12. This gap in environmental standards between high-income and low-income countries raises two worrisome possibilities in a world of increasing global trade:

a. the race to the bottom scenario

b. the environmental paradox scenerio

Booster class

Microeconomics

Skill

Discusssing the Arguments in Support of Restricting Imports

answer

watching

460

views

For unlimited access to Homework Help, a Homework+ subscription is required.

You have 0 free answers left.
Get unlimited access to 3.8 million step-by-step answers.

Get unlimited access

Already have an account? Log in

Raushan RajLv8

3 Nov 2020

Unlock all answers

Get 1 free homework help answer.

Already have an account? Log in

Related questions

6. Alpha can produce either 18 oranges or 9 apples an hour, while Beta can produce either 16 oranges or 4 apples an hour. The opportunity cost of producing 1 orange for Alpha and Beta, respectively, are:

A. 0.25 apples; 0.5 apples.

B. 9 apples; 4 apples.

C. 0.5 apples; 0.25 apples.

D. 2 apples; 4 apples

10. The infant industry argument for protectionism suggests that an industry must be protected in the early stages of its development so that:

A. firms will be protected from subsidized foreign competition.

B. domestic producers can attain the economies of scale to allow them to compete in world markets.

C. there will be adequate supplies of crucial resources in case they are needed for national defence.

D. it will not be subjected to a takeover from a foreign competitor.

13. The race to the bottom scenario of global environmental degradation is explained roughly like this:

A. Companies seek to reduce their costs of operations on plant and equipment design and this results in higher levels of pollution.

B. Companies seek the lowest market prices on products in order to gain market share, resulting in inferior goods and increased waste and pollution.

C. Profit-seeking multinational companies shift their production from countries with strong environmental standards to countries with weak standards, thus reducing their costs and increasing their profits.

D. Companies seek to influence environmental legislation standards are set to the lowest possible standards in the USA in order to maximize profits.

17. If 112 Japanese yen purchased $1.00 U.S. in 2008 and 83 Japanese yen purchased $1.00 U.S. in 2009, then

A. the dollar depreciated against the yen

B. the dollar appreciated against the yen

C. the yen depreciated against the dollar

D. the yen weakened against the dollar

what you think for this ? do you agree or disagree and why ?

I donât think itâs wise for nations to begin raising tariffs and increasing subsidies when we are faced with a global recession. If a smaller country raises tariffs on a good they are importing, it might not have that big effect on the global economy. However, if a country like China, Japan, United States etc. decide to raise tariffs on imports, it could lead to a global increase in the average tariffs. In the article âBarriers to entry: A rise in protectionism would worsen the already grim outlook for world trade,â it talks about the worldwide average for tariffs. In 1986 they average 26%. If the big economies of the world start increasing tariffs, the rest of the world will eventually follow, leading to a global increase on tariffs. A rise in the tariffs would slow down the global economy even more in the long run. In the article it mentions how trade has picked up immensely when tariffs are lower, and the world GDP was higher compared to when tariffs are increased because countries are more willing to trade. I think theyâre still benefits to be gained from trade even when a global recession may be taking place. If tariffs are increased, countries might try to specialize in goods where they donât have a comparative advantage in. Instead of trading for that good, they will try to produce it domestically. The opportunity cost of choosing to specialize in a good when they donât have comparative advantage is using those resources elsewhere. Perhaps for producing a good they do have comparative advantage in. Also a decline in trade because of rising tariffs means firms wouldnât be able to benefit from economies of scale.

As per the discussion in the textbook, smoking is on the decline in high-income countries where the combination of longer life expectancy, education, income, and legal action has created a powerful anti-smoking campaign. Global tobacco companies are shifting their focus from high income to emerging markets where the combination of rising income and the absence of anti-smoking campaigns are leading to the ever-increasing demand for cigarettes.

Is this targeting by global tobacco companies ethical? Is it legal?
What, if anything, should residents in high-income countries do about the rise in smoking in emerging markets?