Free Trade: Corporate Global Control or Benificial to All?

[Locke]

After having just read Naomi Klein's excellent No Logo, I would like to hear other individual views on the global economy.

[Mitch]

I haven't yet read No Logo, it's in my basement and I should probably read it :p
The global economy is interesting and will be very interesting; we haven't had a depression since mass globalisation and the internet started. These two things will make the next depression VERY interesting. The internet industry, as a few people on these boards know about, is a completely different economy; sometimes when money comes in, money doesn't leave. The use of pay services like PayPal make it easy to switch currencies at the click of a button; therefore, money leaving a country very fast, and entering a country.
Also, the formation of the EU (European Union) can really switch things up as we have a massive population exchanging goods with one currency, therefore, all of these countries will have an economic crisis at the same time. I don't believe if we do have an economic crisis that it will be as great as the great depression, but it will effect everyone.

[Locke]

You should read it.
It's not directly about global markets, but it gets you thinking on that track.
I think a mass-scale depression can be averted as there is a rising, goods-hungry middle-class in China (and somewhat less so India) that will probably sustain us through any depression.
In recent light it seems as if my political viewpoint should be listed as "commie", as I am opposed for the most to economic globalisation as performed by transnationals and free trade oganisations such as the WTO, NAFTA and other large non-sovereign organisations. Feel free to try to change my mind.

[Mitch]

HAHA, Too late, you're using the Internet!! The largest product of globalisation!
Well, I too am not a big fan of globalisation, but let's be honest, if it weren't around we wouldn't have the things most people have right now. Imports. (Honda cars, Sony electronics, everything else (China))

[Locke]

Hahaha
no, globalisation is totally inevitable, and I'm down with it, but if you do some research on global trade patterns and economic policies of free trade organizations (especially of developed countries, such as NAFTA), it paints a scary picture.
Yep, China is the pedestal on which our much glorified globalizing world stands.

[eharvester]

The idea that TRUE free trade benefits only corporations is pure communist propaganda. We don't have free trade, what we have now is managed trade, trade that benefits the corporations. If you want to help humanity, allow them to trade.

[Cattraknoff]

The idea that TRUE free trade benefits only corporations is pure communist propaganda. We don't have free trade, what we have now is managed trade, trade that benefits the corporations. If you want to help humanity, allow them to trade.

True free trade cannot exist, for the same reasons that anarchism cannot work in any form. An absence of any control will lead to somebody moderately intelligent exploiting others until he or she can attain increasing amounts of control.

[Locke]

True free trade cannot exist, for the same reasons that anarchism cannot work in any form. An absence of any control will lead to somebody moderately intelligent exploiting others until he or she can attain increasing amounts of control.

An example of that being the financial market (as an enitity). Financial markets undermine the true economy in which peopl produce and sell real things, by exploiting large-scale trends (which itself is not a bad thing), but also contributing to economic devastation by immediately moving large amounts of capital out of areas in which it is more desperately needed. The driving motive being profit, an area threatening to decrease profit, yet is more so in need of capital to survive, is left alone to recuperate at the loss of equality.

The idea that TRUE free trade benefits only corporations is pure communist propaganda. We don't have free trade, what we have now is managed trade, trade that benefits the corporations. If you want to help humanity, allow them to trade.
Just as the idea that free trade benefits everyone is pure capitalist propaganda.
There are always mixed effects to any situation, but profit-driven entities have superceded sovereignty to the point which they are now detrimental.

[oboehart]

Free trade...
Where to begin. First of all, free trade isn't free at all. It comes with strings attached, which doesn't benefit anyone, in my mind. For example: NAFTA. Because we have a trade agreement with the US, if at some point, Canada decides it needs to give Canadians priorities for a product, say a resource, we have severed our ability to do so, by joining the agreement. Free trade also removes all possibility of protecting Canadian industry. Protectionism isn't the perfect solution, but at least by allowing subsidies and tariffs, it makes Canada more competitive on the global stage, which will benefit Canada greatly. Free trade also stifles the development of infant industries, which often transform into a backbone of the nation’s industries, carrying the bulk of the nation’s economy. In Japan it was the automobile industry, in Russia it’s the natural resource industry, in the states it was farming.
Furthermore, looking at the issue from a developing nation's perspective, I think you should consider this analogy (created by Keramac, if you know him.)
Just as you wouldn’t throw an 8-year-old into a boxing ring with a professional boxer, you can’t throw a developing economy into the world of fierce multinational competition. In either scenario, the weaker one gets pummelled by the competition.

[Locke]

Just as you wouldn’t throw an 8-year-old into a boxing ring with a professional boxer, you can’t throw a developing economy into the world of fierce multinational competition. In either scenario, the weaker one gets pummelled by the competition.

Ah, yes, I like his "plant seed" analogy as well. He used it effectively to crush me (in practice, but nevertheless crushed.)
In a truly free society, there still must be liberties for corporations; I've always entertained a propensity towards restricted capitalism, yet capitalism nonetheless; and thus thought that regulations and a protectionism need to be enacted at discretion, yet with no hesitance when they are needed.

[oboehart]

I completely agree.
As for the plant seed analogy, when used in my Cross-examination, Veenu successfully flipped it, and destroyed my case using my very own analogy. Since then, I have looked upon that one less favourably.
Analogies are great for making a point, but I've come to realize that you need fact attached very directly to the symbolism in order for it to hold any weight.