Thursday, September 29, 2011

Are All Barriers on Trade Intentional?



I had thought about focusing on the war on terror and its consequences, but fuel prices appealed to more so I decided to stick with that. With specific  reference to  fuel prices, as I think about my home country Liberia, I do not believe all barriers to trade are intentional. Everything in that country as with most places around the world are driven by the prices of fuel. Many Countries are endowed differently oil is certainly Not one of liberia's natural resources. Taking Liberian into consideration, as a comparative advantage - Liberia is  richly endowed with water, mineral resources, forests, and a climate favorable to agriculture, Liberia had been a producer and exporter of basic products, primarily raw timber and rubber and is reviving those sectors


 Liberia focus mostly focuses on Agriculture sector where lots of  timber logging and Rubber is done making up the overly stated 70% of GDP <https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/li.html>. To make my point, The employment opportunities is never really taken into account when these numbers are reported. Although the industry requires high consumption of fuel, you would think the employment opportunites will measure up. Unfortunately it does not. 85% of the population still remains unemployed. What makes up these numbers are mostly the multinational firms like firestone. The rest are small family farms are in turn to have to sell to their rubber to firestone firestone. The point here is, fuel prices seems to be doing a lot to limit the expansion among these little firms and it leaves a huge window for monopoly among a few companies with huge capital investments. I consider this an unintensional barrier to domestic expension in the industry.

Secoundly, majority of the population is spread across the country. For a country that returning from civil war and slowly attempting to rebuild its infrastructure, access to education is nothing to write home about. Most people are forced to come to the capital. Yet again, fuel not being a natural resource or access to is  a high expense for the nation own's fuel refining company thus pushing the prices up and putting an added burden on the population. Subsequenty, Access to education and or paying for education is incredibly high. The literacy rate is believed to be about 50% yet another unintentional barrier  to trade.  http://liberia.usaid.gov/stories_from_the_field/node/255  Not too many companies are willing to go in on that basis. This poses a profound barrier due to the inbalanced in a trained labor  force  

With 85% of the population unemployed and a country that is culturally built on a informal welfare system. It poses a huge barrier for investors especially since the political climate is still struggling with reforming an international image. 

The prices of fuel also limits the number of employment opportunities in the over all  local  industries..The illiteracy rate limits the ability to establish industries that would turn these raw timber materials into finished goods. The Gas prices are only good enough to import finished goods since local industries do not have the capacity to export. The local thriving business are  owned by few people with huge investment capital opportunities who in turn exploit local citizens since there  is no local price control. See the link below for more details on the country <https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/docs/notesanddefs.html#2012>


agriculture: 70%
industry: 8%
services: 22% (2000 est.)
Unemployment 85% (2003 est.)


Notwithstanding, I believe one policy that would dissolve these invisible unintentional barriers would be a need to invest more heavily in educating the younger population in critical areas of knowledge needs needed in the world  I say  particularly technology.  The firms engaged in these mining  rubber and timber industry should be required to  subsidized standardized formal elementary through high school education for all within their locality. And scholarships in technical and professional areas that will over the long term improve the country capacity building in the long term and preserve plus create job opportunities.This brings me to the local oil refinery leadership being a highly politicized position in the country.  This is only controlled by government and there has never been a discussion for a second refinery outside of a government owned one. On top of that, there is inside corruption activities where leadership in the ranks cross private deals for themselves, become  enriched in the role up to the point where the appointments are confidents of the president. However,  in defence of the monopolization o the oil resource, recent developments have suggest that oil have been found offshore 100 miles into Liberia atlantic waters. "The government has once again being in control of that resource signed a contract with chevron. " If approved, this three-year exploration project is expected to begin in the fourth quarter of 2010 and has a potential worth of US$10 billion. This agreement would create jobs for Liberians, increase the national income and help develop other sectors of the economy."  > http://allafrica.com/stories/201009010484.html   ..  All though, I still feel these contracts may still lack a true element that should benefit the population more then they are now, hopefully this should  shift the tide in reducing the abstract barriers to trade In favor of a policy that creates jobs for the less fortunate population

Saturday, September 17, 2011

Whether you believe that the obligation of businesses in the United States to pay a portion of healthcare benefits affects comparative advantage. Can they compete with countries who offer national healthcare? Are there other policies that could be enacted to improve the comparative advantage of US car manufacturers?


The status quote in the USA requires that health care costs do not go away. It is a necessary evil and part of the social services that makes American great. They must be protected. Our form of government does not promote providing free health care, so this will remain a dilemma for the big three auto makers. This is seen at the highest political levels today, even the president of the US, Barack Obama admitted in January 2010, ” that failure to change the system has brought it to a breaking point.

