I say it isn't. I know some will disagree, but I think it is increasing the wealth gap and is definitly diminishing good paying blue collar jobs in first world countries. one can point out it provides cheaper products, and i agree it does, but at the cost of good paying jobs. In the end it only serves to drive wealth further upward. Ross Perot was right on this issue.
Opinions?
__________________ There are more humans in the world than rats.
It creates better jobs for the upper middle class. Face it. In the end, you're going to have to communicate or do something. If everyone is a performer for a living, perhaps free trade would be better.. In the end, you have jobs for engineers mainly it seems. Then there's the physical labor jobs that don't pay much and take no skill.
It isn't. Protectionism/Fair Trade is the only truly equitable solution.
__________________ Land of the free, home of the brave...
Do you think we will ever be saved?
In this land of dreams find myself sober...
Wonder when will it'll all be over...
Living in a void when the void grows colder...
Wonder when it'll all be over?
Will you be laughing when it's over?
Please justify working conditions and wages of global workers being turned into a race to the bottom and the very existence of the WTO.
__________________ Land of the free, home of the brave...
Do you think we will ever be saved?
In this land of dreams find myself sober...
Wonder when will it'll all be over...
Living in a void when the void grows colder...
Wonder when it'll all be over?
Will you be laughing when it's over?
Mercantilism is only going to increase the wealth gap between 'first world' and 'third world' countries. Mercantilism is basically protecting your own economy by not importing foreign goods. Eventually, down the line the only country that would be able to completely provide for itself in food would be France. Then you have the problem of fuels and other such raw materials which simply can't be created or processed in many countries. It would destroy Africa and parts of South America and Asia within years, and most of the countries in the Western world within decades.
This is of course in a hypothetical situation in which every country in the world would adopt mercantilism.
I don't see how free trade is good for "all parties involved". Lou Dobbs was right..."free reade is nothing more than a euphanism for scouring the globe for the cheapest labor possible".
__________________ There are more humans in the world than rats.
It's all about making money if people are willing to work for cheaper labor in those countries than I don't see how you are going to blame free trade for it.
People in those countries that work for low playing corporation didn't have many other options before and it's not like they are forced into working there. Exploitation happens everywhere.
People in those countries see working for the cheap labor is better than nothing.
Like I said it's not that free trade doesn't have issues but the benefits are greater if the countries have an advantage in producing certain goods or services.
Your blaming free trade for issues which can be resolved by other means like government regulations etc.
If it affects the trade itself like tariff etc so if it affects trade market. You can still have internal regulation to help condition of workers. Regulation was a not the correct word I meant more like better laws etc
Than what's the point of outsourcing if they can't profit from it? Demand for work is to high in developing counties to make this feasible.
Um, exactly... why should we have an obligation to provide work for developing countries, while leaving high unemployment in our own. It baffles me that you apparently consider this a good thing.
KMC Community Forums
May 31st, 2011 12:15 AM
