Free Trade : are old theories obselete?

[Viceroy Xerxes]

The push for free trade agreements has been pushed by governments and businesses aggressively for many years. I remember the anti-globalist demonstrations beginning 6 years ago and at the time I dismissed them. Today I tend to lean more toward their message because I think the current trends are unsustainable. The question remains though....is free trade a good thing? I think there are too many variables to unequivocally say yes, especially from the perspective of the average person/worker. Attached are two very good links I found discussing this issue. I am curious what others think.

 

http://www.mises.org/story/1420

 

http://www.brook.edu/dybdocroot/comm/events/20040107.pdf

[ShadowTemplar]

Welcome to the Forums... And to the Chambers. Yours is an interesting topic. I'll probably get back to it once I've read the articles you posted.

 

- ST

[Ray Jones]

My question would be: is the free trade in general a/the "problem" or the way it is "done"?

[toms]

I have to admit my eyes glazed over about half way into that article.

 

My (therefore) uninformed thoughts are as follows:

 

Free Trade has always struck me as a very odd and confused issue. Not only that, but the sides strike me as odd too.

 

Anti-globalisation protesters seem to encompass both those who want countries to be protectionist and insular, and those that want fairer trade for the third world.

The Pro-free trade side seems to include a lot of capitalist 1st world people and companies who i would have thought have a lot to loose if real free-trade ever happens.

 

I think what alot of people want, from a moral not financial point of view, is FAIR TRADE -

The abolition of the unfair tariffs, taxes, blockades and other tactics that a lot of other unscrupulous methods that western governments and business use to ensure that 99% of the profit never reaches the poor countries who provide a lot of the manpower and resources.

 

Whether any such unfettered, even marketplace wouldn't cause the total breakdown of western economies is another matter.

 

I suspect this is why so many western countries are supposedly pro "free trade", cos they fear it and want to control its development... not let others form it.

 

---------

 

But the way i see it the world is in for a bit of a shake up.

The lives of everyone in the west have improved dramatically over the last 50 years or so... driven by our consumer attitudes... and everyone in the west has expectations of minimum standards of living (tv, refridgerator, car, etc..) which we could never of had before.

 

The foundations our new consumer lifestyle is based on are the fact that the underclass providing cheap labour has been shifted abroad.

 

But the world has shrunk, and people in third world countries are looking at our lifestyle and wanting the same things.

 

But if they get free trade, the profits of their work, decent pay and a similar lifestyle then who is going to be left to produce everything? YOu end up with an upside down pryamid with nothing at the bottom to support it.

 

SO, while free trade is probably inevitable in the global economy in which we now live, and is probably morally the way to go... the ones who are most likely to loose out are the ones who have it all right now. Us.

 

A reasonable parralel would be south africa. Where the minority of whites lived a nice life supported by the majority of poor blacks. (who were held down by artificial restrictions).

 

Then, once those artifical restrictions were removed the quality of life of some of the newly equal blacks increased dramatically... but there obviously wasn't enough to go around.

 

So you now have a situation where a small proportion of boths blacks and whites have a nice standard of living... but a number of the previously protected whites have discovered themselves destitute. (and a number of blacks have discovered that they didn't get the wonderful lives they hoped for)

[ShadowTemplar]

I think that Toms is on to something very fundamental: The people of the 1st world have to accept a significant reduction in material wealth. And that really is that. The problem is, of course, that nobody wants to break this news (except for communists and other moderately delusional people who aren't taken seriously anyway).

 

But, there is another side of the issue as well. If the 1st world is to give up some of the wealth, it is only reasonable to expect third-world countries to start making and practising population growth control policies. Most 3rd world governments are in denial about this fact (as are some *coughbushandthepopecough* 1st world governments). And some actually view it as beneficial to ignore it.

 

OK, I'm tired and I'm going to go home...

 

CU l8r