Countries benefit enormously from free trade, both countries, otherwise they wouldn't engage in it.
That is, as you so eloquently put, total bullshit.
Most developing countries find themselves heavily indebted to Western countries before they even ponder the question of opening up their markets to their companies. By then, the choice is no longer free. That pressure is generally enough, but if not, there is always bribes on Swiss bank accounts to convince governments that "free markets are in their best interests".
Or did you think it is in any country's best interests to let huge US corporates in so that they can sell for a loss for years if necessary to garner market share and put mom & pop stores and brands out of business, meanwhile having nothing to say as the US slams quotas on THEIR basic exports like textile and steel?
You obviously have not been present in the initial stages of a developing country's market experience. Try it, and then let's see how much of your "they open up their market to Colgate and Coca Cola and Marlboro because they terribly want to" remains.
Free markets are a great idea if both trading partners are on equal footing. When one side is far less developed in terms of technology and capital, it is merely exploited as a market by the other, until such a time as it can compete with the other one. By then, of course, certain industries are gone, in most others giant brands have majority market share, and there are underlying dependencies in place from which the country will never recover to a self-sufficient position.
So, yeah, you love free markets, so do I. We both live in them and make good money out of them. But that does not mean we can lie about what free markets mean to a developing country. That is just sick. |
