Assignment 4: Read The Case In Your Text On Pages 238–239

Assignment 4read The Case In Your Text On Pages 238 239 Then Answer

Read the case in your text on pages 238-239. After reviewing your chapter reading, especially pages 238-239, answer the following questions:

1. If you had the power to eliminate tariffs on sugar cane and subsidies on biofuels, would you do it? Why or why not? Would you consider this an ethical stance, why or why not?

2. Regarding your answer to question #1, what would be the impact on the U.S. and on other producing countries?

3. What are the pros and cons of free trade and globalization of production? Answer the questions using complete sentences. Number your answers.

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

Global trade policies, such as tariffs and subsidies, significantly influence the economic landscape of nations and the ethical considerations surrounding international commerce. The decision to eliminate tariffs on sugar cane and subsidies on biofuels involves complex economic, environmental, and moral implications that merit careful analysis. This essay explores whether one would endorse such policy changes, examines their impacts on the United States and other producing countries, and discusses the broader pros and cons of free trade and globalization of production.

Eliminating Tariffs and Subsidies: Ethical and Practical Perspectives

Imagine possessing the authority to abolish tariffs on sugar cane and subsidies on biofuels; the underlying ethical rationale hinges on promoting free trade and reducing market distortions. I would consider supporting such elimination because tariffs and subsidies often lead to market inefficiencies, unfair competitive advantages, and a distortion of true prices. Ethically, this aligns with principles of fairness and free competition, enabling consumers to access goods at lower costs and fostering a more equitable trading environment.

Furthermore, tariffs on sugar and subsidies for biofuels often have environmental repercussions. For instance, biofuel subsidies can incentivize the cultivation of crops like corn and sugarcane, which may lead to deforestation, habitat destruction, and increased greenhouse gas emissions. Ethically, supporting policies that promote environmental sustainability and reduce ecological harm aligns with a broader responsibility toward future generations and global ecological health.

Impacts on the U.S. and Producing Countries

If tariffs on sugar and subsidies on biofuels were eliminated, the immediate impact on the U.S. would likely include increased competition from international producers, potentially lowering domestic prices for sugar and biofuels. While consumers could benefit from lower prices, domestic producers might face significant challenges, including reduced market share and profitability, which could threaten jobs and local economies dependent on these industries.

For producing countries, removing tariffs and subsidies may lead to increased exports, boosting their economies and providing employment opportunities. However, it could also result in overproduction, leading to volatile commodity prices and potential economic instability. Developing countries that rely heavily on sugar exports or biofuel crop cultivation might experience economic growth in the short term but could also face adverse environmental impacts and social inequalities if the increase in production depletes natural resources or displaces local communities.

Pros and Cons of Free Trade and Globalization of Production

Pros

• Lower prices for consumers due to increased competition and access to cheaper goods.
• Greater variety of products and services available to consumers worldwide.
• Increased economic growth, innovation, and efficiency resulting from specialization and competitive markets.
• Expanded markets for producers, enabling economies of scale and higher profitability.
• Promotion of international cooperation and diplomatic relations.

Cons

• Displacement of domestic industries and loss of jobs in sectors unable to compete globally.
• Potential for income inequality and social disparities exacerbated by globalization.
• Environmental degradation due to increased transportation and uneven enforcement of environmental standards.
• Dependence on international markets, which can lead to economic vulnerabilities.
• Cultural homogenization and loss of local traditions and identities.

Conclusion

The decision to eliminate tariffs on sugar cane and subsidies on biofuels reflects a commitment to free trade principles and environmental sustainability, balanced against economic and social considerations. While free trade offers numerous benefits such as lower consumer prices and enhanced economic efficiency, it also presents challenges like industry displacement and environmental concerns. Policy decisions in this arena must carefully weigh these factors, striving for solutions that promote both economic growth and social responsibility.

References

• Bhagwati, J. (2004). In Defense of Globalization. Oxford University Press.
• Cohen, M. J. (2008). The Culture of Globalization. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Krugman, P., Obstfeld, M., & Melitz, M. J. (2018). International Economics: Theory and Policy. Pearson.
• Oatley, T. (2019). International Political Economy. Routledge.
• Stiglitz, J. E. (2002). Globalization and Its Discontents. W.W. Norton & Company.
• World Trade Organization. (2020). Trade Policy Review of the United States. WTO Publications.
• Richter, F. (2021). Biofuel Policies and Their Environmental Impact. Environmental Science & Policy, 124, 263-272.
• Van den Berg, M., & Kletzan-Slamanig, D. (2019). Environmental and Economic Impacts of Biofuel Policies. Ecological Economics, 164, 106370.
• Rodrik, D. (2018). Straight Talk on Trade: Ideas for a Sane World Economy. Princeton University Press.
• Baldwin, R. (2016). The Great Convergence: Information Technology and the New Globalization. Harvard University Press.