'@ACrowbarEnthusiast' "God forbid a a Hollywood production try and expand their target audience"
Self-censorship is awesome, comrade, you'll like it. Not that Hollywood had problem with it anyway.
"Also yes there are kinks in US- Canadian free trade, but he answer is to try and deal with those particular issues, not throw the whole thing and its many benefits out"
US-Canada relationships are as good as it gets, and still you have that recurring problem for over a decade. If you constantly fixing the same thing maybe it's best to change it for something better.
"but he answer is to try and deal with those particular issues"
Ok, deal with this: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/files/2012/10/Rare-Earths.jpg
You can easily get this in any sector of the economy where one or few countries can achieve complete control of the market via price manipulation. See also: historical role of OPEC and why Arabs are so against fracking.
That's one of the reasons why you won't see a lot of free trade in space launch services, for example.
Free trade is advantageous economically (but not politically) in a model with ideal competition and when there is zero lag and no significant cost in replacement of lost service or trade good or workforce retraining. As long as there are no Universal Assembler of some sort, you don't have that in real life. At the same time, you have examples (like "One China policy" that you did not address) where domination of specific industry by some country can lead to undue pressure on your internal or international policy.
By the way, here's another recent example that combines free trade with another aspect of globalization - open borders: Mexico is throwing a fit because of Trump's wall. Legitimate goal of limiting illegal immigration is met like an existential threat (well, it is, for status quo in local politics) by Mexican government. Get this - one country threatens another with trade and legal war for efforts in enforcing the existing border and laws.
Another example - what looks like Chinese attempt of population replacement in Russia's Far East.
Due to legal immigration and now implemented "zones of advanced social development" it is entirely possible that in a couple of decades China can unilaterally move the border deeper into Siberia and there will be no way to stop the loss of territory. Not that it is being utilized for it's full potential now, but since when argument of "I'll take it for free, you're not using it anyway" was acceptable in transfers of territories?
"As for abusive relationships, If my friend was in an abusive relationship I'd tell him to get out of that relationship, but not stay out of relationships forever. "
Globalization implies that you have no choice in this matter.
317
'@ACrowbarEnthusiast' "God forbid a a Hollywood production try and expand their target audience"
Self-censorship is awesome, comrade, you'll like it. Not that Hollywood had problem with it anyway.
"Also yes there are kinks in US- Canadian free trade, but he answer is to try and deal with those particular issues, not throw the whole thing and its many benefits out"
US-Canada relationships are as good as it gets, and still you have that recurring problem for over a decade. If you constantly fixing the same thing maybe it's best to change it for something better.
"but he answer is to try and deal with those particular issues"
Ok, deal with this:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/files/2012/10/Rare-Earths.jpg
You can easily get this in any sector of the economy where one or few countries can achieve complete control of the market via price manipulation. See also: historical role of OPEC and why Arabs are so against fracking.
That's one of the reasons why you won't see a lot of free trade in space launch services, for example.
Free trade is advantageous economically (but not politically) in a model with ideal competition and when there is zero lag and no significant cost in replacement of lost service or trade good or workforce retraining. As long as there are no Universal Assembler of some sort, you don't have that in real life. At the same time, you have examples (like "One China policy" that you did not address) where domination of specific industry by some country can lead to undue pressure on your internal or international policy.
By the way, here's another recent example that combines free trade with another aspect of globalization - open borders: Mexico is throwing a fit because of Trump's wall. Legitimate goal of limiting illegal immigration is met like an existential threat (well, it is, for status quo in local politics) by Mexican government. Get this - one country threatens another with trade and legal war for efforts in enforcing the existing border and laws.
Another example - what looks like Chinese attempt of population replacement in Russia's Far East.
Due to legal immigration and now implemented "zones of advanced social development" it is entirely possible that in a couple of decades China can unilaterally move the border deeper into Siberia and there will be no way to stop the loss of territory. Not that it is being utilized for it's full potential now, but since when argument of "I'll take it for free, you're not using it anyway" was acceptable in transfers of territories?
"As for abusive relationships, If my friend was in an abusive relationship I'd tell him to get out of that relationship, but not stay out of relationships forever. "
Globalization implies that you have no choice in this matter.