Currently you have the opportunity to vote on the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) that involves eleven countries along with our own. This partnership will help remove trade quotas and tariffs with the countries involved in increasing international trade. According to Amadeo, the TPP also covers a wide range of services including food safety standards, telecommunication and financial services. I believe that this Trans-Pacific Partnership is not a good fit for the United States and you should not let it progress any further as it will not benefit the United States. I believe this due to income inequality, Stolpher-Samuelson, and foreign countries with prisoner dilemma motivations.
One reason why I think the United States should not agree to …show more content…
Along with this they refer to factors of production being: land, labor, and capital. The more trade that occurs between different states, the more likely a state will shift to an economy which has more abundant factors. Demand for scarce factors will be lessened as the other state will have a comparative advantage on it. Individuals of abundant factors will have the most to gain as they benefit from the process of freeing trade. The abundant factor price will rise increasing the profit of said economy. But a scarce factor will decrease in price in order to compete with another states abundant factor which in turn will hurt that economy. This means that any individuals involved in that factor will be significantly hurt and may not be able to compete. Because the TPP throws out the ability to put quotas or tariffs on the scarce factor, there is little that can be done to help the scarce economy. For instance, the United States has high amounts of land and capital but not unskilled labor, abundant factor. The United States in turn is a country with a high level of skilled labor over unskilled labor. As mentioned earlier in the paper other countries in the partnership have a larger workforce of unskilled laborers making it more difficult for the United States to compete with, i.e. scarce …show more content…
They export a large number of vehicles to the U.S. whereas the U.S. barely exports any vehicles to Japan. They are not interested in importing vehicles as it would shrink their trade surplus. This would be a huge market for the U.S. to be involved in, but due to its Surplus, Japan will always have a prisoner’s dilemma over the auto industry. Essentially a prisoners dilemma is when two individuals more than likely won’t cooperate even though it will more than likely benefit each other and be in their best interests. They are only in it for themselves and will do whatever it takes to get that out of the TPP. Others argue that if the United States can get Japan to open up to agreements with auto industry by dropping tariffs and quotas then it will be worth the U.S. to get involved as it will help outweigh the negatives. I believe that we should be more cautious when it comes to this due to the government bailout of the auto industry in 2008. Overall Senator Thune, I believe the United States along with yourself stand to benefit by dismissing the Trans-Pacific Partnership. It will not help us economically except for the wealthy. It will lower real wages of unskilled workers creating a greater dependency on government aid. Finally other countries are only doing what is good for themselves and not the greater good of the world. I thank you for your time and I hope you
One reason why I think the United States should not agree to …show more content…
Along with this they refer to factors of production being: land, labor, and capital. The more trade that occurs between different states, the more likely a state will shift to an economy which has more abundant factors. Demand for scarce factors will be lessened as the other state will have a comparative advantage on it. Individuals of abundant factors will have the most to gain as they benefit from the process of freeing trade. The abundant factor price will rise increasing the profit of said economy. But a scarce factor will decrease in price in order to compete with another states abundant factor which in turn will hurt that economy. This means that any individuals involved in that factor will be significantly hurt and may not be able to compete. Because the TPP throws out the ability to put quotas or tariffs on the scarce factor, there is little that can be done to help the scarce economy. For instance, the United States has high amounts of land and capital but not unskilled labor, abundant factor. The United States in turn is a country with a high level of skilled labor over unskilled labor. As mentioned earlier in the paper other countries in the partnership have a larger workforce of unskilled laborers making it more difficult for the United States to compete with, i.e. scarce …show more content…
They export a large number of vehicles to the U.S. whereas the U.S. barely exports any vehicles to Japan. They are not interested in importing vehicles as it would shrink their trade surplus. This would be a huge market for the U.S. to be involved in, but due to its Surplus, Japan will always have a prisoner’s dilemma over the auto industry. Essentially a prisoners dilemma is when two individuals more than likely won’t cooperate even though it will more than likely benefit each other and be in their best interests. They are only in it for themselves and will do whatever it takes to get that out of the TPP. Others argue that if the United States can get Japan to open up to agreements with auto industry by dropping tariffs and quotas then it will be worth the U.S. to get involved as it will help outweigh the negatives. I believe that we should be more cautious when it comes to this due to the government bailout of the auto industry in 2008. Overall Senator Thune, I believe the United States along with yourself stand to benefit by dismissing the Trans-Pacific Partnership. It will not help us economically except for the wealthy. It will lower real wages of unskilled workers creating a greater dependency on government aid. Finally other countries are only doing what is good for themselves and not the greater good of the world. I thank you for your time and I hope you