IB Econ 12 (1)

1. Britain wants to open up a free trade agreement with China; this would be a multi-billion dollar agreement. The EU is highly opposing this, and especially believes that this decision would have to be discussed for a lot longer. Britain's future in the EU is unknown, as they may no longer be welcome due to decisions such as these, which also involve nuclear weapon production and exchange.  2. The article is arguing against free trade, because it seems like the decision would solely benefit the UK and China, whereas other countries will be left out and may even be in danger. Also, because there are so many against it, it would seem best to wait.  3. Domestically, Britain would be extremely benefitted, as the would get a very high profit. Their consumers would have more choices at lower prices. Also their firms will be able to expand their markets, though may face new competition. The government will also gain a very high profit.  Foreignly, it will have many problems with the rest of the EU and other countries, so it may seem unadvisable, especially if it gets cut off from the union. Also, this will mean less exportation therefore loss of money. 

In this article the British prime minister David Cameron promised the leaders of China that he would advocate a multibillion dollar free trade deal. The British prime minister states that China is the second best economy after the USA and so he decided to advocate this free trade deal because he believes that in the long run it will benefit his nation. Opposing his thought though is the European nation, who stated that advocating such deal was a premature move. After this the discussion of human rights drops in, on how EU believes that by advocating such deal there will also be negative consequences on the citizens of Britain.

1. The article addresses tariffs in relation to the so called 'Infant Industries'. Even though international free trade  helps poorer countries to get out of poverty, tariffs for the protection of an infant industry represent an exception. In fact, they are part of Protectionism which clearly counter attacks international imports, and they aim at giving a chance to developing domestic industries to become stable and efficient so that they can enter in global competition. But even in such case, economists have proved that they do more harm than good.  2. The article is more prone to free international trade, as it criticizes the application of tariffs even in relation to infant industries, as they always provide more disadvantages than benefits. 3. Of course, Infant industries would be protected with the application of tariffs, although these may not be as efficient all the times. However, this means higher costs for government, which weighs on consumers to get tax revenue to support domestic developing industries.

1) Briefly summarize the article (3-4 sentences) The article mainly discusses about the issue Europe is feared about the uncontrolled protectionism. Several countries such as Russia, Brazil, Indonesia, China and other countries are posing a increasing threat to global recovery, because the markets are emerging turning against the free trade. Overall, it will give several economic crisis towards several nations in Europe. 2) Is your article arguing for or against free trade? Explain The article is mainly arguing against free trade, because by pushing over 154 new tariffs and restrictive measures, it will be violating G20's promise and it is a threat to global growth. 3) Explain how different stakeholders might be affected (foreign/domestic producers, consumers, gov't) As reading the article I could see that domestic producers are going to be suffering due to the tariffs and restrictive measurements, thus it will also give a damage towards the consumers. As markets are emerging, the markets will be selling products with higher price levels. The government will be also heavily damaged, because by emerging markets, half of the global is output and free trades are turned back as political pressure mounts.

1) Briefly summarize the article (3-4 sentences) The article is about the Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott's protectionist strategy in the purchase of Australian companies. This highlights the event where Archer Daniels Midland attempted to purchase Graincorp, as well as the example of George Bush's Protectionist policy for US steel workers. It is concluded it is better to maintain an open anti-protectionist policy to encourage trade to find the best comparative advantage. 2) Is your article arguing for or against free trade? Explain The Article is mainly for free trade, as it takes the stances of criticizing Abbott's actions as well as likening it to Bush's "Failure". It determines Australia needs more foreign investment to remain competitive. It does however mention Abbott's encouragement to give Quantas more foreign investments. 3) Explain how different stakeholders might be affected (foreign/domestic producers, consumers, gov't) It is stated domestic producers will suffer from the lack of investments, which will consequently affect consumers. Consumers will experience higher price levels and hence higher costs of living. Foreign producers may not experience as much difficulty as domestic producers, though the lack of any comparative advantage will make it less beneficial for the foreign producers. The government is the only stakeholder who will gain, as the higher tariffs may increase tax revenue.

1) This article talks about the EU that threatens anti-subisdy tariffs to the Argentinean and Indonesian biodiesel after approving five-year levies to counter below-cost, or "dumped," imports from both countries. 2)The article is arguing in favour of free trade as it tries to impose Argentina and Indonesia Anti-dumping 3) The effects on stake holders, will be that in this case Argentina and Indonesia will have to pay for five years as a consequence of them dumping the BIO-fuel on the EU. on the other hand the EU will benefit from this situation as from now one they will pay the normal price and therefore the consumers will pay less as the cost for the government and the country to get the fuel is less.

