Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
There are many arguments both for and against both free trade and protectionism. There are some that say that free trade should rule the day and that the market can regulate itself. There are others that suggest that the market is an immoral mess and/or that countries should be allowed to protect their national and economic interests if and when it becomes necessary. This report will talk about the pros and cons of each thought process and offer an overall opinion at the end. While free trade is generally the better course of action to follow, there are times and situations where at least some elements of protectionism are not beyond the pale.Generally speaking, free trade is when trade is allowed to happen in an unfettered way. Rather than goods being blocked from crossing borders in the form of exports or imports, free trade is all about letting people sell what they wish across borders without penalty or bans on items that are generally legal and without restriction when they are not crossing international lines. On the other end of the spectrum would be protectionism. While many economists and pro-trade people view this as a "bad word," there are times and situations...
Indeed, there are some times where it is perhaps necessary or advisable. Indeed, there are many that say that free trade, for all of its benefits, tends to have hidden or obscured harm that is brought to bear on people who are just trying to get by.
The main reason protectionism is employed is to protect national jobs and industries. For example, an oil-producing nation will often impose heavy restrictions on imports of oil so as to protect local suppliers. The side effect this commonly has, and indeed a main complaint that people have about protectionism, is that this limits supply and this usually keeps prices up and higher than they technically have to be if supplies were not restricted. However, the complaints about free trade often involve the invoking of the term "race to the bottom" in that many poorer and developing countries will gladly take on low-paying jobs. However, many suggest that this only hurts these countries in the long run. Beyond that, economies that are heavily dependent on exports often flounder and suffer greatly when world economic conditions go south.
As with many…
However, each stakeholder has its own interests at heart. Those interests in the long-run may be served by freer trade, but in the short-run they are driven more by political considerations. Works Cited Markheim, Daniella & Rield, Brian M. (2007) Farm Subsidies, Free Trade and the Doha Round. The Heritage Foundation. Retrieved December 11, 2008 at http://www.heritage.org/RESEARCH/BUDGET/wm1337.cfm Chang, Ha-Joon. (2007). Protectionism...the Truth on a $10 Bill. The Independent. Retrieved December 11, 2008
Protectionism and Free Trade Principles of Economics: A Discussion on Protectionism and Trade Liberalization Rich nations make the rules. This comes as no surprise: Since rich people have significant power in their own nations it is to be expected that the rich nations should have analogous power in the world system. Just as surely as rich nations hold the balance of power in the world, it is just as certain that when they
Protectionism and Free Trade Principles of Economics: A Discussion on Protectionism and Trade Liberalization In the convoluted world of discussion over the future of developing countries, rich nations seem to make all the decisions, regardless of whether they benefit or harm the former group, or so it seems. This supposition is debated heatedly by those concerned and by external actors, especially when it comes to deciding whether trade liberalization is the right modality
Also, the importation of technology from abroad exposes consumers and producers alike to the innovative use of vehicles, such as hybrid technology, that domestic producers can implement even better than the original manufacturer. Innovation is the ultimate driver of new sales and the creator of new markets and new markets means more jobs for workers. Beginning a trade war by setting tariffs or limiting imports through quotas ultimately creates waste
In 1815, the Corn Law attempted to create a legislative framework that would regulate the import of corn on the British market. The import of corn was initially used as an instrument to complete the supply of corn in those seasons when production was law. At the same time, import would have allowed for prices to remain low and affordable for the large part of the population. The problem, as
Yet it has been reviled by human rights associations that blame free trade for a dangerous degrading of workers' rights and its damaging effects on the surroundings. The benefits of free trade can hide its unintentional forces. But actions to protect against its troubles elevate the apprehension of protectionism (Chmielewski, 2011). Protectionism is the practice of countries to guard domestic industries and their employees by providing subsidies for their manufacture