A Case For Economic Protectionism

Ecuador recently imposed trade restrictions that putexploitation is more covert and hidden under the
tariffs on certain imports. The cry has gone out thatmantra of free trade. We are all too familiar with the
this is "protectionism" and hinders free trade.mass exodus of U.S. manufacturing and service
Economists around the world have become fearfulsector jobs to Asia and Mexico. This was done
that such actions may be followed by other nationsbecause wages in those nations were pennies a day
as a tool to boost sagging national economies. Theand business regulations almost non-existent. In the
questions to be asked are what are so bad aboutabsence of tariffs, the products are then sent back
some form of protectionism? Is economicto the base country at prices far below those of
globalization really that great? Do such actions reallylocal firms. Clearly, the globalized world economy is
hurt a free market economy?under the control of the few.
Ecuador uses the dollar as its currency. With ourSo, back to Ecuador. With trade restrictions, local
economy in the dumps, there is little wonder that afarmers are doing better. Local manufacturers are
nation like Ecuador would have concerns. Accordingdoing better and overall, locally based firms are
to some in Ecuador, the tariffs, while slowing importsgrowing. Who is hurt? Those companies that exploit
and hurting those companies that rely upon foreignforeign workers and undercut local trade. In a
goods; the tariffs have been a boon to locally basedcapitalist economic system, trade barriers are touted
firms. Is this a bad thing? Is it wrong not to dependas an anathema. Nations that tax imports are called
on foreign imports to meet local economic demands?the dirty word, 'protectionists.' Until such time as
We hear a lot of talk about free trade. But how freethere are universal labor laws, fair wages, uniform
are the global markets? In a perfect world, firmsbusiness regulations and monitoring and equitable
producing products should be able to sell theiraccess to labor and resources, the so called 'free
products anywhere without fear of trade restrictions.market' system is simply not free at all. If a nation
The theory being that those with the best producthas the capacity and the resources to produce
for the best price gets the sale. However, the worldproducts locally, why should their businesses be
markets are far from free. While many products inundercut by unscrupulous and foreign corporate
the U.S. come from China, they are not from Chinesegiants? Certainly, if a product cannot be produced
companies which are paying their employees decentlocally, markets to import such products should be
wages. They are often from American companiesfree and open. Business and labor, competing freely
who pay the Chinese workers dirt cheap wages. Weand on equitable terms is a worthy goal. But, I do not
are all familiar with sweat shops and child labor abusewant my clothing produced in child sweat shops. I do
in foreign nations. Are these the features of a freenot want most of my food imported from foreign
economy?nations that have no environmental regulations. I
In colonial days the economic system was calledhave no issue with bananas from Panama, we can't
mercantilism. Mother countries exploited their coloniesgrow them here. I have no problem with hand
for their raw materials and then made the coloniespainted dishware that is reflective of a foreign
buy finished goods from them. Next cameculture. I have no problem with bamboo products
imperialism, where powerful nations extended thefrom China. The point is, to me, globalization should
spheres of economic influence and once again,not be just a new name for imperialism. It should be
controlled the businesses and markets of othera system that allows nations to freely exchange
nations. Now we call it globalization, whereproducts that are best produced by each nation
mega-corporations exploit the economies of thirdunder a truly free set of rules and regulations.
world nations. In both mercantilism and imperialism,Protectionism may not be all that bad after all and it
the systems were overtly run by the exploitingjust might bring home jobs that never should have
country's governments. In globalization, support forleft.