G20 governments containing protectionism: WTO

[Joanne98]

Source: Reuters

(Reuters) - The G20 rich and emerging countries have been broadly successful in holding protectionist pressures in check in recent months but must remain vigilant, the World Trade Organization said on Monday.

World

Some G20 countries, in contradiction to pledges at their London and Pittsburgh summits last year, have implemented new measures to restrict trade but their scope has been limited and the group has continued to avoid an escalation of protectionism, it said in a report, a copy of which was obtained by Reuters.

The report calls on G20 leaders to reinforce recovery from the crisis by reaffirming their commitment to open markets and putting their many calls for an early conclusion of the Doha trade round into effect.

"The figures we have released today show that G20 governments have, on the whole, managed to contain protectionism. It is clear that if we are to have a sustainable economic recovery we must keep markets open," WTO Director-General Pascal Lamy told Reuters.


Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6272R320100308

---

Bastards! Joining the WTO was the worst thing we ever did!

[PSPS]

1. "The G20 rich and emerging countries"

The G20 rich and emerging countries have been broadly successful in holding protectionist pressures in check in recent months but must remain vigilant, the World Trade Organization said on Monday.

A more accurate description for the "The G20 countries" would be "The G20 countries where a miniscule slice of the population enjoys enormous wealth at the expense of the other 99.9% of its people."

[pampango]

2. Technically we didn't "join" the WTO, we (FDR) started GATT which became the WTO.

FDR (and Truman after FDR's death) considered it a triumph over republican isolationism like the Smoot/Hawley/Hoover tariffs.

[HeresyLives]

3. Thank goodness, protectionism is the last thing we need.

At least we learned SOMEthing from the Great Depression.

[The2ndWheel]

4. "One vast and ecumenical holding company, for whom all men will work to serve a common profit"

http://www.americanrhetoric.com/MovieSpeeches/moviespeechnetwork4.html

"You are an old man who thinks in terms of nations and peoples. There are no nations. There are no peoples. There are no Russians. There are no Arabs. There are no third worlds. There is no West. There is only one holistic system of systems, one vast and immane, interwoven, interacting, multivariate, multinational dominion of dollars. Petro-dollars, electro-dollars, multi-dollars, reichmarks, rins, rubles, pounds, and shekels."

We didn't join anything. That's not how this works.

[HeresyLives]

5. Ideological rhetoric.

[The2ndWheel]

8. How could it be anything but?

However, it is a singular ideology. One which encompasses the entire planet. Fewer and fewer institutions representing more and more people.

[HeresyLives]

10. That's just it, we have too many.

We have about 200 countries with 200 different sets of standards and regulations and oversight...ranging from excellent to non-existant...all trying to trade with each other.

And with trade, loans, debt and so on we are dealing with trillions of dollars, globally, every day.

So if a few million, or a few billion get 'diverted' and go missing, nobody notices.

Too much secrecy leads to massive corruption and chaos in the system.

Every now and then a financial bomb goes off, when one of these messes come to light, and we have a crisis. So we apply bandaids.

At the moment a LOT of financial bombs are going off, and bandaids will no longer work.

We need to take the secrecy and the chaos out of the world financial system or we're going to continue to get whomped by the explosions. And we need to do it before there are so many of them we ALL go down.

[The2ndWheel]

11. Right, we live in a global economy, with regional governments

As you point out, something has to give. That setup won't, can't, last. The economy will either become regional/local again, or government will become global. Not in a conspiracy way, but because it physically must, if we're to keep a global economy functioning.

[HeresyLives]

12. Yup, agreed.

And since the majority of our problems are global...the financial crisis, climate change, terrorism, drugs, war, poverty and so on, things will go global. We'll have fits and starts with it, problems and crises, but in the end it will be global.

[The2ndWheel]

13. Although I wouldn't say it's inevitable

The history, complexity, and momentum of the last few thousand years points in a certain direction, but it's a constant fight against entropy. It takes a lot of energy to even get to the point where we are now, let alone a future phase of globalization. If the energy to accomplish that is cheap enough, then it probably will happen. The consequences that we'll have to deal with as a result of our actions will be that much larger though. But that's true whatever happens.

We won't solve much either. What have we really solved up to this point? We'll end up making the financial situation, the climate situation, terrorism, etc, that much more complicated, with that many more variables that can go wrong. It comes with the territory.

[HeresyLives]

14. Well we've gone from

families to tribes, from tribes to regions, from regions to countries...so now we move from countries to planetary.

200 countries are confusing things...one system, one method of dealing with things, will simplify not complicate.

[The2ndWheel]

15. I would say it'll be our most complicated endeavor yet

I'm not saying it isn't possible. Like you said, it's a process that has been happening for thousands and thousands of years. Every step of the way though, it's been more complicated.

The reason for that might be because there were other expanding centers of power doing the exact same thing in different places, and there is only one actual global system possible. However, that global system will have to fit every person, everywhere, all at once. Or, each person would have to be made to fit the system, everywhere, all at once. Either way, that one system will have to represent 7, 8, 9+ billion people. We'll still live within physical reality, and so that system will naturally break down and erode. Roads require maintenance. Houses need repairs. People need to eat. So to keep that global system up and running will require vast amounts of energy, coming from everywhere. We'll probably try to make everywhere in the world the same. Since we would have one method of dealing with things, why wouldn't we do that? It'll take that much more time, energy, and effort, on top of what we would already be doing, to make that system fit the world, or to make the world fit that system.

Then you take into account all that is non-human in the world. All those different interactions, with only one method of dealing with them, on an even larger scale than what we have today. One size will fit all life.

We'll do our best to make it happen, so hopefully it will be simple. If not, we may end up crazier than we currently are.

[HeresyLives]

17. Oh fer shure.

No country fits every person, everywhere all at once, so I don't expect a global system to do so either tho.

[Waiting For Everyman]

6. Protectionism is the ONLY way to recover from this.

Until we face that, economic decline everywhere will only get worse. National economies work, the race to the lowest common denominator obviosly does not work.

It may take a lot longer, or maybe not, but eventually this global economy will completely FAIL and be OVER if it continues... because it's a system which is impractical and unsustainable on its face. Eventually its breakdown is inevitable, as reality will prevail in the end. The only question is, how long it takes us to admit it and change course - and how much more destruction comes from the delay.

Free trade generates poverty. PERIOD. It's idiotic, as any honest person with a brain already knew before it started (I mean this current go-round of it, it's been tried before with the same result).

[HeresyLives]

7. Pull up the drawbridge and turn into N Korea? No.

The world is moving from national economies to a global one, and things will improve immensely for everyone.

What you're seeing now is the chaos and dislocation of the change-over period.

[Waiting For Everyman]

9. I disagree. But time will tell. n/t

[Grand Taurean]

16. We need fair trade.

It is one thing to trade with our fellow developed nations.
It is another to trade freely with third world countries. There is no way to compete with such low labor costs.

[HeresyLives]

18. Well that's in the eye of the beholder.

Other countries don't regard the US as fair either.

But they have learned about comparitive advantage, and are colonies no more.