Ethical Challenge You are a member of a World Trade Organization task force that
ID: 1138305 • Letter: E
Question
Ethical Challenge You are a member of a World Trade Organization task force that is reviewing the nine-year banana conflict between the United States and the European Union (EU). The EU was giving preferential treatment to banana exporters from Africa, the Caribbean, and the Pacific island nations. But the United States challenged what it saw as unfair trading practices and the World Trade Organization agreed. The U.S. action gained support from global fruit companies Dole, Chiquita, and Del Monte, which account for nearly two-thirds of the fruit traded worldwide. The EU argued it was supporting struggling economies for which bananas make up a large portion of their income. 5-5. Should international trade be left to private enterprise only, or should governments openly manage it to benefit poorer nations? 5-6. Would you have argued on behalf of the United States or the EU? Explain. 5-7. What are the pros and cons of each side's arguments?Explanation / Answer
Answer of 5-5: I strongly recommend that INTERNATIONAL TRADE should be a mixed economy. A MIXED ECONOMY is the economy where there is 50-50 percent share for both the PRIVATE and the GOVERNMENT. INTERNATIONAL TRADE cannot be left to fully PRIVATE, as there will be MONOPOLY in the market and there will be price discrimination. The Private enterprises would be busy making profits from the INTERNATIONAL TRADE and they in return give special preferences to the countries who has got much stronger economies and ignore the smaller countries whose economy is struggling. Fully GOVERNMENT is also not preferable, as there would be a risk of loss making. The government might import goods at a higher prices to give preferences to the smaller struggling countries economies and export goods at a very high prices. The bargaining might not be there. So as a result of which there will be CURRENT ACCOUNT DEFICIT which will be huge loss to the economy. So a mixed economy is always preferred in such a case.
Answer of 5-6. To some extent I would have argued on behalf of the EUROPEAN UNION. Since they are giving special preferences to the exporters from AFRICA and other struggling economies, so in some way or the other EU is trying to revive the economies of those struggling economies of those countries.
Answer of 5-7: Pros and Cons of each side's arguments:
PROS: The EU is definately helping the smaller countries and allowing them to make some sort of profits from their exports.
The EU is helping the struggling countries to revive their economies so that their CURRENT ACCOUNT DEFICIT remains on the positive side.
CONS: By helping so much the smaller countries are completely dependent on the EU, which is not a good sign. They will not be able to stand on thir own. Overdependency is harmful.
Related Questions
drjack9650@gmail.com
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.