User talk:Stevenarntson/group spaces/2009summeranalytical/group 2

Week 8 Assessment
You are about ready to start editing, I think. Here's where I'm seeing some possibilities for additions before that begins:
 * 1) Add a personal nonfiction element somewhere in the paper, possibly the 'bicycle conundrum' we were discussing.
 * 2) The WTO section still needs content.
 * 3) I'd like to see an anecdotal example or two in the solutions section, so the paper can end on a strong image of what your group envisions.
 * 4) The source list should be considerably expanded to include every referenced source.
 * 5) Then, start sifting through one another's work. Generally speaking, shorter paragraphs and typo fixes.


 * Best, Stevenarntson

MIDTERM GRADES

 * Hello Analytical Writing groups,

Just a note to let you know I posted midterm grades today. These grades are not based on accumulated points,and have no permanent affect on anything, but I wanted to give the groups a heads up in terms of where I feel everyone is at. On week 7, your group will meet with me according to the following schedule. Please post all materials you can on your main page before that, so I can talk to you about it during our meeting.


 * Group 1: 12:30-1
 * Group 2: 1:10-1:40
 * Group 3: 1:50-2:20
 * Group 4: 2:30-2:50

All group members should be present and prepared to discuss what they're researching and writing.

Best, Stevenarntson

Well there is the usual INTERNATIONAL TRADE wikipedia page that gives a good overview over the theories of international trade. Karolinaberglof 04:25, 14 July 2009 (UTC)karolinaberglof

Isolationism and free trade are a result of economic standings
I found an intersesting article regarding the state of the economy and trade.

The article states that when the countries economy is good, the trade barriers are open. This allows the citizens to spend alot of money and bypass inflation

while when the economy is bad, politicians try to protect or isolate our trade barriers. This cuts the country off from trade and as a result all nations suffer. The world than develops a weakened economy.

This was witnessed in 1930 when the Smoot-Hawley Tariff act past and as a result created an international trade war.

With in the country, domestic jobs which produced exporting goods, declined. (the question I ask on this sentence...Why not create jobs to help produce goods for the country?)

Now it seems 70 years later we are repeating this pattern. The United States is experinceing a failing economy. During his speeches Obama has expressed the need for Free trade, and yet allows congress to pass material inhibiting free trade and promoting protectionism and isolation of our barriers.

I found this subject matter to be intersesting. Please bring fourth anything else you guys have found of interest. This is only one very small sliver of the pie.

Here is a link the article

Global Research


 * John burbridge

So I was doing some more research on free trade and closed trade barriers and I think that perhaps this debate should be our topic. Now that I understand the concept more clearly I think it would be very interesting

From what i understand. Free trade raises our standard of living.

I believe we should lower our standard of living becasue we hurt our Earth to achieve these high standards. Therefore I think free trade may be not as good as it sounds.


 * John burbridge


 * Hi Group,
 * This sounds fascinating to me. Consensus?
 * Stevenarntson

WTO Policies & Opposing POV
Later in this section I will post what I have written for the final paper so far. Basically what I have learned over the past few weeks is that while the WTO is necessary for the world economy to function with some degree of efficiency, it also must be regulated. But this of course brings up several problems.

First, who should we entrust to regulate an organization like the WTO?

Second, how much control would they have over WTO, over us?

Third, who regulates the regulators?

Fourth, how much regulation is too much?

I am sure that you can think of some more examples; however, these are just a few I have come up with.

Also, I want to make sure that we clarify (probably will take place in my section of the final paper) that the way the WTO polices its members, and accepts or denies membership (either by monetary barriers, or by legal & trade base barriers) to nations. Because on the surface, the WTO puts up a great front for uniting nations under trade agreements.

Quick Facts: 193 nations in the world (recognized by the United Nations-meaning that a nation does NOT have to belong to the United Nations to be recognized)

153 Nations are members of the WTO

Leaving 40 Nations who are non-members of the WTO

There are 42 Nations (recognized by the U.N.) who are considered to be third world economies (6 of those nations did not give/have data) this means that there are at least two U.N. recognized nations who are members of the WTO. I will look on the membership list at www.wto.org and the third world nations list for the third world nations who are/may be members of the WTO.

ok, with that here is my paper thus far, let me know what you think. I will add in some more obvious citations within the next week or so.

Doug Sheets Analytical Writing :: WTO Policies & How They Help or Hurt Fair World Trade August 24, 2009

The World Trade Organization is the leading entity for world trade and economics. The “Organization” is made up of first world and even some second world nations who meet several times each year to discuss and debate then finally make into “trade agreement law” policies they believe are beneficial to the Organization’s members.

