International trade - Revision history

Jukeboksi: remark the stark contrast between air and sea transportation when considering the ecological impact

2004-09-21T13:15:51Z

remark the stark contrast between air and sea transportation when considering the ecological impact

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:15, 21 September 2004
Line 5:		Line 5:
	Also [[blues\|pro-globalization]] people may be very strong advocates of [[w:protectionism]] when it comes to [[product group]]s that are seen as traditionally nationally important.		Also [[blues\|pro-globalization]] people may be very strong advocates of [[w:protectionism]] when it comes to [[product group]]s that are seen as traditionally nationally important.

	Many [[greens\|ecologists]] object to international trade on grounds that transportation of [[product]]s over long distances is not ecologically sane.		Many [[greens\|ecologists]] object to international trade on grounds that transportation of [[product]]s over long distances is not ecologically sane. Though the mode of transport plays an important role in determining the environmental cost of transporting over long distances. For example [[sea transport]] doesn't consume much resources (ie. it is very eco-efficient) and [[air transport]] on the other hand releases [[w:greenhouse gas\|greenhouse gas]]es straight to the atmosphere where there is no vegetation to tie up the [[w:carbon dioxide\|carbon dioxide]] released and also consumes a lot of fuel.

	There is also the [[reds\|opposition]] based on distress caused to the local economical situation due to the fact that [[Multinational]] [[corporation]]s can move their production and [[capital]] around the globe quite quickly and use this possibility to negotiate or extort [[tax]] exemptions in countries that fear the loss of [[employment]]		There is also the [[reds\|opposition]] based on distress caused to the local economical situation due to the fact that [[Multinational]] [[corporation]]s can move their production and [[capital]] around the globe quite quickly and use this possibility to negotiate or extort [[tax]] exemptions in countries that fear the loss of [[employment]]

Jukeboksi: typos

2003-11-28T21:57:27Z

typos

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:57, 28 November 2003
Line 5:		Line 5:
	Also [[blues\|pro-globalization]] people may be very strong advocates of [[w:protectionism]] when it comes to [[product group]]s that are seen as traditionally nationally important.		Also [[blues\|pro-globalization]] people may be very strong advocates of [[w:protectionism]] when it comes to [[product group]]s that are seen as traditionally nationally important.

	Many [[greens\|ecologists]] ~~people~~ object to international trade on grounds that transportation of [[product]]s over long distances is not ecologically sane.		Many [[greens\|ecologists]] object to international trade on grounds that transportation of [[product]]s over long distances is not ecologically sane.

	There is also the [[reds\|opposition]] based on distress caused to the local economical situation due to the fact that [[Multinational]] [[corporation]]s can move their production and [[capital]] around the globe quite quickly and use this possibility to negotiate or extort [[tax]] exemptions in countries that fear loss of [[employment]]		There is also the [[reds\|opposition]] based on distress caused to the local economical situation due to the fact that [[Multinational]] [[corporation]]s can move their production and [[capital]] around the globe quite quickly and use this possibility to negotiate or extort [[tax]] exemptions in countries that fear the loss of [[employment]]

	For the [[consumer]] international trade provides more [[moral choice\|choice]] and reduced [[price]]s from increased competition.		For the [[consumer]] international trade provides more [[moral choice\|choice]] and reduced [[price]]s from increased competition.

Jukeboksi: defining scope

2003-11-28T20:47:17Z

defining scope

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:47, 28 November 2003
Line 10:		Line 10:

	For the [[consumer]] international trade provides more [[moral choice\|choice]] and reduced [[price]]s from increased competition.		For the [[consumer]] international trade provides more [[moral choice\|choice]] and reduced [[price]]s from increased competition.

			International trade is not simple, but we must work to inform the [[consumer]] of the various issues in [[import]]ed goods.
			----
			See [[w:Trade Bloc]] and [[w:Free Trade Zones]] for information on anomalities related to international trade

Jukeboksi: arguments for and against

2003-11-28T20:43:30Z

arguments for and against

New page

'''International trade''' is one [[feature]] of [[globalization]].

International trade has it's good and bad sides. The opinion about what is good and what is bad about it vary strongly in the [[political spectrum]] with some [[faction]]s having almost symmetrically opposed views.

Also [[blues|pro-globalization]] people may be very strong advocates of [[w:protectionism]] when it comes to [[product group]]s that are seen as traditionally nationally important.

Many [[greens|ecologists]] people object to international trade on grounds that transportation of [[product]]s over long distances is not ecologically sane.

There is also the [[reds|opposition]] based on distress caused to the local economical situation due to the fact that [[Multinational]] [[corporation]]s can move their production and [[capital]] around the globe quite quickly and use this possibility to negotiate or extort [[tax]] exemptions in countries that fear loss of [[employment]]

For the [[consumer]] international trade provides more [[moral choice|choice]] and reduced [[price]]s from increased competition.