|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the International trade article.|
|International trade has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Society. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as C-Class.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
- 1 Untitled
- 2 Investment and Services as "trade"?
- 3 Question on accuracy
- 4 See Also section, purpose
- 5 Krugman models
- 6 Import needs its own article
- 7 question
- 8 Answer
- 9 Data
- 10 Basic information needed
- 11 Risks in international trade
- 12 Merging this article with Protectionism and Free Trade
- 13 Divide this into two different articles
- 14 Top traded commodities (exports)
- 15 At present, we manage international trade on the internet, like on Alibaba, Globalsources.
- 16 international trade
- 17 heckscher ohlin section seems to be messed up.
This article definetely needs some sort-of tidyup and re-edit. I know. This article is under heavy heaping
- I am working on a heavy re-edit, any help would be apreciated. thanks Mgw 23:12, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Investment and Services as "trade"?
- I am not certain that it would be accurate to include capital and services as "international trade" items, even though, within the WTO's current negotiations, this is certainly the position that the United States and other developed countries defend. Trade involves only imports and exports of goods (commodities, capital goods, etc.), which does not include investment and services - which are in a different category, and are thus being negotiated in a different category within the Doha Round (even though developed countries would like to see concessions in the agriculture goods area conditioned to the acceptance of concessions in the investment and services areas).
The difference between trade liberalization and the "new topics" laid out in the WTO is made clear by this article: http://www.twnside.org.sg/title/mk10.htm
- It is necessary to distinguish financial trasaction and trade. When one invest 100 million dollars to a foreign country, one usually do it through investment banks: acquisition of stocks, company bonds and other forms of claims. These are financial transaction, which should not be included in the trade. A firm may import materials and machine-tool borrowing certain ammount of money from this investment. These transactions are often called the import of capital but in reality, they are import of goods and should be classified as trade.
Question on accuracy
- This is not completely true. UK, in its height observed mercantilist policy. Today, the highest tariff rates are found among the most industrialized nations. Both the United States and Japan rank among the highest in the list for tariffs in the following areas: textiles and apparel, and agricultural goods. Since developing nations most often have comparative advantage in those areas with protectionist policies, it is not surprising to see developing nations continuously redressing their grievances via World Trade Organization. Also not surprising to observe is that the citizens of United States were less eager than of Mexico to sign the NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement), largely due to Mexico's low wages, which leads to comparative advantage in labor intensive goods.
Not sure what user posted it but it doesn't belong in the article but in the talk pageFalphin 22:46, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- another intresting point is that tarrifs on tobaco, which is exported by LDCs, is 4% while tarrif on derived products, which MDCs produce, are around 40%. shows that WTO favours MDCs--GregLoutsenko 01:09, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
See Also section, purpose
I disagree with the recent elimination of the link, here, to the Bhagwati article. The reason given was,
"See also - This person is not relevant enough for this list, perhaps a list of thinkers or academics in the areas of trade would be a better category."
But that is the purpose of See Also, as I understand it: to suggest other paths a user might pursue, to broaden & deepen. The int trade article as it stands now is very good, but it is very limited: limited to people who both enjoy and are able to read generalities. It appeals mostly, I would guess, to people who already know a great deal about the economics of international trade.
The int trade subject covers more than just economics, though. It is a major political and social and cultural talking-point in all conversations now -- daily headlines, newsbites, etc. -- concerned very little with, and perhaps innocent of, economics. A Wikipedia user coming in from that non-econ perspective finds little of use in the current article, I think: references to "the Heckscher-Ohlin model" won't satisfy someone wildly excited about "outsourcing & offshoring & Enron & China", etc.
I don't think it's sufficient simply to drive people away from "international trade", and toward other less-academic sources which they might find here about their particular interest in the subject. I'd rather see a broader discussion, in the article, than currently is presented. At least, however, links to the other angles of the subject ought to be provided: "personalities" very much included, in this... People unfamiliar with international trade economic theory -- and that's most of us -- are able to grasp something unfamiliar, very often, by exploring its history or by seeing it through the eyes of personalities who popularize it. Viz. People Magazine, and television, and Time Magazine, and SciAm, and yes Wikipedia...
So let us have a list of "people who do international trade", and/or links to them, on this int trade page: Jagdish Bhagwati, certainly, and Amartya Sen and Stiglitz -- but also some non-economists -- Soros... If this article doesn't satisfy the average Wikipedia reader then no one will read it: and "the Heckscher-Ohlin model" doesn't satisfy -- dry as toast, that one.
--Kessler 00:59, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
He cut his teeth on Increasing Returns and Market Power models, because standard HOSV starts with Perfect Comp and Constant Returns to Scale. We need an article on these theories. John wesley 16:41, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
Import needs its own article
Currently, import redirects here. It should have its own article, just like export. Or possibly we should consider the creation of exports and imports article, like supply and demand?-- 19:24, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- I totally agree with the necessity of creating exports and imports article.
--OutOfMainStreamEconomist (talk) 11:17, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
1) is there any thing called foreign indirect investmnts
2) Any information on the International Trade Theories of Absolute Advantage by Adam Smith.
