Economic Justification of Increased International Trade

There has been much debate about the issue of freeanother market with a good that is cheaper than the
trade and its effects on the economy. Without acountry can produce domestically, in order to try and
doubt it has both positives and its negatives, but itdrive domestic producers out of business and then
seems that many people trying to take a side on thisraise prices once their competition is eliminated. This is
issue are doing so without being very well informeda tricky situation because the affects of this are
as to the economics behind international trade. Thisclearly negative in the long-run so we need to be
article is an attempt to discuss some of the commoncareful not to let this happen, but we should not let
misconceptions about free trade and explain why fivethe fear of foreign competition driving domestic
of the main arguments that anti-foreign tradeproducers out of business keep us from importing
activists stand behind don't hold true. The majority offoreign goods. "Dumping" is illegal in the United States
the voting public does seem to understand theand if there is any of it occurring, domestic producers
economics behind international trade and ignorantlywill be able to spot it and put an end to it before it
form their biases against free trade. It's time thatbecomes a problem. They know how much it costs
they understand what they're talking about beforeto produce their good, and if their competition is
they take a side on the issue.More...selling items at obscenely low prices they will notice
The anti-free trade arguments that are mostand investigate their operations.
common are:Free trade hurts the environment
* Free trade steals jobs away from the U.S.Since many nations have environmental standards
* We don't want our money leaving the countrythat are not as strict as the United States', people
* It encourages labor exploitationbelieve that U.S. firms are going abroad to take
* Other nations are"dumping" in the U.S. and notadvantage of these lax standards and save money
buying our importsby not having to worry about the effects of their
* Free trade hurts the environmentproduction processes on the environment. Well it is
Free trade steals jobs away from the U.S.true that many nations has lower standards than the
People complain about offshoring and how theU.S., but the firms from the U.S. in those nations
amount of jobs that domestic companies haveconsistently exceed the regulations of their host
moved overseas is hurting the economy. First of all,economies.
lets make sure that it is actually offshoring that isIt's clearly not in a U.S firm's best interest to exploit
causing companies downsize their employee base inforeign labor or environmental standards. Just
the U.S. Lets look at manufacturing goods (MFG) as abecause there is moral hazard for U.S. firms in these
whole, where in the U.S., the amount of employees incountries doesn't mean that they will actually try to
this industry is decreasing. People argue that this is toget away with exploiting foreign countries because
be blamed on trade, but you need to examine thethe cost of being caught doing so will still have many
relative percent changers in other industries to reallynegative effects on a firm.
determine what's going on here. Technology and____________
Service industries are growing far more rapidly thanThis anti-foreign bias has somehow swept common
the manufacturing industry is shrinking. This meansbelief and convinced the common non-economist
that more jobs are opening up in these sectors whichpublic that engaging in trade with foreigners has a
are higher paying, better jobs than the outsourcednegative affect on domestic producers. On the other
industrial jobs being lost. Another component of thishand, people who have a background in economics
is that the technological advancement of the Unitedunderstand that the positive affects of free trade
States is making production processes more efficientdrastically outweigh the negative ones, and thus,
and cutting down the need for manual labor.support and encourage increased international trade.
Importing goods will cause the domestic producers ofSo what is it that has caused the general
those goods and their employees to lose out onnon-economist public to believe that free trade is a
income that they would have received if there werebad thing? A well crafted survey conducted by
trade restrictions to protect domestic producers. It isMichael Hiscox provides a little insight as to why this
also true that keeping jobs in the United States isanti-foreign bias is so prevalent. Everyone in his
important, but it is more important that we allocatesample was asked "Do you favor or oppose
our resources to the best use possible. If someoneincreasing trade with other nations?" and "Is that
can produce same or better quality coffee than usstrongly favor (oppose) or somewhat favor
for less, why wouldn't we buy their coffee and do(oppose)?," combined with one of the following
something more productive with our resources thatintroductions:
we were using to produce coffee? In other words, if* Pro-Trade Intro: Many people believe that increasing
a country has a comparative advantage in somethingtrade with other nations creates jobs and allows
let them produce it and we'll buy it from them whileAmericans to buy more types of goods at lower
we specialize in producing something else that weprices.
have a comparative advantage in that they can buy* Anti-Trade Intro: Many people believe that
from us. In this situation both countries will benefitincreasing trade with other nations leads to job losses
from free trade and experience greater consumptionand exposes American producers to unfair
possibilities.competition.
