Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Blocking trade paths hurts economies and makes everyone a loser

By Tony Makin - posted Thursday, 27 October 2016


The classical British economists Adam Smith and David Ricardo first proposed this idea hundreds of years ago.

In essence, comparative advantage proposes that when any two countries specialise in producing the goods in which they have a comparative cost ­advantage, the combined output and hence income of both countries rises. Hence it pays economies to specialise in production and trade with each other. The same applies to regions and to individual production units within economies.

Ricardo used the example of ­England and Portugal.

Advertisement

If England was relatively more ­efficient at making cloth than wine, it followed that it should specialise in cloth making and export cloth to pay for wine imports.

Other reasons for supporting international trade are as follows. More international trade means consumers have a greater variety of goods and services to choose from. In addition, producers sell to bigger markets, which can lower costs as production is on a larger scale, while competition from imports checks the market power of domestic firms. Trade is also a powerful vehicle for spreading technology.

Why then does liberalising international trade create so much rancour if it delivers these economic gains? The answer is that although the winners from increased international trade generally outweigh the losers, the often not so visible benefits are diffused over large numbers of consumers, whereas the losers are usually concentrated in particular industries and are not compensated. Being concentrated, losers can also more easily organise and understandably have strong incentives to try and block any change.

Ideally, losers from increased international trade should be compensated by winners, though unfortunately, this usually proves impractical. Yet blocking new trade is a worse outcome as it means lower prosperity overall.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All

This article was first published in The Australian.



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

63 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Tony Makin is professor of economics at the Gold Coast campus of Griffith University and author of Global Imbalances, Exchange Rates and Stabilization Policy recently published by Palgrave Macmillan. He is also an the academic advisory board of the Australian Institute for Progress.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Tony Makin

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 63 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy