Thank you globalization.
After watching the documentary called 'Life and Debt', I found the idea of "free trade" in poorer countries to be very different than i would have first thought. It seems free trade in the case of Jamaica resulted in a large import of goods, to the point where local Jamaica could not compete with the huge multinational corps from other countries.
I read this in many places, granted, they all may have some bias (You can make a search with "reasons declining extreme poverty"). But, I personally do believe it is the main reason.
And due to comparative advantage, even competing against imports with free open trade is better than being closed off.
That may be the case, and one would hope the local businesses are able to adjust or that new jobs follow. But it is certainly not automatically the case that having your local market flooded with cheaper goods is better for consumers.
If you can't find such a good or service, then free trade has helped consumers.
I also said nothing about whether or not free trade in general is beneficial. What I addressed was the unsupported blanket assumption that free trade will automatically benefit consumers without any kind of qualifications.
As I said: It very well may do, but for that to be true in any specific case, then a number of other factors needs to line up as well.
Maybe. Sometimes. Under certain circumstances.
http://www.e-ir.info/2011/06/23/britain-free-trade-and-the-i...
As in the 1800s, it's a good deal for rich countries and a bad deal for developing countries since their infant industries can't compete and so never get off the ground.
China was wise not to follow this path. As was Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore and Hong Kong.
It was causing food to be exported to Britain while the Irish starved.
For instance, the more successful economies Japan, Germany, China, Korea didn't follow the same model of free trade that has been "suggested" to the South American countries. In fact, in the eighties everybody complained how difficult was to access to the Japanese markets.
The other thing is that is very different free trade of commodities vs. free movement of capitals but normally it's sold like it's the same. If you are in Peru is probably a bad idea get a lease denominated in U.S. dollars, no matter how good the deal looks now.
A few days ago I ordered & received a cheap scarf via mail. US$0.95 - delivered! from China! obviously whoever was involved didn't make much off the transaction, yet they WERE able to make & sell & deliver something to an idiot on the other side of the planet. Where there was no market before, Amazon & USPS & other businesses have pursued "globalization" to the point that a manufacturer & buyer a world apart could engage in profitable transactions.
The way out of poverty is capitalism, sellers & buyers making mutually profitable agreements, and globalization eliminating barriers of distance & borders.
The world's poorest are really getting less poor.