Upon hearing this, one might assume that the World Trade Organization is a pretty good group, after all they are meeting with one another, debating an issue from all sides and then finally coming to a consensus on the matters; which is a lot more than we can expect out of the United States Congress. However, the more one looks into the membership rules and application process, listed on their website, as well as who is and who is not benefitting from the policies listed on opposing organizations websites such as the Global Exchange, the more the WTO looks similar to a major corporation exploiting poor nations who will do the labor for less. Of the 193 recognized (by the United Nations) nations in the world, 153 of them are members of the WTO leaving 40 non-member nations. There are currently 42 nations considered to be third world nations (this number includes the six nations where data was unavailable). At the very best two third world nations are members of the World Trade Organization; leaving all real power over the world economy to developed and developing nations i.e. the wealthiest nations. The WTO does have a purpose and an important use; however its power must be regulated like anything else. Trade is not always going to be truly fair and we should not expect that it ever will be; but the point we want to make is that while one group may always come out on top in a trade deal, we should not support or allow an organization who essentially bans poor nations from joining their organization, and then exploits them economically to operate; especially in our name and for our benefit.

the end Dc.sheets

Global Market needs new policies
According to this paper written by The Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy and CIDSE, the world is experiencing an ever growing food crisis.

The European Union and the Unitied States are the biggest supporters and users of unregulated or free trade. They have the ability to change their policies and redirect their methods in order to improve the food crisis.

At this point in their policies the EU and US belive that a global market is the answer for stable food, but as experience shows, this is not the case.

Some reasons a global market has not worked. The EU and US have placed policies inhibiting the use of governmental support of agriculture for developing countries. While at the same time creating policies that fully supported the EU and US agricultural and food industries.

Basically for fear of protectionist trade barriers, the EU and US have made it almost impossible for developing countries to be sustainable. Making these countries dependent on the EU and US which has cause a global food crisis.

John burbridge

Here is a link to the paper on which I recived this information

The Institute of Agriculture and Trade Policy, CIDSE

Hey everyone, i had a quick tour w/ some people at the WTO two weeks ago> they showed me around a little and essentially "tooted" their own horn about how great they are and how beneficial their policies are to anyone and everyone. Of course they have a biased point of view, as we all do. I asked why one must pay to be a member and why no one who is not a member can join in on the discussions about world trade policies, the answer she gave was that "There would be too many parties involved to efficiently manage the world trade policies."

I believe that there is some truth to that; however, I also believe that the reason we would have to pay to become a member is so that the top dogs in the organization can maintain a large profit margin. I will be doing some research this weekend & I'll be loging back on then to read everything you guys have come up with so far.
 * Dc.sheets

Contemperary view point: opposing internaiton trade organizations rough draft (un-finished)
Hey guys I have written a short rough draft on my section. I am placing it up here in hopes to better the unified idea of our paper.


 * The current approach to international trade and its policies need to change. It is apparent that the present organizations that control the flow of trade have done a poor job supplying the world citizens with the proper necessities to live. The resources of our world are distributed unevenly amongst countries; to the extend that in certain places, people have an over flux of materials, while people are unable to survive because of a lack of materials. With the current system of international trade, places that need resources have been put in a situation where they are dependent on other countries for their necessities and have become unsustainable.
 * The organizations that control the world trade claim to be advocates of free trade. The term free trade refers to a trading policy where governments do not add taxes or tariffs at trade barriers. Yet countries that belong to these trade organizations still have tariffs and taxes at their trade barriers. For example the United States and European Union regulate their trade barriers for imports coming from countries belonging to other governances. Interestingly, countries that are boardering the United States have true free trade with the United States and there are no regulations placed on traded goods. Similarly, all countries belonging to the European Union have true free trade. If the world is to trade properly, all countries must have the same benefits. When the trading organizations state they advocate free trade, they must allow all countries to gain from their ideals equally.
 * The policy of free trade inherently raises our standard of living. This can be a great outcome for the whole world. The current international trade policies makers have done nothing to balance the standard of living equally to every person on the Earth. People are dying due to such low living standards. Others standards are so high, that in order to sustain, our Earth and its inhabitants have been put into jeopardy.

