hurt Central American countries why would they sign the agreement? They must have SOME educated economists and finance ministers right? And I don't doubt that some people are hurt and put out of business, but when you take a look at the big picture, their economy as a WHOLE is better off and that's what matters right?

ever heard of puppet regimes, and corrupt officials

and economy is only one aspect of life...

___________________
[/IMG]http://i54.tinypic.com/ngycqo.png[/IMG]