Global and Regional Economic

1) What would change if NAFTA did evolve into a Common Market?   

2) Explain if and how this change would be generally beneficial or generally harmful to businesses within the NAFTA area. 

3) Would this change reduce, leave unchanged, or increase cultural conflict within NAFTA?  Explain.  

Your initial response to this prompt is due Wednesday before midnight, and provide at least 3 responses to your classmates over 2 different days before Sunday at midnight. 

MY. ANSWER 

Changes that would Take Place if NAFTA Evolved into a Common Market

NAFTA regional economic integration allows the member states to trade freely amongst the member states without trade barriers. However, while dealing with non-member states, the countries can determine the terms to use while coping with them. On the other hand, the Common Market allows the member states to remove trade barriers within them and allow the free movement of labor and capital (Mason & Sanjyot, 2018). If NAFTA changes to a Common Market, people can easily find employment opportunities in the member states. As these workers seek employment in the member states, they will not be required to have visas and work permits. Common Market integration also allows member states to trade freely with non-member states in the same manner. Thus, this will contribute to a broad market. 

How these Changes Would Benefit or Harm Businesses in the NAFTA Area

The businesses would benefit through being able to access a vast pool of labor from the member countries. They would also benefit from a vast market for their goods since there would be no trade barriers between member and non-member states that trade with them. On the contrary, businesses would suffer if disruptions occur in these member states (Mason & Sanjyot, 2018). These disruptions could be caused by political unrest, economic instability, and natural disasters. The member states would experience sudden labor shifts as employees move to countries with better wages, and the countries with cheaper labor could experience an increase in manufacturing and production companies. 

Whether These Changes Would Lead to Cultural Conflicts

These regions would lead to disruptions in the cultural settings. As NAFTA promoted trade within the member states, most companies shifted to Mexico, where production costs and labor were cheaper. The shift led to increased female homicides, especially for females working in exploitative companies(Mason & Sanjyot, 2018). Thus, as more companies access themovement of labor and broader markets, these conflicts are prone to increase. There was also unequal wealth distribution of resources in the country. This unfair wealth distribution would lead to cultural conflicts as the various groups fight for their share of wealth. 

References

Mason A. Carpenter and Sanjyot P. Dunung (2018) Opportunities and Challenges in a Flattening World

 

RESPOND TO THE THREE STATEMENTS BELOW 

1. (PS) It was a pleasure to read your post to this week’s discussion thread on the topic of NAFTA and Common Markets. I think your insights in response to question two provide a great perspective on the potential benefits and harms to the member states within the common market. The emphasis on the shifts in labor due to better wages would lead to a major competitive swing to those who can pay their employees the best. In addition, the opportunity to provide cheap labor through manufacturing could cause individual companies to consider relocating and provide new jobs to areas that have not been able to experience the sort of pay before. The discussion this week on common markets and NAFTA provide a great view on how major some changes would be in our world of business. The shift to a common market would benefit some but not necessarily all because as trade barriers limit they also contain the overall competitive surrounding around their business. It also companies to mitigate the overall environment to their favor. Do you think we have not seen the NAFTA shift to a common market because of the control to provides for its member nations? And if they did, which of the three from NAFTA do you think benefits the most?

2.(BB)  You did an excellent job explaining what a common market was and how it would apply to the NAFTA area. I personally think that adjusting to a common market is a bad idea as americ would become very relient on the economies of the member countries. This relience pupts less control over our economy and could lead to bigger issues. The flip side of this is that labor would come by more easily as there would be no barriers to get labor from other member countries. Overall, great post.

3.(AK) 1) What would change if NAFTA did evolve into a Common Market?  

There would be further integration into a common market as there would be fewer restrictions on production and labor mobility. We could also expect unified trade policies, more collaboration with education and training, and financial systems would be more connected.

2) Explain if and how this change would be generally beneficial or generally harmful to businesses within the NAFTA area.

Initially, when NAFTA was introduced it was rather controversial especially in the United States as it was viewed the United States would be losing employable positions to Mexico. However, it has not been as successful as anticipated. It can be harmful as it can lead to the debate that it causes job loss and low wages. A transition could be beneficial as it would have a greater market expansion, access to a new labor pool, and an overall increased amount of trade, but there could be challenges to adaptation. 

3) Would this change reduce, leave unchanged, or increase cultural conflict in the region?  Explain.  

Global and Regional Economic

We offer the best custom writing paper services. We have answered this question before and we can also do it for you.

GET STARTED TODAY AND GET A 20% DISCOUNT coupon code DISC20

Leave a Comment