June 21, at am. Melissa Berry. July 15, at pm. July 16, at am. July 16, at pm. For example, a fair trade activist will fight to increase the wage rates of workers and improve their working conditions, especially when a large multinational corporation chooses to pay pennies per hour for labor in one country instead of dozens of dollars per hour elsewhere.
Fair traders suggest that companies and governments should regulate trade to ensure that workers receive a just level of compensation and a safe working environment. Fair traders express their concern through private action like boycotts of products made with child labor, and through government regulation.
However, the main goal for fair trade is to empower marginalized groups of people in the communities while also improving their lives. According to economists, free trade provides the least amount of overheads in the production process, hence lower prices that are not regulated by the government.
Fair trade, on the other hand, is inclusive of the additional price for fair labor; hence products and services are pricier. In free trade, there are few regulations to exchanging goods and services across borders. Free trade between countries in most cases has no subsidies, tariffs, quotas or regulations.
Pin 7. Share This grants them long-term stability and the chance to plan for their future. No child labor — Fair Trade advocates express concern for exploitation by boycotting products that are considered unethical—for example, products made using child labor or slave labor, or created in unsafe working conditions. By providing fair wages for workers, Fair Trade also reduces the need for children in undeveloped countries to work to support their families. Community investment — A Fair Trade premium is paid on top of regular wages, going towards a community fund.
This can be spent on community projects determined by the producers themselves, such as better medical care, schooling, or building projects. Better working conditions — Fair Trade producers have safe working conditions, free from dangerous chemicals and other harmful substances.
Free Trade and fair trade may sound like similar economic concepts, but the two terms describe different conditions. What is the Difference between Free Trade vs. It's always that the cost outweigh the benefits or that the jobs lost are greater than the jobs saved.
LEVIN: What do you say when somebody says and they ultimately do, "Well, look, it's not fair because our wages are higher, and when we're trading with the poor countries or the third world or so forth, their wages are de minimis, and so that's just not fair.
PERRY: Yes, well, again, if you look at it through the viewpoint of the American consumer, we want the lowest prices, we want the lowest labor costs. So if American companies can import products produced in another country because of lower wages in China or Mexico, that still creates this huge benefit for American consumers and to the extent then that they save money on buying imports that freeze up money that they spend on other goods and services, so there could be the stimulus effect and more jobs in these other industries that are hard to identify, but again You may import something that resonates beneficially to the American consumer, the American consumer may spend money on this industry or those services or products rather than this, or they might be buying natural resources from these poor countries, using them and again, that create jobs throughout the American economy.
I mean, again, if you think of, again, the global marketplace that the advantages are, is that goods can be produced in the countries that have the lowest cost of production. So, ultimately that benefits the entire world economy and benefits American consumers, and also American workers from the standpoint that the higher the level of our standard of living and more economic prosperity and liberty we have, it is going to create jobs in all of these various industries.
LEVIN: And the economic prosperity we have in this country in the last half century is unparalleled in human history, isn't it? PERRY: Well, that's right, yes, there has never been any other country that has had this long of a record of economic growth and economic prosperity that's benefitted more people and raised the standard of living, especially for lower income and the vulnerable populations that we have because of access to cheap products from overseas, it really, again, has this trickle-up, I guess, effect that it really helps people from the bottom all the way up by having access to world markets.
Are we supposed to reduce our salaries? Our benefits? Our medical expenses for each laborer? Are we supposed to force another country to raise them? In other words, these arguments, it's not fair, that argument can wherever there is liberty, whenever there is capitalism, that is the whole notion is to spread opportunity and spread wealth, right? PERRY: Well, yes, and in some cases, the wages in the United States are not really market determined wages, they are artificially higher wages like in the auto industry, you think of the UAW, where their wages and compensation packages were way out of whack based on the rest of the world.
And so, that exposed that industry because their labor costs were so high. Ladies and gentlemen, we're going to come right back. But before we do, don't forget you can join us at LevinTV almost every week night by going to crtv. We'd love you to join us over there. We'll be right back. Now that may help the steel barons and it may help the steel unions, but when that begins to resonate throughout the economy and the consumer, does that help everyone on assembly lines?
Does that help the United States military that are buying new tanks and buying new aircrafts and other armaments and right down through the economic system? Bush imposed steel tariffs and it completely backfired in a way that I think might happen again this time because the higher that steel prices go, that's a main input for manufacturers all across the economy, and there was an article I think in the "Wall Street Journal" the other day about a domestic US producer of lockers for schools and government and offices or whatever, gyms, and that's their - and their main input is steel, so now, they're really getting hammered.
They're just a small company trying to survive in a globally competitive marketplace, so again, as you see those higher input prices kind of ripple through the economy, I think what we're going to see is just like in , there's going to be job losses and in that case, , there were more jobs lost throughout the economy than there were jobs in the Supporters of free trade are often supporters of capitalism.
They also seek to reap the benefits of globalization as a means to achieve a truly borderless means of trading. That, of course, also always entails that a government trade bureaucracy be established to enforce the protectionism. And regardless of what form the protectionism takes, there is no getting around the fact that protectionism is merely central planning.
It is no different from the central planning that took place in the 20th century in communist countries such as the Soviet Union or takes place today in Venezuela, North Korea, and Cuba. All forms and levels of protectionism require central planning. Government bureaucrats must determine which domestic industries to protect, how to erect a particular trade barrier, which goods should be subject to tariffs, how much the tariffs should be, which countries should be punished, which counties should be excluded, below what price dumping is determined to be taking place, which goods should be restricted, which goods should be subject to import quotas, what the number of the quota should be, how long the trade barriers should be maintained, and how often the need for protectionism should be reevaluated.
Protectionism is therefore no different from wage, price, and rent controls; minimum-wage laws; usury laws; price-gouging laws; or other forms of government economic interventionism. Free trade is also the absence of any government trade agreements. Government trade agreements are government-managed, centrally planned trade, not free trade.