Free

Free Trades Impact on the Workforce Essay Liberalization in trading policy enables ease of flow in trading goods between different nations or state by removing heavy impositions in the economic policies on restrictive world trading or commerce. Free trade’s policy to strengthen world market includes tariff reduction, non-restrictive quota, labor and capital movement across and within states, open markets, reduced restrictive international policy, tax reduction, and related issues. Free trade complies with the ideology of comparative advantage by Ricardo, which places all members of the free trade in an equal and open competition in the free market (Stockmann 1989). The economics of free trade is relatively simple: by removing the tariffs and tax revenues, the net economic gain increases by reduction of consumer loss and increased gain of the producers. However, the so-called economics of free trade is prone to criticisms because of the ambiguity of the market. Aspects investigated are its effect on the producer, consumer, government and the workforce. The workforce or the driving force of the economy mirrors the pro’s and con’s of trade liberalization. The main question is that will free trade exact profitable netto as a whole or if it will effect a more positive impact on certain economic structures more specifically the workforce arena. The tangible effect is seen in the statistical economics of the country. Free Trade Agreement of US and Trade Adjustment Assistance to a number of countries resulted to a more structurally sound and profitable market. As of 2005, exportation industry generated $1. 2 trillion and manufacturing jobs at 20%. Job exportation comprises 15 % of the jobs/work. The service sector accounts for one-third of the exportation (2006 Trade Policy Agenda and 2005 Annual Report, 2006). As seen in the aforementioned statistics, the workforce gains in the non-traditional market system by the increase job outputs/opportunities by expanding consumer zones. Take into account that most of the consumers are found outside the state and thus freer trade would imply more jobs. Naturally, increase exportation would increase the Gross domestic Product and the real per capita income of the state. The workforce benefits by less cost of commodities, more products to choose from, higher income and a higher standard of living. Job opportunities created for the workforce over the past score years decreases poverty by bulks. However, this is not to say that free trade is beneficial at all times. Free trade members do always emerge as a winner. It all boils down to the clause of the agreement. High cost production does not always benefit from the free-trade system as compared to the low cost producers. Equal tariff rates are imposed at producers who may have spent different amounts on their cost production. Thus, this spawns economic inefficiency and as a result possible cost-cutting of the high cost producer can result to â€Å"reduced job seats. † Workforce or employs in domestic companies can be affected by the reduced cost (price dumping) of the â€Å"imported goods† especially in the face of stiff competitors. Small time producers, especially those belonging to the poor sector (e. g. farmers) do not benefit and instead their profits are reduced. Also, competitive industries like the First World countries (e. . US) have a distinct advantage because they can market superior products en masse over the less-superior products of the developing countries. The less developed countries have the lesser chance of having their products bought because of ‘colonial mentality’ among consumers. Thus there is still a question if free trade encourages workers or if it displaces them. The global marketing competition forwarded by the free market system on the workforce arena is bilateral; while it may have reaped benefits for the winning party, the loser tends to lose more in the process.