Special interest groups argue that US trade deficits

 

 

Some politicians, labor unions, and special interest groups argue that US trade deficits are harmful to the economy and nations that run large trade surpluses with the US are benefiting from unfair trade practices and agreements. These parties support increasing tariffs on imports, elimination, or re-writing of trade agreements.

Respond to the following in a minimum of 175 words:

Discuss what credible economists say about the effects that tariffs, changing trade agreements, and/or manipulating exchange rates will have on the total US trade balance.
Do you agree with their assertions? Why or why not?

 

Discussion 2

RESPOND TO Saridania and Rebecca post be professional and constructive with response.

Saridania post

 

The United States of America is considered the largest economy in the world. However, over time, various decisions, including trade agreements, have led to a negative U.S trade balance because the monetary value of the goods and services imported exceeds the economic value of goods and services exported. In response to the effects of the agreements, a section of economists believes that the solution is to alter the arrangements made and even impose tariffs to have a positive trade balance. For instance, some economists argue that the agreements need to be changed because they lead to a negative trade deficit and job loss to Americans. Additionally, because of the deals, countries engage in manipulative acts that hurt the local manufacturing sector and jobs, further worsening the U.S trade balance (Scott & Schott, 2017). From a personal point of view, it is agreeable that the trade agreements have hurt the U.S trade balance, and if the remedy is imposing tariffs or altering the contracts, then that needs to be done.

That is because just with a simple examination at the issue of trade agreements and how it affects the balance between the country’s monetary value of exports and imports is evident with trade agreements that have led to a negative trade balance and, in return, loss of jobs. For instance, agreements that permit trade between the U.S and the low-wage nations negatively impact American workers, especially those without college degrees, as they are the ones rendered jobless. Thus, tariffs should be increased, and some agreements need to be re-written.

 

Sample Solution

our becomes a commodity owned and controlled by bourgeoisie thus removing the human nature present in organic production and creating the ‘objectification of labour’ (Marx, 1844 cited in McLellan, 1978: 78). This concept of how the labourer is separated from the product of work is the first form of alienation that will be discussed. As the worker put effort and skills into his products as ‘is necessary and universal aspect of human life’ (Ritzer, 2000: 60), he becomes alienated from his capital as he has no control or ownership of it. Instead, his product ‘confronts [the labourer] as an alien being, as a power independent of the producer (Marx, 1844 cited in McLellan, 1978: 78). This distortion is a product of capitalist structure of society whereby the more the worker produces, the cheaper his labour becomes (McLellan, 1978). Where the capitalist replaces his product with a low wage, the objectification continues, as his value is removed and he becomes dominated by his capital in order to receive subsistence to survive (McLellan, 1978). This alienation is worsened by the increase in value of products as in return the value of labour diminishes.

Following on from this, a second key form of alienation is the alienation from labour. For Marx, production distinguishes man from other animals because “man through his own labour … sustains his own life and reproduces society and the human species” (Pappenheim, 1967: 85). The capitalist process whereby the worker has no connection with its product creates this form of alienation. The labourer has given away his skills in return for a low wage as nothing more than a commodity. Yet, the labourer has little other choice as this is his only chance of survival in a capitalist state. This is why Marx calls for the upheaval of the class system to be replaced with a communist state where labour is valued as ‘life’s prime want’ (Marx, 1891: 119). In context of contemporary British politics, Marx’s argument can be undermined by the declining size of the working class and greater relative power it has through trade unions. Thus, arguably Marx’s arguments are weaker in relation to modern times but it must be celebrated that they can still hold to a certain extent over a century on.

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.