--John burbridge 05:55, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

A little piece of history
this is the beginning to my part of the paper Europe and also the world suffered from two devastating wars in the beginning of last century. WWI was beyond what anyone ever thought could happen, the industrial world finally entered the scene of war. Human against the machine, and the amount of people that died during WWI was something that did not have its match in any previous conflict, the brutality and the slaughter was unheard off. Some even called it, the War that would end all Wars, but how wrong they were. After WWI Germany became the black sheep and was, and isolated Germany a country already left in shatters and was charged to pay for the restoration of the other involved “winning parties”. When the great depression struck and inflation became out of hands, the German population suffered harder than the rest of Europe. Adolf Hitler managed to take the power by promising the Germans that he could bring them back to prosperity, to bring them out of the depression, to create jobs for the nation, to once again raise and put food on the table for his people. Hitler was very successful in creating jobs and blowing hope into a nation in despair, he proposed and started to build the now so famous Autobahn, but that was before he decided to march right into Poland and Austria. Most of us know the gruesome war that followed, and how the first atomic bomb got dropped, the holocaust, the destruction European cities and land. So this is how the Bretton Woods conference came into being, it was a gathering of 730 delegates from all 44 Allied nations. The meeting was held from 1 July to 22 July 1944 in July, when the agreements were signed to set up the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). GATT is what later turned into World Trade Organization (WTO). Set up during the meeting was also the Bretton Woods system of monetary management. “The Bretton Woods system was the first example of a fully negotiated monetary order intended to govern monetary relations among independent nation-states.” Those institutions were born to give out loans to the war-torn Europe and also to find common meeting grounds, so a war of this caliber never be able to happen again --Karolinaberglof 18:10, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

History rough draft
Here's the beginning of the history section, and a few links to some articles I thought were interesting.

http://www.econlib.org/library/Columns/Irwintrade.html

http://finance.mapsofworld.com/trade/history-international.html

http://www.economywatch.com/international-trade/history.html

““Do you guys take American Express?” The woman at the counter looked nervous. “Oh, sure,” I replied, “We take everything. Except pelts. We no longer accept pelts.” She laughed. “I’ve got a muskrat in my purse…” she offered jokingly. The very idea of common trade is funny now, but it really wasn’t that long ago that the trade of raw goods was a much more frequent transaction. The principle is simple: I have something you want, you have something I want, and we trade. I raise chickens, you raise pigs, I trade you eggs for some bacon, and now we both have breakfast. Except that now, I still have chickens, but no longer have a pig. It’s a great deal for me, but now you haven nothing left to barter with. Except that cow. “How about that cow?” I say, “I’ll give you 10 dozen eggs and this leg of prosciutto for that cow.” The leg of prosciutto looks vaguely familiar, but you agree. You need the eggs. A week later, I approach you again. “Have I got a deal for you. Eight gallons of milk, six dozen eggs, and a pound of beef jerky, and all I want in return is permission to fish in your lake.” You reluctantly agree. You need the milk. Very quickly, this simple exchange becomes a sticky situation. This parable is not as farfetched as it might sound. In fact, it’s a lot like international trade. Spices, furs, food, livestock, and raw materials have been traded worldwide for thousands of years. In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, basic rules of mercantile economics were established. It was more favorable for a country to export manufactured goods and import raw goods, and ideally, any items exported would exceed the value of the raw goods imported. This kind of balance is impossible to achieve for every country—the system invariably benefits the stronger, more established countries, a trend that continues today. The rich get richer, and the poor get poorer. Not only are these trades often unfair, they are not always sustainable. Just like in the bacon and eggs story, the weaker party gives away valuable resources in exchange for what they need in the moment. For example, using farmland to chip away at a national debt, and not directly benefiting the people. Fair trade principles include fair labor conditions, fair market pricing, democratic organizations, community development, and environmental sustainability.

--Stevenaguilar 19:18, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Stevenaguilar 19:10, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Solutions Page?
How are we going to write this section? We all need to contribute.

Our teacher Steven mentioned that we should talk about using more sustainable methods to produce neccesary goods for trade. Also using these techniques for local goods and food locally

So I started a rough draft of the solutions section. Please go back, read over, alter, and add any information you feel neccesary. The current writing is merely a starting point for us to grow on. Something for us to work off of, and by no means thought of as a permanent proposal.

Dc.sheets my take on the solutions...

I am thinking that we need to take a hard lined approach when talking about solutions. I mean this in terms of who is and is not at fault and who has the power to change what is going on.

That being said, I believe that the WTO and similar organizations within international and national governments are mostly to blame, along with the corporate interests who essentially pay (through campaign contributions primarily) politicians and voting members of the WTO to agree upon policies favorable to business. It is up to a large organization which includes all nations to keep the WTO in check, how they do that i do not know, but i think that if they can figure out how to keep the poorer nations in control, they should be able to find a solution to keep themselves under control as well.

AS far as what I think we can do... I don't really know. It is (in my mind) hard to persuade someone to believe that an organization is "evil" when both we and that person benefit (at the very least indirectly) from the trade policies from that organization. But i think that if we can stress the idea of human exploitation of other humans it would bring a powerful image into people's minds. I think everyone knows how it feels to be used. Let me know what you guys think of my ideas thus far, and post some of your thoughts down here as well. thanks

Dc.sheets

Hey guys, I have posted some ideas for our summary and solutions page