China is continuing to protect its rare earth minerals. It's important to note that China holds nearly 97% of all rare earth's in the world. These rare minerals are needed for many manufacturing ventures. China will increase its regulation on rare earth production to prevent any further externalities.  The article outlines a plan against free trade. Yet, stirs arguments about China's possible attempt to monopolize the industry. The United States, for instance, argues that China's export tariffs are too high, and that they inhibit America's domestic production of needed goods. China argues back that it's an environmental issue.  Countries who rely on technological progress will be hurt by this protection. The minerals are needed for cell phones, wind turbines, missiles, and many other high-tech products. If protection continues, prices will rise, thus lowering the advancement in that sector for many economies around the world. In China, however, less exports mean more jobs domestically. Also more supply domestically. And lastly, the environmental concern of China can further improve the standard of living for citizens whilst cutting down the pollution levels. 

1) Briefly summarize the article (3-4 sentences) Calgon Carbon Corporation announced that the Department of Commerce (DOC) has determined the amount of antidumping tariffs to be assessed on imports of steam activated carbon from China that entered the United States between April 2, 2011 to March 31, 2012. 2) Is your article arguing for or against free trade? Explain My article is arguing for free trade, as it is discussing the revision on anti-dumping tariffs in order to complete a more free trade between China and the United States. 3) Explain how different stakeholders might be affected (foreign/domestic producers, consumers, gov't) Foreign and domestic producers will have increased competition as the prices of steam activated carbon now will be decreasing. This will have a postive effect on consumers, since they now can buy the carbon at a cheaper price. The government will be generating less revenue, as the tariffs are now 0.40 usd per lb less than the initial tariff imposed.

This articled discusses about the EU imposing anti-dumping duties on biofuel from Argentina and Indonesia, which will last five years. Argentina and Indonesia have access to the raw materials necessary at a way lower price than the global market prices available for the EU. The EU has worked in collaboration with the WTO to enforce this punishment on Argentina and Indonesia, which will last five years.  This article is clearly for free trade because it shows how anti-dumping is important and must be enforced, since it isn't fair for the foreign countries to impose a higher price than the production one. Stakeholders can be affected by this issue, for example Argentina and Indonesia will now have to pay their duties for five years because of them dumping biofuel in the EU, while the EU will benefit from this situation since they will now pay the normal price for biofuel. consumers will also probably pay a bit less, since the country as a whole and the government will have to pay less to obtain biofuel. 

leave protectionism behind  It's better for the economy 

This article speaks about the new tax for Thai jewelry imports in India. Gov't tried to defend its producers. This article is more or less neutral and speaks from neither perspective of Indians, nor from Thai people

Using the Google News search tool please find an article that relates to one or more of the above concepts that you have just listed. Make sure that you tag it "Trade" on Diigo and share to the class. In the description box please do the following: 1) Briefly summarize the article (3-4 sentences) 2) Is your article arguing for or against free trade? Explain 3) Explain how different stakeholders might be affected (foreign/domestic producers, consumers, gov't)

Using the Google News search tool please find an article that relates to one or more of the above concepts that you have just listed. Make sure that you tag it "Trade" on Diigo and share to the class. In the description box please do the following: 1) Briefly summarize the article (3-4 sentences) 2) Is your article arguing for or against free trade? Explain 3) Explain how different stakeholders might be affected (foreign/domestic producers, consumers, gov't)

This article discusses about the recent (August) increase of inflation in Japan, after a deflation that had been lasting for fifteen years. The labor market is very tight and companies have been starting to raise wages, which would indicate that prices will still rise, leading to Japan reaching its goal of a 2 percent inflation rate. Japan has come through recession in 2012, and prices raising tend to indicate that Bank of Japan's monetary stimulus and reflationary policies have been bringing improvements to the economy.  The fact that inflation has been increasing lately will have absolutely a positive effect on Japan's economy, which has grown by a third between April and June. What Japan needs to focus on now is keeping the inflation rate stable and not letting it be affected by disinflation. Prime Minister Abe has been pressuring employers to raise wages, which it might not be the best move, since it will reduce their competitiveness. In the long-run, if the inflation is kept at a normal and stable percentage it will surely be positive for Japan's economy. 

my ia