Transcript for:
Global Trade Lecture Notes

Have you heard this lie? Global trade is good for everyone. That's bunk. Many economists believe in the doctrine of comparative advantage, which posits that trade is good for all nations when each nation specializes in what it does best. But what about costs to workers and the environment? What if a country's comparative advantage comes from people working under dangerous or exploitative conditions? Or from preventing them from forming labor unions? Or allowing employers to hire young children? Or from polluting the atmosphere or the ocean, or destroying rainforests and polluting groundwater? My old boss, Bill Clinton, called globalization “the economic equivalent of a force of nature, like wind or water.” But globalization is not a force of nature. Global trade is structured by rules negotiated between nations about which assets will be protected and which will not. These rules determine who benefits and who is harmed by trade. Over recent decades, trade deals such as the North American Free Trade Act and agreements under the World Trade Organization have protected the assets of U.S. corporations, including intellectual property. For example, if another nation adopts strict environmental regulations that reduce the value of U.S. oil assets in that country, U.S. oil companies can seek compensation for their reduced profits. Trade deals have also benefited the pharmaceutical industry with extended drug patents. They’ve benefited stock traders by ensuring they can move capital into and out of countries, regardless of local banking laws. And trade deals have protected big agriculture. Now, it's true that American consumers benefit from lower priced goods from China, Mexico, and other countries where wages are lower than in the United States. But trade deals have caused millions of Americans to lose their jobs. Between 2000 and 2017, a total of 5.5 million manufacturing jobs vanished, partly due to increasing imports, mostly from China. Global trade on its own is neither good nor bad, but the way trade is now conducted protects the wealth of those who already have it and burdens those who don't.