🏷️ LIMITED TIME OFFER: GET 20% OFF GRADE+ YEARLY SUBSCRIPTION →
Log in
Economics
1
answer
0
watching
85
views
14 Mar 2018

Your assignment for this week is to comment briefly on the Pros and Cons of international trade. In economics we say that there is no such thing as a free lunch. Everything in life has a cost, so international trade, like anything else, has a cost associated with it. Please comment on the pros and cons of international trade. Who benefits? Who loses?

Watch
1
answer
0
watching
85
views

For unlimited access to Homework Help, a Homework+ subscription is required.

Collen Von
Collen VonLv2
16 Mar 2018

Unlock all answers

Get 1 free homework help answer.
Already have an account? Log in
Share

Related textbook solutions

Principles of Economics
2nd Edition, 2017
Openstax
ISBN: 9781947172364
Principles of Macroeconomics
2 Edition,
Openstax
ISBN: 9781947172388
Principles of Microeconomics
2 Edition,
Openstax
ISBN: 9781947172340

Related questions

Fill in the blanks. In case you get stuck, I’ve provided a list of all the missing words in alphabetical order at the end of the question. According to David Ricardo’s model, the pattern of trade between nations is determined by the distribution of ______________________ advantage. Unlike the ______________________ advantages described by Smith, Ricardo’s explanation allows for trade between partners in which one nation has superior ______________________ in the manufacture of all goods. That’s because Ricardo’s principle rests on the economic concept of ______________________ (defined as the amount of good Y that must be sacrificed when the nation produces a unit of good X) which can never be concentrated in just one nation. The model is usually specified with barter-style trade, meaning that we use ______________________ rather than ______________________ prices for the tradable goods. The price of each good on international markets must be higher than ______________________ in the exporting countries and lower than ______________________ in the importing countries. Although all parties can benefit from trade, there is no reason to think that they benefit equally. The ______________________ are derived from the difference between the opportunity costs of production in each nation and then distributed between participating nations according to the market price. As the price of a nation’s ______________________ good rises, it receives a larger share of the gains from trade, and we say that its ______________________ are appreciating. However, nations that ______________________ this good will receive a smaller share of the benefits from trade.

Absolute

Comparative

Export

Gains from trade

Import

Max WTP

Min WTA

Money

Opportunity cost

Productivity

Relative

Terms of trade

Comment this discuss in few paragraph ?

Cultural Differences and Ethical Standards

Should you pay the 10 percent commission? Justify your response.

The type of country in which this scenario takes place. As Hill (2009) points out there are high and low context countries. Asian, Latin American, and Middle Eastern countries are high context countries where the message must be interpreted based on not only what was said, but the person's social status, and other cultural indicators present (Hill, 2009). In low context countries, what is said is the message and there is no need for further interpretations (Hill, 2009). Therefore, it would depend on where this interaction is occurring and who is asking for the commission (status, rank, business title, etc). These commissions may be a normal part of doing business in a certain region of the country. However, there are strict laws governing bribes (Mestre, 2015) and if I suspected that this commission was a bribe for business or personal advantage, then I would not pay the commission. This would eventually have a detrimental effect on my business and go against my ethics.

Does it make a difference if your competitors routinely pay such commissions? Explain why this may or may not have an impact on your decision.

As Mestre (2015) explains, bribes are so wide spread that the fundamental alter the business landscape in certain markets. As he states, there is a, "barrage of extortionate demands for bribes in foreign markets (p.2)." Unfortunately, bribes reward the corrupt and not eh efficient which a free market should award the most competitive and efficient company (Mestre, 2015). So these types of "commissions" are frequent around the world and should be calculated in to a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) analysis when deciding to enter a certain foreign market. A company needs to decide what risks they are willing to take to enter into a new market. Will they pay bribes furthering the decline of a market and risk large legal penalties? Or will they not pay the bribes knowing that this will make it harder for them to do business in that market?