We don't want our money leaving the country* Both Intros: Many people believe that increasing
When looking at the formula for GDP, (GDP =trade with other nations creates jobs and allows
Consumption (C) + Investment (I) + GovernmentAmericans to buy more types of goods at lower
Spending (G) + (Exports- Imports) (M-X)), thisprices. Others believe that increasing trade with other
argument makes sense. If we are importing morenations leads to job losses and exposes American
than we're exporting then we're experiencing a tradeproducers to unfair competition.
deficit and lowering our GDP. Lower GDP means* No Intro
we're worse off right? Well yes... and no. Trying toThe results:
keep money in the country should not be a priority.1. The Pro-Trade Intro had no effect; people who
The reason that a country tries to have a highheard it were no more supportive of free trade than
amount of exports is not because the money frompeople who had No Intro.
those exports puts money into the economy, but2. Hearing either the Anti-Trade Intro OR Both Intros
because that money made on exports is what fuelssharply reduced support for free trade. The
domestic production. If domestic producers couldn'tAnti-Trade Intro reduced support by 17
export their goods then they would be hurt, thuspercentage-points; Both Intros reduced support by
hurting the economy as a whole. If the increased19 percentage-points!
revenues for domestic producers is spent onThese results suggest that people without a
importing cheaper foreign goods consumers canbackground in economics, in a free debate, will favor
benefit greatly. The way to promote exports is notprotectionism. In other words, free debate favors
to try to limit imports, but is to be more efficient atprotectionism. With voices from both sides of this
producing things than other countries are and toissue trying to turn favor towards their stance, the
exploit these advantages by providing them withvast majority of the non-economist public have been
goods at a lower cost than they can produce them.persuaded that free trade is a bad thing for the
Free trade encourages labor exploitationeconomy. The reason that this anti-foreign bias has
This argument is founded in the belief that the U.S.swept the nation is only because it is easier to see
firms offshore their production processes to savethe local appliance store going out of business
money, but in doing so force low-skilled workers inbecause a Wal-Mart came into town than it is to
that country to be subject to inhumane workingmeasure the increased producer surplus provided by
conditions and prevent them from ever getting outthat Wal-Mart to all of its customers. It is true that
of poverty. The harsh truth of the matter is thatWal-Mart makes it harder for some other local
these low-paying jobs and harsh working conditionsbusinesses to turn a profit because they simply can
are actually the providing thousands of theirsell things at a lower price than smaller local
employees to be able to feed and clothe themselves.businesses, and it does turn out that many of the
Trying to reduce imports from nations like these orproducts available at Wal-Mart are foreign made.
prevent offshoring to less developed countriesWhat is not taken into account is how much money
actually hurts these nations. The U.S. is doing what itpeople are saving by shopping at Wal-Mart, and when
can to help prevent abusive child labor in foreignyou look at these numbers you will see that the
countries. They pay a wage premium of around 10 -positive affects of having a place like Wal-Mart to
20% more than employers in their host countries,shop vastly outweigh the negatives.
and the U.S. is the #1 contributor to many different“What is prudence in the conduct of every
efforts to put an end to child labor and unacceptableprivate family, can scarce be folly in a great kingdom.
working conditions.If a foreign country can supply us with a commodity
Other nations are"dumping" in the U.S. and not buyingcheaper than we ourselves can make it, better buy it
our importsof them with some part of the produce of our own
"Dumping" is when other countries try to floodindustry.