Debate Digest: Teacher-student friendships on Facebook, Law school, Balanced budget amendment, US debt ceiling deal.
Debate: Protectionism
From Debatepedia
Revision as of 16:03, 21 July 2009 (edit) Lenkahabetinova (Talk | contribs) (internal link) ← Previous diff |
Revision as of 20:17, 1 October 2009 (edit) Lenkahabetinova (Talk | contribs) (corrections) Next diff → |
||
Line 110: | Line 110: | ||
|- | |- | ||
|colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| | |colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| | ||
- | ==Related pages on Debatepedia== | + | ==See also== |
*[[Debate: Free trade]] | *[[Debate: Free trade]] | ||
== External links == | == External links == | ||
Line 119: | Line 119: | ||
* [http://www.ecdel.org.au/whatsnew/2003/steel.htm WTO ruling on USA measures to safeguard steel industry] | * [http://www.ecdel.org.au/whatsnew/2003/steel.htm WTO ruling on USA measures to safeguard steel industry] | ||
* [http://www.uswa.org/ United Steelworkers of America] | * [http://www.uswa.org/ United Steelworkers of America] | ||
- | * [ New Internationalisthttp://www.newint.org/] | + | * [http://www.newint.org/ New Internationalist] |
== Books == | == Books == |
Revision as of 20:17, 1 October 2009
Should governments favor their own industries by protectionist measures? |
Government duty - Does a government have the duty to protect its citizens from foreign competition and loss? Or, does it have an international responsibility as well? | |
YesThe first duty of every government is to protect its own citizens: A duty of care is owed to those whose economic prosperity depends upon industrial production. If outsourcing threatens the prosperity of a citizenry, a government should oppose it. |
NoWhile a regime’s primary duty of care is to its own people, prosperity for its own citizens is enhanced by trade liberalization (see below): . |
Anti-dumping measures - Are anti-dumping measures a good protectionist tool? | |
YesAnti-dumping measures (which can be tried at law) are more carefully targeted measures than blunt tariffs and quotas. |
NoAnti-dumping retaliation is as unnecessary and economically inefficient as any form of protectionism, and would rarely pass domestic antitrust legislation. |
During recession - Should protectionism be advanced in times of depression? | |
YesIn times of recession there is pressure to protect declining industries. Some localities, or countries, are dependent on a single source of manufacturing or agriculture, and allowing the free market to take its course would prolong or deepen an economic depression and drive huge numbers of people out of work. |
NoProtectionism worsens depressions by cushioning firms from their effects, preventing sufficient diversification of sources of national income, and discouraging retraining to meet the needs of the future. The Depression of the 1930s was in fact worsened by restrictions placed on free trade (e.g. the USA’s Hawley-Smoot measures), as protectionism spiraled downwards into increasing retaliation. |
Subsidizing companies abroad - Should government's subsidize companies that go into developing countries? | |
YesDeveloping countries need extra help in building a competitive economy: short-term subsidies to foreign companies are the early stages of import-substitution and economic independence. It is better that governments offer firms subsidies than try to cut corners on labour standards. |
NoThere is a difference between encouragement of foreign industry into a country, and protection of domestic suppliers. Competition will not merely be over the size of national subsidies, but also on wage costs and looser environmental and safety regulations. |
Trade blocs - Should developing countries protect themselves from trade blocs? Would they be better off relying on bilateral trade deals? | |
YesMany developing economies hit a glass ceiling as they attempt to stabilize their economies, as they are unable to diversify into different markets. Maintaining their former colonial relationships is the only way for them to defend themselves against large trading blocs. |
NoCompanies in developing economies often suffer from poor stockmarket flexibility and political uncertainty, as a capitalist mentality needs time to develop. The solution is not more protection, but for groups such as the EU to dissolve their barriers to trade. |
Essential goods - Should governments protect essential goods from the threat of foreign competition or instability? | |
YesIt is sensible for governments to protect domestic supplies of vital goods, such as oil, food and steel, from the political vicissitudes of world cartels; which is part of foreign policy and not pure economics. To prevent this is to invade national sovereignty. |
NoWorldwide cartels of producers have recently weakened, especially for agricultural goods. For governments to engage in protectionism merely against international cartels is pure hypocrisy; national security will never be gained by the chimera of economic self-sufficiency. |
Is protectionism more efficient than free trade? | |
Yes |
No |
See alsoExternal links
Books
|