Question

Using your economic knowledge and your research, compose a 350- to 450-word editorial that evaluates the effectiveness of these two agreements in bettering the US economy. Keep in mind that evaluating means discussing the pros and the cons, picking the side that seems stronger, and using facts to justify your choice.

Answer 1

Answer:

Economic

Explanation:

This is particularly problematic in countries with extensive publicly-funded higher education systems. After receiving training in their home countries, many people emigrate and spend their professional career in a more lucrative economy at the expense of their home country.

Globalization can also have a significant negative impact on taxation. Since many companies are able to trade with one country while being based in another, large corporations often exploit tax havens such as Luxembourg, Switzerland, and Hong Kong to avoid paying taxes in the countries where they generate their profits.

This can often hurt consumers in the form of higher taxes on consumer products and property. Since countries often have little control over where big companies register to avoid tax, they are often forced to raise other taxes in order to make up for lost revenues due to corporate tax avoidance.

Many economists and environmentalists have criticized globalization due to its environmental impact. Learn about the environmental effects of globalization in

Answer 2

Answer

The benefits of trade agreements are not felt evenly by all industries in an economy. In fact, even member nations gain varying advantages by entering into trade agreements. However, despite these drawbacks, the United States continues to act on its commitment to free trade. In 2005, the United States signed a fair trade agreement (FTA) with Australia, and in 2012, it signed a trade protection agreement (TPA) with Colombia. Both agreements have been in force for a while. Now the question is, Have these agreements benefited the US economy? Let’s examine the impact of the bilateral agreements with Colombia and Australia on the US economy.

According to the USTR, the International Trade Commission (ITC) predicted that the United States–Colombia TPA would increase national GDP by $2.5 billion (Office of the US Trade Representative). Under the TPA, US exports to Colombia increased from $12.0 billion in 2010 to $18.3 billion in 2013 (US Department of State). The TPA seems to have delivered on its promise, because according to the USTR, US exports to Colombia increased by 30% in 2013 (Office of the US Trade Representative). So financially, Colombia is a lucrative market for the United States. However, the main opposition to the TPA stemmed from concerns about the terrible labor conditions in Colombia and the violent threats to those seeking to improve labor conditions in a country rife with crime. Although violence is a major concern, the FTA will eventually help both nations by bringing about social and labor reforms through economic activity. By helping Colombia become a peaceful country, the United States can pave the way for increased trade with Colombia in the future.

The United States–Australia FTA received considered opposition in both countries. US dairy farmers, ranchers, and small farmers were anxious about job losses resulting from the free entry of Australian products into the US market. However, if we judge by the boost in exports, the FTA has contributed to overall US economic growth. According to the USTR, in the first five years of the FTA, US exports to Australia increased by 33% (Office of the US Trade Representative). The FTA removed all tariffs on American imports into Australia, giving US exporters barrier-free entry into Australian markets.

The export industry plays a key role in driving economic growth and generating jobs in the United States. Colombia and Australia are two large and important markets for US exporters. The United States faces competition from other nations for access to these markets. By signing trade agreements, American goods can compete effectively in these markets. Although the agreements with Colombia and Australia are opposed for valid reasons, the agreements will benefit the US economy over time