Do you think there should be more or fewer attempt to regulate international ethics? Why? Justify your answer using the research you have done in preparation for this assignment.

The United Nations (UN) and the World Trade Organization (WTO) both have areas that monitor and regulate ethics (websites, ND). Additionally, the United States and other countries have, for example, anti-bribery laws that penalize both the bribe giver and taker (Mestre, 2015). Given all of the regulation, there is still wide spread corruption in the global marketplace (Mestre, 2015). Additionally, new technologies far exceed the pace of legislating new laws and policies (Herther, 2018). Therefore, it seems like a combination of corporate ethic policies, government intervention, and international trade agreements can help to combat unethical behavior in international business. It is important to have multiple areas of regulation as ethical behavior varies by country. For example, what Americans consider unethical may not be unethical in another country.

The difference between a free trade area and a customs union is, in brief, that the first is politically straightforward but an administrative headache, while the second is just the opposite.

Consider first the case of a customs union. Once such a union is established, tariff administration is relatively easy: Goods must pay tariffs when they cross the border of the union, but from then on can be shipped freely between countries. A cargo that is unloaded at Marseilles or Rotterdam must pay duties there, but will not face any additional charges if it then goes by truck to Munich.

To make this simple system work, however, the countries must agree on tariff rates: The duty must be the same whether the cargo is unloaded at Marseilles, Rotterdam, or for that matter Hamburg because otherwise, importers would choose the point of entry that minimized their fees. So a customs union requires that Germany, France, the Netherlands, and all the other countries agree to charge the same tariffs. This is not easily done: Countries are, in effect, ceding part of their sovereignty to a supranational entity, the European Union.

This has been possible in Europe for a variety of reasons, including the belief that economic unity would help cement the post-war political alliance between European democracies.

But elsewhere these conditions are lacking. The three nations that formed NAFTA would find it very difficult to cede control over tariffs to any supranational body; if nothing else, it would be hard to devise an arrangement that would give due weight to U.S. interests without effectively allowing the United States to dictate trade policy to Canada and Mexico. NAFTA, therefore, while it permits Mexican goods to enter the United States without tariffs and vice versa, does not require that Mexico and the United States adopt a common external tariff on goods they import from other countries.

This, however, raises a different problem. Under NAFTA, a shirt made by Mexican workers can be brought into the United States freely. But suppose that the United States wants to maintain high tariffs on shirts imported from other countries, while Mexico does not impose similar tariffs. What is to prevent someone from shipping a shirt from, say, Bangladesh to Mexico, then putting it on a truck bound for Chicago?

The answer is that even though the United States and Mexico may have free trade, goods shipped from Mexico to the United States must still pass through a customs inspection. And they can enter the United States without duty only if they have documents providing that they are in fact Mexican goods, not trans-shipped imports from third countries.

But what is a Mexican shirt? If a shirt comes from Bangladesh, but Mexicans sew on the buttons, does that make it Mexican? Probably not. But if everything except the button were made in Mexico, it probably should be considered Mexican. The point is that administering a free trade area that is not a customs union requires not only that the countries continue to check goods at the border, but that they specify an elaborate set of “rules of origin” that determine whether a good is eligible to cross the border without paying a tariff.

As a result, free trade agreements like NAFTA impose a large burden of paperwork, which may be a significant obstacle to trade even when such trade is in principle free.

Question:

1. From this case, what is the main difference between a free-trade area and a customs union?

2. Why are rules of origin needed for a free-trade area? How might they be protectionist?

Related Documents

ECON 110 Chapter Notes - Chapter 34: Export Restriction, Deadweight Loss, Customs War
pinkantelope920
ECON 110 Chapter Notes - Chapter 34: National Treatment, Market Power, Comparative Advantage
ultramarinemole905
ECO100Y5 Chapter Notes - Chapter 34: Asteroid Family, Trade Diversion, Trade Creation
aquamarinemallard749

Weekly leaderboard

Home
Homework Help 3,900,000
Economics 400,000
Start filling in the gaps now
Log in