3 ms·
As always with any trade agreement there will be winners and losers on both sides. Sure on the macro level you can run some numbers and conclude that one is th
by orange_tee 6y ago
As always with any trade agreement there will be winners and losers on both sides.
Sure on the macro level you can run some numbers and conclude that one is the overall winner, but this is of little meaning to the people. What is more meaningful is for each individual to figure out if they stand to gain or lose.
If the EU agreed to "sell out" an industry, that is only because they got something in return for some other industry. This is one of the criticisms of trade agreements in general. The government basically picks winners and losers... their say can make or break whole industries.
- rjknight 6y agoNormally we don’t think of trade in terms of “winners” and “losers”, at least in absolute terms. Any restriction on trade reduces the overall level of possible economic activity, so a situation that reduces trade relative to the alternative is an overall loss. We can talk about “winners” and “losers” in relative terms, if we accept that “winning” just means “losing less than the other side”. Of course, this isn’t a purely economic question: people who voted for Brexit did so in part because they valued other things (e.g. restrictions on immigration, national sovereignty, national democratic self-determination) more than the economic cost that comes from having them.
- orange_tee 6y agoAs I said who is winning and losing on a macro level is of little importance, so sure if you want me to take the liberal view, all are winners. But what is more important is winning and losing on the micro level and now I will disagree with you if you tell me there are no losers. There most certainly are losers. Some industries from both sides will be sacrificed as part of the deal and people involved in those industries will certainly lose a whole lot of money.