• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

China, Japan, South Korea seek trade pact

donsutherland1

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
11,862
Reaction score
10,300
Location
New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
From the BBC:

The trade ministers of China, Japan and South Korea have agreed to step up efforts towards forming a trilateral free trade agreement.

The ministers said that free flow of trade and investment between their countries was key to sustaining growth.

BBC News - China, Japan, South Korea seek trade pact

Although it appears that the U.S. has become less convinced of the benefits of trade than had been the case in preceding generations (free trade agreements with South Korea, Colombia, and Panama have yet to be ratified), that less favorable perspective on trade is not shared by all nations. Moreover, what is particularly revealing is that the U.S. has yet to conclude a free trade agreement with Japan despite an enduring favorable bilateral relationship that has existed since the end of World War II.

In general, nations that have growing confidence are willing to take a more expansive view. They seek growth and improvement over the status quo. They are risk takers. They pursue the expansion of trade, understanding that the overall benefits exceed the tradeoffs. They increasingly make strategic investments (education, new industries aimed at addressing unfavorable factor conditions or pursuing emerging opportunities, new technologies, etc.). They seek to shape the balance of power to better align with their interests.

China and South Korea continue to follow that path. Japan, now a mature advanced economy, also sees potential benefits in such a relationship (dynamism, greater market access, increased economic growth, etc.). That Japan is not using the recent catastrophic Tohoku earthquake, ts enormous debt burden, and fierce headwind of a currently declining population to rationalize a more inward-looking course that aims at little more than preserving and harvesting the status quo reveals that contemporary Japan still has a growth-oriented outlook.
 
From the BBC:



BBC News - China, Japan, South Korea seek trade pact

Although it appears that the U.S. has become less convinced of the benefits of trade than had been the case in preceding generations (free trade agreements with South Korea, Colombia, and Panama have yet to be ratified), that less favorable perspective on trade is not shared by all nations. Moreover, what is particularly revealing is that the U.S. has yet to conclude a free trade agreement with Japan despite an enduring favorable bilateral relationship that has existed since the end of World War II.

In general, nations that have growing confidence are willing to take a more expansive view. They seek growth and improvement over the status quo. They are risk takers. They pursue the expansion of trade, understanding that the overall benefits exceed the tradeoffs. They increasingly make strategic investments (education, new industries aimed at addressing unfavorable factor conditions or pursuing emerging opportunities, new technologies, etc.). They seek to shape the balance of power to better align with their interests.

China and South Korea continue to follow that path. Japan, now a mature advanced economy, also sees potential benefits in such a relationship (dynamism, greater market access, increased economic growth, etc.). That Japan is not using the recent catastrophic Tohoku earthquake, ts enormous debt burden, and fierce headwind of a currently declining population to rationalize a more inward-looking course that aims at little more than preserving and harvesting the status quo reveals that contemporary Japan still has a growth-oriented outlook.

I'm not so sure free trade agreements, NAFTA for instance, are actually free trade agreements. Many are designed to put certain producers out of work to give a Corporate advantage. I wish I could give better details, but check on NAFTA and its details.
 
I'm not so sure free trade agreements, NAFTA for instance, are actually free trade agreements. Many are designed to put certain producers out of work to give a Corporate advantage. I wish I could give better details, but check on NAFTA and its details.

So you freeing admit to having an opinion but no details to back it up???
 
I'm not so sure free trade agreements, NAFTA for instance, are actually free trade agreements.

A free trade agreement in the purest terms would entail eliminating all tariff and non-tariff barriers with no limitations of any kind. For obvious political reasons, negotiated free trade agreements do not take the pure form. If they did, political support necessary to approve, ratify, and implement the agreements would be lacking. Each of the countries involved typically negotiate some kind of protections for key sectors (which may or may not be transitional) and for reasons that may have little to do with economics/competitiveness. Those political ingredients are found whether trade liberalization is pursued at the global level (WTO) or multinational level (among various nations). NAFTA is not an exception.
 
A free trade agreement in the purest terms would entail eliminating all tariff and non-tariff barriers with no limitations of any kind. For obvious political reasons, negotiated free trade agreements do not take the pure form. If they did, political support necessary to approve, ratify, and implement the agreements would be lacking. Each of the countries involved typically negotiate some kind of protections for key sectors (which may or may not be transitional) and for reasons that may have little to do with economics/competitiveness. Those political ingredients are found whether trade liberalization is pursued at the global level (WTO) or multinational level (among various nations). NAFTA is not an exception.

On the other hand, if you are dealing with Corporatism, you make sure the agreement works to the advantage of the biggest Corporations
and that is what has happened. Corporations and Corporatism are not the good guys.
 
On the other hand, if you are dealing with Corporatism, you make sure the agreement works to the advantage of the biggest Corporations
and that is what has happened. Corporations and Corporatism are not the good guys.

You go dig up all that proof you have, then bring it here.
 
This is great news. A free trade agreement between China, Japan, and South Korea would be hugely beneficial to three of the world's largest economies. I think we also need a NAFTA-EU-Japan free trade agreement.
 
You're a genius for stating the obvious.

Well perhaps I was wrong, perhaps its not the statement I made thats so unobvious to many here perhaps its the fact that I assumed everyone considered it a weak position to argue from and somethig best to be avoided even if it meant being unable to respond to a post that you really really really hate. Both seem so obvious to me, along with the observation and many people here see either one or both these statements as not so obvious. I guess with you in perticular don't find my second statement here to be obvious, since you so often do the action my first statement describes.
 
Back
Top Bottom