I'm trying to collect data on international trade. Since i'm brazilian, i was able to deal with the national system of data on trade. I'd be happy if you could help me, adding the websites of your own countries. --Luizabpr
Basic information needed
I added a stub tag to the "Overview" section, indicating a need for basic information about the international trade that is happening today. How much is traded overall? We have a list of top trading countries, but it would also be useful to have an overview of what gets traded where, for major industries. -- Beland (talk) 09:55, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Risks in international trade
This section is poorly thought out and unnecessary. Insolvency, protracted defaults, non-acceptance are all risks when trading with one’s next-door neighbor, and so have nothing inherently related to the subject of this article. The comment on economic sovereignty is certainly bias (there is no evidence that “surrendering economic sovereignty” is risky, rather than rewarding). That leaves only exchange rate risk, which might justify its own section in an article about exchange rates.
Similarly, the risk of cancellation or non-renewal of export or import licenses is also a domestic risk, if the words “export or import” are removed (i.e., it is equally a domestic business license). War is neither more nor less risky for international trade, if one is not doing business in a war zone. If one is, then it might well be a domestic war zone. Expropriation / confiscation was mainly a domestic phenomena in the 20th century. I’ll grant the risk of an import ban, but given WTO rules this risk is so small as to be meaningless – unless, of course, the ban is for violation of WTO rules or general safety standards. Transfer risk is unintelligible, and I’m not sure why exchange controls are considered political risks. Finally, the influence of political parties has always been far more dangerous to domestic trade than foreign trade.
- Most likely the list came from some economic textbook. I would hesitate in getting getting rid of the list since it's probably still in use in current textbooks. My biggest problem is it should be put in prose rather then current format. --Patrick (talk) 03:21, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Merging this article with Protectionism and Free Trade
One cannot discuss any of these topics by themselves. They all need to be put together in context, in one single article. Otherwise we'll have needless duplication, which will be irritating to readers. Of course, we may fork off some of the more complex stuff into a separate article, but as yet I don't think we're at that part, and I still think it is questionable to have separate articles on free trade and protectionism. II | (t - c) 02:30, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
- I have to disagree. You can talk about international trade without mentioning free trade or protectionism. There also the problem of merging theories and policies together. Free trade as a policy is different then free trade as a theory. I also think that by combing them, you just create this massive article that wouldn't do much good. So I think all three of these articles should be kept separate. Maybe we should have this discussion over at economic project, with a link on all these pages? --Patrick (talk) 23:40, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Another thing importers and exporters have to take into account is staying in compliance with international laws, as well as domestic ones. Many countries and international organizations maintain compliance lists, or watch lists, which lists individuals, business or organizations that importers and exporters are not allowed to do business with. In the United States one of these lists is the OFACs list. Importers and exporters that do business with listed entities or individuals can lose their license or even go to jail. Sometimes importers and exporters do not know they're not in compliance. Many of the lists are hard to access and even more difficult to check on a regular basis. The US Treasury Office of Foreign Assets Control recommends using software that checks several of these lists daily, and alerts imports/exporters if any of their foreign contacts are listed. One of these services is WatchlistCompliace.com. There are others as well, and one can always manually check the lists. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Watchlistcompliance (talk • contribs) 17:07, 1 July 2010 (UTC) Another thing importers and exporters have to take into account is staying in compliance with international laws, as well as domestic ones. Many countries and international organizations maintain compliance lists, or watch lists, which lists individuals, business or organizations that importers and exporters are not allowed to do business with. In the United States one of these lists is the OFACs list. Importers and exporters that do business with listed entities or individuals can lose their license or even go to jail. Sometimes importers and exporters do not know they're not in compliance. Many of the lists are hard to access and even more difficult to check on a regular basis. The US Treasury Office of Foreign Assets Control recommends using software that checks several of these lists daily, and alerts imports/exporters if any of their foreign contacts are listed. One of these services is WatchlistCompliace.com. There are others as well, and one can always manually check the lists. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Watchlistcompliance (talk • contribs) 17:08, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
Divide this into two different articles
It is advisable to divide this article into two different articles: one as "international trade (facts)" and another as "international trade theory."
- The present article "International trade" is too long.
- The first section "The model" specializes in the theories on international trade. The other parts concerns the facts and policies on trade.
- The "facts" of international trade change every month, so we would have to either accept yet another out-dated article, or find a dedicated group willing to update and revise as data is made available. But, since the overwhelming importance of trade is not how much moves where each month, but how many people are affected (for better or worse, just to keep it neutral), then this article should be THEORY, Practice, (and facts), in that order. DOR (HK) (talk) 06:09, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
What kind of facts should be noted
The facts which change every month do not deserve to be written in the Encyclopedia. New tendency and long term characteristics should be picked up.
- increase of relative importance of intra-industry trade
- increase of relative importance of intermediate input goods.
- increase of triangle trade together with offshoring
- Your facts look like they all apply to the globalization article. I see your point that the trade models section is very long. Maybe this section could be condensed here and expanded in an International trade theory article. I still think that this article should at least contain a summary of international trade theory, along with a history of international trade, trade agreements, and globalization.--Bkwillwm (talk) 03:37, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Top traded commodities (exports)
Hello, I am working for the International Trade Centre (ITC) and I would like to update the table under the section "Top traded commodities (exports)". If that doesn't represent a problem for the Wikipedian community I will proceed next week.Divoc (talk) 10:48, 28 June 2011 (UTC)