| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
swinewho
Joined: 17 Aug 2009
|
 Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 5:46 pm Post subject: US-K free trade to be implemented March 15th... |
 |
|
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/biz/2012/02/123_105405.html
I'm expecting there to be some lively protests in and around Seoul - It wouldn't suprise me if a load of farmers went and released 100's of pigs and cows into the city 
Or a 'dirty' protest like a farmer in the UK did once! Now that would make world news! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Luciddreamer
Joined: 31 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 6:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Although it's purported that the FTA will create jobs in various sectors, why does this agreement negatively affect the Korean farmers and other industries?
What are the cons of the agreement?
Anyone able to shed light on this? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SeoulNate
Joined: 04 Jun 2010
Location: Hyehwa
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 6:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Luciddreamer wrote: |
What are the cons of the agreement?
|
Drives down the cost of many goods, which is never good for the little guy who is even smaller in Korea with all the middle men. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ssuprnova
Joined: 17 Dec 2010
Location: Saigon
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 6:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SeoulNate wrote: |
| Luciddreamer wrote: |
What are the cons of the agreement?
|
Drives down the cost of many goods, which is never good for the little guy who is even smaller in Korea with all the middle men. |
Nope. The "little guy" gets paid peanuts compared to the profit margins made by the middle men, with or without the FTA. However, if there is an influx of cheaper foreign goods that might result in lowering the generally accepted price points, which is, again, not good for the middlemen since they'd have to lower their margins. Ergo, they scare the "little guy" that the big bad FTA will take away their livelihoods, hoping to get him riled up and protest.
That being said, this is Korea. I wouldn't hold my breath for any changes for the average Kim. The conglomerates will probably control imports and end up increasing their margins (i.e., selling the goods at the same price even though they'd be cheaper to import and pocketing the difference). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
swinewho
Joined: 17 Aug 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 7:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| That being said, this is Korea. I wouldn't hold my breath for any changes for the average Kim. The conglomerates will probably control imports and end up increasing their margins (i.e., selling the goods at the same price even though they'd be cheaper to import and pocketing the difference). |
This ^ i'm guessing
One good thing about high food prices are I now only generally eat seasonal fruit and veg and buy them from my local market - cheaper than E -mart ect (90% of the time)..... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fermentation
Joined: 22 Jun 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 7:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ssuprnova wrote: |
That being said, this is Korea. I wouldn't hold my breath for any changes for the average Kim. The conglomerates will probably control imports and end up increasing their margins (i.e., selling the goods at the same price even though they'd be cheaper to import and pocketing the difference). |
Apparently this was the case with beef. Imported beef costs went down but the stores ended up either maintaining or even hiking up their prices because consumers still pay for it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
coralreefer_1
Joined: 19 Jan 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 6:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| swinewho wrote: |
| Quote: |
| That being said, this is Korea. I wouldn't hold my breath for any changes for the average Kim. The conglomerates will probably control imports and end up increasing their margins (i.e., selling the goods at the same price even though they'd be cheaper to import and pocketing the difference). |
This ^ i'm guessing
One good thing about high food prices are I now only generally eat seasonal fruit and veg and buy them from my local market - cheaper than E -mart ect (90% of the time)..... |
Agreed. Since the EU FTA, prices have not changed, even though numerous newspaper articles have been written about it. Importers are simply pocketing the difference, and frankly until a few importers are willing to drop their prices to reflect the FTA, ,(to become more competitive and increase their business) none of them will, which I find completely in their right to do so. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spartacist
Joined: 18 Feb 2012
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 4:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Cons -
doesn't actually benefit great mass of society, as those on this thread who have pointed out the failure of prices to fall after the EU FTA came into effect have shown
the success of Asian economies was not based on free trade but rather on pragmatically protecting industries. Market fundamentalists however largely ignore history in favour of 200 year old theories such as Ricardo's, based on ridiculous assumptions and dressed up with the arcane and flawed mathematics of neoclassical economics
the FTA only has one or two chapters out of about 24 about trade, the rest are about liberalising industry sectors for US firms that make it more difficult for people to protest against them, liberalising the financial industry in similar ways that lead to the global financial crisis etc
A little brief but hope that helps |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Luciddreamer
Joined: 31 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 4:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Thanks guys |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nismo
Joined: 31 Aug 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 9:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Chilean wines seem to have realized success in the South Korean market post FTA. Not that I'm in support of FTA - I think there needs to be a house-cleaning of local conglomerates before even thinking of an FTA with the U.S. The price-fixing in South Korea is an absolute joke, and South Korean residents get the short-end of the stick - low-quality at high-prices.
Last edited by Nismo on Fri Mar 02, 2012 6:37 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atwood
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 6:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Spartacist wrote: |
Cons -
the success of Asian economies was not based on free trade but rather on pragmatically protecting industries. |
Or, in other words, predatory economies that prey on the U.S., mainly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
