RE: Debate Forum - Week 10 - Trade Agreements
I think the real intent behind the large trade agreements is really to create an organized framework to regulate exchange of goods and services among member countries. However, the next question now becomes who really benefit from these trade agreements. The government surely benefits from these trade agreements but not the state as a whole. With these trade agreements, it is easier for the government to regulate trade between member countries and create industry-specific policies as well as protect the government's interest. These trade agreements can also be used by the government to assert to the people that they are doing their jobs in the government and even make unrealistic propaganda to instill to the people's minds that the government is doing everything in its power to establish a balanced economy that can be beneficial to all. Surely, multi-national corporations (MNCs) also benefit from these trade agreements because they can freely move among boundaries and exploit resources that would best serve their interests. Not to mention MNCs always have a voice in the government so their interests are always considered in this kind of agreements that governments may enter into.
Hence, my take is trade agreements are not made to actually serve the people. They are just imperfect institutions created by the government that may or may not serve the people. They may serve the people in some instances in a way that goods or services coming from member countries with a competitive prices may become accessible. However, these trade agreements can become harmful institutions that may pave the way for unfair exploits of resources that may lead to more disastrous results to the people. So long as the government create policies with arbitrary minds and with interests other than thinking of the effects that it may create to its people and with interests of member countries warring against each other lead by not so brilliant and insincere leaders, these trade agreements will never uphold and serve majority of the people's interest.
Thank you for this contest @wwf, I'm so loving it. :)
Beautiful & well versed answer. I do agree with you on this phase specifically as you mentioned these agreements are helpful for the governments than members of the countries @ailenepm
Nice response. I'm surprised that nobody picked up on this yet. If the point of free trade agreements is to remove barriers to trade, where did the barriers come from to begin with? Our governments. So why would we enter into even more and more complex agreements when the solution is as simple as getting the governments out of the way? What are your thoughts on that?
Definitely, the real intent of free trade is not to remove the barriers to trade because so long as the government is there there will always be barriers like the tariff, trade quota, import license and the likes. Indeed the question is why not just remove the governments out of the way rather than create complex agreements. I think government just cannot afford to do that because it is from these barriers that they gain a lot. Removing trade barriers can actually have more negative effects to richer countries than the poorer ones and I really believe that trade agreements also reflect power struggle among member countries where the richer ones always win. Trade agreements is more of like business deals among governments and no government would want to abandon a hold on those businesses just yet and I cannot think of any single entity that can oust government from interfering with trade except the people. However, the people of different countries have varied interests as well some want a free movement of goods while some want to protect the local goods so it is really impossible to oust the government from interfering with trade. But, I really believe that in a real free trade, most people can actually benefit from it. I do not believe that free trade can lead to concerns on dumping of goods to one country, supply and demand can actually correct such concerns.
Thank you for coming up with a mind-boggling follow up question. :)
I suspect that the corporations are actually holding the governments hostage as they have their own representatives in key positions of power now. As such, that allows the corporations to start dictating policy and they are forcing governments to put these agreements into place. Governments were looking after the best interests of the people (questionable) but now that has been usurped by greed, power and corruption. Treason would be a good term to use. I think that the governments could find themselves being phased out and powerless by the time this is over. In the end, the people are still confronted with the reality of this situation and again, it is only the people that can do anything about it.
You are welcome about the mind-boggling follow up question. :) lol. I love being a moderator for these debates. hehehe