I do not believe that in nature there are laws absolutely valid, but that trade represents for humanity as a valid tool to generate wealth and maintain peace among the peoples in history is a rule with very rare exceptions. As Frédéric Bastiat
said, "if a border is crossed by the goods, eventually witnessing the march of armies." I am also convinced that we can not prevent every man to free trade and protectionist barrier that any end to cause the damage of all. It 's my way of saying that they are for peace.
There is an undeniable fact which one must go: we live in a period history in which our industrial supremacy is strongly attacked by developing nations, which are acknowledged to have organizational skills and work more competitive or at least equal to ours. In this respect, China is emblematic of this nation, but many others are the following and will be able to play in the near future an important role in world trade.
As in sports competitions, our country is in a position to have an advantage to defend against opponents that are catching up and having to muster all the resources at its disposal to maintain a position of favor. The question is whether we can do it or not, but we have no alternative.
Use suitable protective duties and levies by creating not only a priori means to admit our defeat, but condemned to immobility, a self-sufficient isolation in which our people would live in the inertia and the illusion of being able to maintain the current standard of living. In fact, we all know that we would end soon overtaken by the rest of the world without even having tried to react, heading for a sudden collapse, delayed in time, but a harbinger of more serious and irrecoverable damage.
In this historical moment the world is witnessing the emergence of countries and peoples, for many reasons have remained prisoners of the past regimes and cultures are wrong. All of us, and in particular those who always strive for a more equitable distribution of wealth, we should be happy. In the end, we applied the Christian teaching according to which the poor and underdeveloped nations do not have to give fish but teach to fish.
The process of economic integration is taking place. It leads to a new division of labor whose consequences have a negative impact on jobs in Europe. It 's inevitable. Is being repeated in developing nations that process of development capital and labor that has characterized the Western countries, although to an extent and at different times in the last century.
We must take note of this fact, perfectly legitimate for those who want the good of humanity. We must act accordingly, trying to make the best possible, also perfectly legitimate, in the process of transformation. This has always been the alternative that has historically been presented at the changes: be conservative or innovative. Sure would have been more tranquil, and even more in line with the natural attitude of laziness of most men, remain in the "status quo", but the facts do not.
Therefore, we must accept the challenge. With the war? To impose by force our will on those people? You will all agree with me not to even consider this possibility. We must accept the challenge in economic terms.
As with all challenges, we do not know if we will succeed or not to maintain the current standard of living (health and welfare). I think it is very likely that we will have to give up something, but without the commitment and contribution of all, it being blessed and peaceful in the shelter of protectionist barriers invoked, we should certainly give up a lot more.
the lack of protection has already set in motion all companies, large and small. Already today, in excess of what is perceived through the newspapers, the greatest attention is paid to these countries. It has created a new cultural attitude, which led and continues to bring great change initiatives. We are seeing the negative sides, especially the relocation of many manufacturing activities with a consequent loss of jobs. Instead, we are not refractory to consider the advantages that from today our economy can take a similar upheaval.
First, the availability of consumer products at very low prices, that all Europeans (and workers in particular) can be purchased, resulting in increased purchasing power. With the imposition of duties, however, they should be paid to local producers, the equivalent of a tax, with subsequent depletion, beginning with the weakest classes. Secondly, the lack of protection is causing an increase in investment in niche products and organization sales networks, (because difficult to detect statistically). These are important initiatives, which for the first time bring our country to operate in terms of globalization.
But the benefits are more consistent in the integration of different economies, producing benefits to both parties. Difficult to explain how this process works out in practice, because it varies from product to product and is the result of extensive choices that take account of different strategies and different realities. The result often leads to impossible to ascertain the origin of the product. It must give priority to the design, manufacturing equipment (if this occurs within a single country), marketing or distribution? When we read "made in Italy" or "Made in China", which means? Who has the right to affix the word "made"? For many products manufacture, we think that for historical heritage constitutes the most important element, is not even 10-20% of the total cost. We have not yet fully understood that what gives value to the product is the brand name, quality, as well as the product enters the market, in the opinion which gives the customer.
The integration of markets and different economies tend, through the decisions of countless actors, in order to maximize the value of products for the benefit of all. But the job? Additional of work is not lost in the occurrence of the outsourcing of production, but have gradually disappeared before, hand in hand with the loss of competitiveness, becoming useless jobs and in some ways harmful. It should not be forced to insist on keeping alive. The damage would cost more than the inevitable social safety net that no doubt should be implemented.
The main criticism that will be moved to these basic considerations is the lack of common rules, resulting in distortion of the market. It follows, according to critics, a framework of unfair competition, dumping actions put in place by a totalitarian state, both in terms of raw materials social fields. This unfortunately is true and forces us to compete in terms of obvious inferiority.
But how much longer can continue to stay alive a totalitarian regime with a development like the one we are seeing? How long will the prosperity attained in significant segments of the population will be compatible with the system of a country that denies democracy and civil rights? Already achieved in economic conditions in China, for example, should be built a labor movement capable of pushing up wages in parallel with the increase in available resources, as seems to be happening in India. Until now this has not happened is because authoritarianism the political regime established in the country not to allow it. Just as the dumping of raw materials (eg steel) operated by the state, with resources for citizens wrongly withheld, would be very difficult to sustain in a democracy with freedom of information.
How long will the current situation continue? It also depends on us, or rather from all over the Western world. Not in the sense of giving rise to an imperialist war, but acting with the information and world public opinion that not only the economy but also the political regime becomes liberal. History teaches us that the first generation of middle class can only be satisfied with the wealth experience, but that the second or third generation, in the absence of the most basic civil and democratic rights inevitably produce a political opposition, even revolutionary. In the meantime, we must necessarily accept the challenge under the present conditions and be aware that sacrifices lie ahead, the more the more we are unable to counter the competitive level the work of emerging countries.
