Ha-Joon Chang, on the false economy of unfair trade deals

[Abuhafsah2009]

fix the Audio please, otherwise good video, i'm starting to like this guy

[rbl777]

@Abuhafsah2009 hold on a sec....

okay i fixed it

your welcome

[toseeornot2see]

These so called "free trade" agreements, aren't actually free; plainly because the larger economy - for instance the US - provides large subsidies to its own businesses, while deterring the weaker economy from providing such subsidies.

[Off2SeeTheWizard]

@LibertyDownUnder Yes, government must regulate trade. In turn, the *people* must get off their couches and turn off their TVs and regulate government by voting, by protesting - by constant and vigilant participation. Otherwise, private agencies and private money "regulate" trade - in their own interests ONLY. How does this promote freedom for the greatest number? Obviously, it doesn't.

[LibertyDownUnder]

Big Government agencies and corporations messed up world trade, and now the solution is for bigger Government agencies to regulate trade?

This man's teacher was an openly Marxist economist. So naturally, his solution to everything is to let Governments take over and regulate it.

[SoundOfDawn]

Through "Bad Samaritans", Dr. Chang has done a great job shedding light on facts of history kept away from discussion on free trade today. However, these ideas are not new, in fact, one of the most prominent figures that advocated views of economic nationalism was none other than one of the Founding Fathers of United States, Alexander Hamilton.

[Lodatzor]

It's such a shame that I find it so hard to listen to this guy. Not because of what he is saying, but because his accent is so thick that my brain switches off!

I'm a bad person, I know, but would subtitles kill ya? :(

[EasyEs]

I am a scientist and entrepreneur and what he says is false. I had shitty jobs paying my way through university, it never doomed me to a job installing ventilation.

Some economist use the worst analogy's.

[MachYew]

@EasyEs Yeah but you never had full time work imposed on you when you were 7 years old, preventing you from pursuing your uni education - which would be much closer to his analogy than your example of taking shitty jobs through your studies.

His analogy isn't the best, but its even generous to those who argue for these policies, because the reality of international trade arrangements is much worse. Local industry often gets wiped out and swallowed up in open competition with the west.

[Aiden057]

the sounds on this was incorrectly recorded resulting in the horrible distortion to the voice... what a pity.

[galileoknows]

This is a false arguement. Poor countries benefit tremendously from trading with wealthy countries, and the huge trade surplus indicates that their unfair protectionism IS a problem for our economy in the long term. Rather than being appreciative of the fact that they are getting huge technological benefits from interacting with developed nations, their elite beneficiaries spit on the west, while doing everything they can to cheat us.

[TheCZMan]

"and the huge trade surplus indicates that their unfair protectionism IS a problem for our economy in the long term."

Yes, sure. Like receiving real goods against paper money backed by no counter value ( which is translated in those trade surpluses) is the bad side of the bargain...

[holymolydude]

They don't benefit from the new technology acquired through trade because of the patent laws and lack of skills to learn from the technology. By opening their markets developing nations leave themselves open to torrents of capital that sweep in and bubble up then burst and flight. This isn't the age of enlightenment, the world is a complex place. Maybe if you new your history you'd understand how countries actually develop.

[mtw02]

He's not arguing that trade is bad; he's in favor of fair trade. If you read his book you'll get a much more detailed argument which lays out the pros/cons of the current trading system. And if protectionism is bad for development, as you say, then you'll need to account for why the US/UK and other countries used protectionism for decades to build up their economies. History doesn't support your point.

[fenderboy88]

@mtw02 How can fair trade be 'fair'',please expand?

[quinbrady]

18 of the G20 nations employed wholesale protectionist policies to get where they are, as well as colonialism and slavery. SAPs require developing nations to forego technology, and enforce production of low return primary products, which are vastly more susceptible to market fluctuations, in order to service debt incurred by irresponsible IFI practice. USA & EU argi-tariffs & subsidies are massively in excess of the 3rd world's. The rest of what you say is propaganda & self-interested nonsense.

[jed989]

this guy is the man

[SlicktheRick101]

Ok who besides me is doing a masters in IPE and actually does know what he is saying

[mozlovers]

I love all his books, this man is a genius!

please join the ha-joon chang reading group on facebook.

[flagship21]

don't buy countries product's you don't support. Ie racism, exploitation of developing countries. etc.

[mainemanx]

Chang's argument violates the most basic economic principles... the opportunity cost of his son going to work is foregoing his Dad's free lunch and a human capital rich future... developing countries don't have that luxury, their alternative is starvation. Possibly Oxford would have been a better choice... or most any non-Marxist JuCo in the States.

[dearbosie1]

Wrong. Developing countries do have this luxury in potentia, if unimpeded by these policies, and it is in potentia that you're discussing a human capital rich future anyway. The argument is still valid.

[dearbosie1]

Wrong. Your argument presupposes that Developing countries will never have the potential to grow their industries. On what do you base that? Just as this guy's son will not have a human capital rich future if he goes to work at age 6, developing country industries will have no chance of a rich future if they're exposed to free trade now. Argument still stands.

[rbl777]

@dearbosie1 you still think so after the crisis?

[cultpunk]

What are "the most basic economic principles"?

[postideo]

How can you say that there are no alternatives? Then,how Nokia and Toyota have possibly become as they are?

[haribcapra]

So are we to assume that poor people must always be poor and idiots always idiotic?

[tuberabban]

Unfortunately that so-called brain dead argument is being forced on poor countries by neoliberal institutions. Poor people have to pay for basic medical care, pay more for water, pay more for electricity, pay for basic education when wealthy countries have done the exact opposite by having good free health care and education and basic infrastructure.

[Kalydosos]

Excellent! I couldn't agree more.

[teambrizzo]

Thanks, this makes a very complicated issue a bit easier to understand.