Free trade is supposedly a self-sustaining economic model that promotes progression through necessity. The theoretical result of a free trade economoy is a more equal distribution of wealth. A third world country has a surplus of cheap labour. Primary industries such as farming and mining rely heavily on labour. A more developed country should not be able to compete in these areas due to higher wages and therefore higher production costs. Exports in primary materials should flourish, generating wealth and economic growth. So why are there so many countries that are stuck in abject poverty?

The truth is that it is only the less developed nations that are forced to engage in the free market. Subsidisation protects domestic business to the point that American and French farmers can sell agro-products cheaper than African and South American countries. These countries that have opened their borders to foreign imports are suddenly flooded by cheap produce. So much to the point that the skills required to produce these goods are lost from the skill set of the workforce.

It is hard to critique something that does not really exist. On the theoretical side it seems a very sensible system for operating an economy. Free trade could be described as Evolutionary Economics with the weak weeded out by survival of the fittest and invention rewarded with wealth and success. Unfortunately we have yet to see it in action.

Learn more about this author, Vilmos Ziggy.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

---

Add your voice

Know something about Free trade philosophy critiqued?
We want to hear your view. Write now!