Did you ever consider that "globalization" and economics could bring peace to the world?
"Trade Freedom: How Imports Support U.S. Jobs"
By Derek Scissors, Ph.D., Charlotte Espinoza and Ambassador Terry Miller
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/09/trade-freedom-how-imports-support-us-jobs
"Abstract: It is a common misperception that importing goods to America comes at the cost of American jobs. In fact, imports contribute to job creation on a large scale. The increased economic activity associated with every stage of the import process helps support millions of jobs in the U.S. This Heritage Foundation analysis shows that over half a million American jobs are supported by imports of clothes and toys from China alone. These jobs are in fields such as transportation, wholesale, retail, construction, and finance. Understanding the positive role of imports with respect to jobs, in addition to their other benefits, is critical to adopting the correct trade policy and thus to bolstering the economy. "
"Tariff Reform Needed to Boost the U.S. Economy"
By Bryan Riley
"Congress routinely makes targeted, short-term tariff cuts through “miscellaneous tariff bills.” While conventional wisdom is that unilateral tariff cuts are politically impossible, these bills show that it is possible to reduce tariffs. Proponents of such tariff cuts argue that the cuts support U.S. jobs; critics argue that the economic value of miscellaneous cuts is modest, and that the process is open to abuse. While it is healthy to discuss ways to maximize the benefits provided by miscellaneous tariff bills, the United States would see the most economic benefit from across-the-board tariff reform. The best possible reform would be for the U.S. Congress to eliminate all remaining import tariffs and quotas."
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/04/tariff-reform-needed-to-boost-the-us-economy
It is useful to actually THINK when determining whether international trade is taking jobs from America, or if "globalization" is bad for America.
Think.
Here is the thing you should think about . . . from "The Week" quoting George Will, Washington Post: "Protectionism’s misguided nostalgia"
"Trade protectionists want “to make America great again by making it 1953 again,” said George Will. That’s when manufacturing’s share of the labor force peaked at 30 percent. But the decline in factory jobs that followed “was not caused by imports from today’s designated villain, China, which was then a peasant society.” In reality, it was the return of competition from industrial nations devastated by World War II, combined with rapid technological advances. The latter trend continues today. Of the 5.6 million manufacturing jobs lost in the 2000s, trade accounted for only 13 percent; productivity improvements from new tech accounted for more than 85 percent. Efforts to protect workers by pricing imports out of the market through tariffs also tend to backfire, often by dramatically raising prices for consumers. In the 1980s, Ronald Reagan’s limits on Japanese auto imports helped create 44,000 U.S. jobs, but “the cost to consumers was $8.5 billion in higher prices, or $193,000 per job, six times the average annual pay of a U.S. autoworker.” Similarly, President Obama’s tariffs on Chinese tires saved 1,000 Americans’ jobs, but at a cost of $900,000 per job, “paid by American purchasers of vehicles and tires.” We’ve tried these interventions before. But for protectionism’s fans, “there is no Everest of evidence too large to be ignored.”
If we want to say we count more jobs, and are willing to do so at any cost, with numbers such as George Will describes, drop the façade. Just write checks to the people we want to call "employed," and give them some work to do, like rebuilding America's infrastructure.
The fact is that globalization is good for America and good for anyone who wants the economic benefits in addition to less war, and more peace in the world, as long as power is shared and not corrupted.
"The theory of comparative advantage states that if countries specialise in producing goods where they have a lower opportunity cost – then there will be an increase in economic welfare. Note this is different to absolute advantage which looks at the monetary cost of producing a good." Nov 28, 2012
Try to UNDERSTAND the economic complexities BEFORE saying sh*t Mr Tweety Twump, President-elect. Try READING the FACTS.
"Definition of comparative advantage"
Tejvan Pettinger November 28, 2012
http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/glossary/comparative-advantage/
I tried to explain "CA" in a simpler cartoon a few months ago, a tall man picks apples, a shorter man gathers strawberries. Now it is time for the college class definition PowerPoint slide you see above.
"glob·al·i·za·tion"
ˌɡlÅbÉ™ləˈzÄSHÉ™n,ˌɡlÅbəˌlīˈzÄSHÉ™n/
noun
noun: globalization; plural noun: globalizations; noun: globalisation; plural noun: globalisations
the process by which businesses or other organizations develop international influence or start operating on an international scale.
"fears about the increasing globalization of the world economy"
Why do people FEAR "globalization" if they are not sure what it is?
"Globalization implies the opening of local and nationalistic perspectives to a broader outlook of an interconnected and interdependent world with free transfer of capital, goods, and services across national frontiers. However, it does not include unhindered movement of labor and, as suggested by some economists, may hurt smaller or fragile economies if applied indiscriminately."
http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/globalization.html
"The Irrational Fear of Globalization"
Aug 13 2011 Published by Hrafnkell Haraldsson under "Uncategorized"
http://archives.politicususa.com/2011/08/13/the-irrational-fear-of-globalization.html
"What’s with the fear of globalization? Globalization, the integration of the world’s economy, people, and governments, though many people might not be aware of it, is an ancient process and one that has yet to bring ruination to the world. There has always been globalization, even when civilization could not encompass the globe, even when only small portions of the whole were known to the peoples concerned."
"There is a very good reason that the United Nations in New York proudly displays in the Security Council Chamber the Treat of Kadesh signed between the Hittites and Egyptians is the earliest example of an international peace treaty (ca. 1258 B.C.E.) in history – a treaty, significantly, between superpowers. The signatories were concluding a period of warfare that had culminated in the Battle of Kadesh (ca. 1275 B.C.E.). As scholar Amanda Podany says of the strife between Hatti and Egypt (and of other struggles as well), “In the end, the real victor was not any one of the great powers, it was the idea of brotherhood.”"
"
Compare this peaceful entreaty to the words of the Bush administration, or the Republican candidates for president, or the members of the U.S. House. Why could kings in this supposedly barbarous time behave more admirably than our would-be leaders today? What is there to fear in a community of nations that acknowledge one another as equals and work for the common good?
We should remember that, as Podany tells us,
"The Near East is often described as the birthplace of law, home to the earliest cities, and the ‘cradle of civilization.’ It was also home to the first diplomatist and the first kings to discover the benefits of peaceful coexistence."
It would be a pity if the United States more than 30 centuries later, were to be its graveyard because the Republican Party wants to be more like Assyria [the rogue state of that Age/time] and less like Hatti and Egypt [the seekers of peace]."
Think!