Notwithstanding, in terms of a fiscal policy that would be impact healthcare benefits affecting comparative advantage for the big 3.  I believe the burden on these firms is first of all the unionization that is a built into the work force. The union contracts are the biggest problems they faced. More importantly, I could not find a single American car that is sold world wide and made breaking record. Toyota for example according to http://whoartnow.hubpages.com/hub/Top-50-Best-Selling-Cars-Of-All-Time is noted as the “Over the last 45 years Japanese car maker Toyota have manufactured a record 32 Million Cars!  Cheap to buy and cheap to run worked well for Toyota over the last 45 years, and even with all the problems with the car industry at the moment, don't expect to hear of this little record breakers reign coming to an end anytime soon.” I  Could not find anything compared to this auto maker where the big three broke a similar record .

The unfortunate thing is the other auto makers are not compelled to deal with this in their overall overhead since they manufacture majority of their vehicles outside of the usa  .
I would propose more aggressive programs for younger college workers, Offer early retirement packages to older retirees to take them out of the system. Slowly transition their assembly line where the least cost of most companies occurs.  Research into options of opening factories in foreign nations to reduce costs. Keep patient design offices in the USA for strategic, Outsource developing parts and assembly them in the USA to reduce the health care cost. In early Dec 2009,  GM eye India's auto market US and Chinese car makers hope to gain access to one of the fastest-growing markets. english.aljazeera.net/business/2009/12/2009124123455292515.html
More importantly, invest heavily into R&D take advantage of opportunity make more fuel efficient cars.
This was noticed a while back. This was noticed June 10, 2009 when “General Motors took a big step toward its reinvention as the "New G.M." today when it opened what it calls the largest automotive battery laboratory in the United States, a move the struggling company believes will hasten the development of electric vehicles” phttp://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/biztech/06/10/wired.gm.battery.lab/index.html
Notwithstanding, it will take, years  before the big 3 automakers in the US can attain a comparative advantage given the current state of world economy and the fact that they are behind plus the added burden of health care cost for even retired workers.

Sunday, September 11, 2011

How Open to Openess are you?

My position on trade openness is a little complicated. While there are many benefits for
poorer nations, It seems like lesser and lesser  developed countries
benefit  properly from this opportunity. Most of this is owing to less infrastructural development.
The underdeveloped countries get the shorter side of the stick while rich nations get only
richer. Take for example.. In a recent statement made by President Barack Obama about 21.30 mins
into his American Jobs Act speech http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5f-FwN2ZJs&feature=player_embedded
, he said, " this will clear the way for trade agreements for American
companies to sell their products in other countries in panama, columbia, south korea
while also helping the workers  whose jobs have been affected by global competition.
This sounds so noble and promising from a domestic policy angle. Yet, countries like
columbia and panama are under developed countries whose citizens benefit we do not
take into account in making this opportunity seem glamourous. There is no way to be sure
these agreements will also benefit that people of that country fairly.


While my position may seem a little bias and with limited facts, take for example, Liberia in West Africa
for example, very few countries in the world would be considering that nation for trade agree
ments other than Rubber, iron ore or an opportunity to use its flag as a Maritime stamp
since registration requirements are not as ridgit. Maritime revenue makes up..
http://www.liberianforum.com/Articles/Brokering-Liberia-Maritime-Domestic-Resources.html
http://www.africaneconomicoutlook.org/en/countries/west-africa/liberia/
 The bottom line is the citizens in the country
do not benefit particularily well as it would be with a developed nation since all the laws that
should be there in the first place to support fairness do not exist.. So, the response to how opened
am i to openess i am is hopefully getting clearer. Untill there are laws that should benefit the nation benefiting from exports.
and equally the imports in trade, it seems to me trade openess is yet another opportunity to only
expand corporate interest for developed nations, with no clear account for this benefits less developed nations.Most especially the citizens .There must be better laws that will globally ensure there are benefits fro both the nation as a whole and its citizens, especially in poorer countries.

Tuesday, September 6, 2011

How open to openness are you?

Multiple things jumps out at me when I think of Trade openesness. For the purposes of this blog I will outline a few. 
  • Trade openess is a good thing. 
  • Without trade openess Globalization will never take place
  • Poorer countries need trade openess for their benefit.
  • Wealthy countries need not exploit less poorer nations.
  • There must be a lot of social responsibility best practices when countries who know better involved with those who don't.