Korean Job Discussion Forums

[liveinkorea316]

Car import tariffs into South Korea from USA are 8%
Car import tariffs into USA from South Korea are 2.5%

South Korea exports roughly 740,000 cars per year into the USA
The USA exports less than 50,000 into South Korea per year ( I think)

Now, the reason US exports into South Korea are so low is not just because the tariff is higher, it is also because there are many other barriers in Korea that prevent US cars coming in. Many would say these are done on purpose, some would say they are incidental. Use the example of Japan denying entry of an Australian apple on the grounds that it could contaminate Japanese biosecurity and you can get the picture.

South Korea has vehicle emission laws, engine safety laws and vehicle size laws and a whole host of other standards that (some would say) are erected to make it hard for outside players to enter Korea. When outside players conform to those rules...the rules are changed. South Korean manufacturers are consulted secretly first and can change first. It is a game.

It happened to apple. The i-phone was kept out of the South Korean domestic phone market for long enough for Samsung to develop(see steal) the Galaxy platform. Almost 2 years I recall. They did this by insisting that i-phones have some type of frequency or specification that local phones have. This was OBVIOUSLY and on purpose not an easy thing to put into an i-phone and while it was done ( and for not logical or obvious benefit to anyone) it gave time to Samsung to develop the now highly successful Galaxy phone we all know today.

I am sounding cynical because well that is how this process has worked. That is not to say Korean cars or phones are not good or even the best in the world, but lets not kid ourself that they don't or haven't used underhanded tactics to gain that competitive advantantage.

Where does that fit into this current debate? not sure... tariffs on Korean cars in the USA are quite low as is. They will eventually drop off. I think the real benefits of this FTA are small and spread over a wide range of goods. Each country takes a small hit on autos. Korea takes a hit on agriculture but I suppose they balance this with the hope that growth in automobile and electrtonics sales in the next ten years will outweigh this loss.

When you really think about it Korea should be making its money from cars and electronics not agriculture, in terms of trade flows anyway. Anything which helps it sell more of its cars is a good thing. More foreign cars into Korea will also help to improve the quality of the Korean car market.

[coralreefer_1]

[atwood]

[nstick13]

I'm originally from the rust belt (NW Ohio), my grandfather was a foreman at Ford, and I know too many people who worked in factories that are now out of work. I used to be anti-FTA (and in a way I still am) but I've been a bit more receptive of this one, as in many regards it gives American companies more access to Korean markets.

My hometown makes Whirlpool washing machines. I'd love to see those sold here. There are entire closed factories that make automobile parts and the entire thing.

FTAs typically exploit the weaker of the 2 countries, but Korea, being in the top 10 economies, is strong enough to not really be "weaker" economically than the US. An FTA can definitely be a form of economic colonization; in this case, I don't think it is.

America needs any market it can get access too, because consumer demand in the US is dwindling.

[Yaya]

Korea is one of the top 15 economies in the world, not top 10.

[joesp]

This has been an interesting thread and I read each and every post.

I can say that there is no need to go into the merits of free trade. The response to the US-Korea FTA is a knee-jerk response by the Koreans. It is a cultural response because the word "USA" is in the name of the FTA. Korea is really good at generating emotions but not too good at fixing the aftermath or thinking a problem out logically. I compare this to their knee-jerk response to the US beef import thing a few years ago. Or, the tank running over 2 school girls about a decade ago.

The other problem is that in Korea, there is no unbiased news source, so what source are people supposed to use to evaluate the FTA?

There is no counter-argument available. The question is not even a question, it is just a knee-jerk response.

However, I believe it is about time. IMB (이명박) has signed so many FTAs during his presidency .... Korea is an advanced country now in terms of economy, but not in terms of attitude. They really have to change their attitude to become part of the international community. They have shown very little compromise with foreign powers historically. This all comes to a head with the USA- FTA. This is an opportunity for Korea to truly prove its desire to be a fair player in many areas. However, their bearishness and nationalism are standing in the way. IMB (이명박) is trying to move Korea forward but Korea has lots of negative momentum trying to deny change.

Actually, China and the EU are bigger trading partners than the US with South Korea. However, the US is closest to South Korea in terms of a friendly relationship. Koreans have a very favorable view of America after their assistance following the Korean war. I am confident that this friendship will lead in the end to a good result.

Heck, I even saw Saturday Night Live Korea a few days ago!!!

[bucheon bum]

[Kimchifart]

[sublunari]

Tried asking an anti-FTAist why he wasn't against similar FTAs with Europe or India, and he rationalized his anti-Meegookness by saying he didn't have a problem with those other agreements because Koreans don't want anything from such places

I should mention that this person is a rather intelligent sixth grader who wants to be president. Despite this he supports Park Gun Hye, while also partaking in the ancient Korean tradition of despising 2MB.

Am I right in saying Koreans shouldn't be afraid of this FTA because the US government seems to prefer sending jobs overseas in exchange for cheap foreign goods? Also, the idea that this will hurt Korean farmers is a load of crap; I live in a farming town, and I haven't seen a single farmer here under the age of forty, and most are a lot older.

Barring a worldwide nuclear war, the future of agriculture lies in mass production, and the inevitable (successful) synthesis of meat will eliminate any need for animal husbandry. So really, no more whining about the farmers. It's like the guy who invented the square rock complaining about the other guy who invented the wheel.

At the same time, as a communist, I'm also convinced that there is no difference between the moneyed classes of any country, and that when they enact deals together, those deals are principally designed to further their own interests, usually at the expense of everyone else.

[atwood]

Kind of off topic, but speaking of the EU, whatever happened to the Ikea store that was supposed to open in Seoul this year? Anyone know anything about it?

[The Floating World]

[pkang0202]

[The Floating World]

[pkang0202]

[The Floating World]