May 27th-
Link
"The Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal making its way through Congress is the latest step in a decades-long trend toward liberalizing trade — a somewhat mysterious development given that many Americans are skeptical of freer trade."
"Similarly, a Pew Research Center survey released on Wednesday found that a plurality of Americans making under $30,000 per year say that their family’s finances have been hurt by free trade agreements. By contrast, those making more than $100,000 per year overwhelmingly believe free trade has been beneficial — 52 percent said trade agreements have helped their family’s finances versus only 29 percent who said they have hurt."
Briefly describe why you think Americans that are in higher social classes feel that free trade is beneficial to their family's finances. Also I am curious if you support the Trans-Pacific Partnership? If so briefly tell me why you support it if not explain your argument against it.
I think that families with higher incomes could have more access to global investments facilitated by free trade. While smaller income families don't have as much access to investments. This reminds me of the off-shore routing that big companies do- maybe wealthier individuals have a similar process. I think this agreement needs some more vetting before it gets passed but could potentially be a good thing for the global market.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Taylor in that families with higher incomes are more likely to have stock in companies that function on a global basis and would benefit from these companies partaking in free trade. Whereas lower income families are those who work for the companies that will outsource their job in implementing free trade agreements. It's hard to say whether or not I'm against the Trans-Pacific Trade Agreement as I, like most everybody in America, have no idea what's in it. I think that it should not be allowed to be fast tracked and that it needs to be made much more transparent before it gets passed.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Taylor in that the wealthier individuals will have access to global investments once free trade is allowed. In contrast, the lesser wealthy will not necessarily be able to invest abroad since the costs may still be too high. I also agree with Shelby in that the free trade treaty could result in job-outsourcing, which would cause the more labor-intensive workers to lose jobs to countries that have a comparative advantage in producing labor-intesive goods. I am not sure if the treaty will be good for the United States economy since so much is still unknown to the public about the TPP.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Taylor that wealthier individuals will have more access to global investments once free trade is allowed. On the other hand, less wealth individuals will not be able to have the ability to invest abroad due to high costs. Shelby also brings up a valid point that this free trade could result in the outsourcing of jobs, which could be a reason that lower income individuals are so heavily against this free trade agreement. Again as others have stated before I don't know as well whether this treaty would be good for our economy or not because of the fact that the public still does not know about the TPP.
ReplyDeleteI agree that more liberal trade benefits businesses, and this increases the value of their company and the return for their investors. From reading Piketty, it seems fairly clear that if free trade is increasing the return on capital (i.e., invested wealth), then it is only worsening inequality.
ReplyDelete