Why Trade?
The Case Against Free Trade
为什么要进行贸易？——反对自由贸易的理由
In 'The case for free trade - comparative advantage'「国际教育 · A-level经济」自由贸易的案例——比较优势, you can see a fairly convincing economic argument in favour of international trade without barriers based on the theory of comparative advantage. It is certainly true that the world economy as a whole benefits from free trade, but who are the winners and losers? Some industries within economies will lose out under a free trade regime. Governments may seek to help these industries through 'protectionism'.
在 "自由贸易的案例--比较优势 "中，你可以看到一个相当有说服力的经济论点，支持基于比较优势理论的无障碍国际贸易。当然，世界经济作为一个整体从自由贸易中受益是事实，但谁是赢家和输家？在自由贸易体制下，经济体内的一些行业会受到损失。***可以通过 "保护主义 "来帮助这些行业。
To start with, we need to look at the methods of protection in some detail. Then we shall look at some of the economic reasons given by those who defend protectionism. Finally, we shall briefly look at some of the counter arguments of those who reject protectionism.
首先，我们需要详细了解一下保护的方法。然后，我们将看看那些为保护主义辩护的人提出的一些经济理由。最后，我们将简要地看一下那些反对保护主义的人的一些反驳理由。
Methods of protection 保护的方法...Or, to put it another way, trade barriers. The most famous of the lot is the tariff. Although its use has been much reduced through the sterling work of the GATT and the WTO, it is still the first port of call when a government is thinking of a way to deter foreign competition.
...或者，换一种说法，就是贸易壁垒。其中最著名的是关税。尽管通过关贸总协定和世贸组织的出色工作，关税的使用已经大大减少，但当一个***在考虑如何阻止外国竞争时，它仍然是第一道关口。
Tariffs 关税A tariff is, quite simply, a tax levied by the government on imported goods. This forces the price of the good up and so makes it relatively expensive in the home market. This benefits the domestic industry as its product now appears relatively cheaper to home consumers. The home industry has, in effect, been 'protected' from the foreign competition.
简单地说，关税是***对进口货物征收的一种税。这迫使商品的价格上升，因此使其在国内市场上相对昂贵。这对国内产业有利，因为它的产品现在对国内消费者来说是相对便宜的。国内产业实际上已经受到了外国竞争的 "保护"。
It should be noted that the foreign firm could absorb the tax by reducing its price until the overall price (including the tariff) is the same as it was before the imposition on the tax. The firm is unlikely to be able to do this forever, though, and the tariff imposing country could always raise the tax again.
应该注意的是，外国公司可以通过降低其价格来吸收税收，直到整体价格（包括关税）与征税前相同。不过，该公司不太可能永远这样做，征收关税的国家总是可以再次提高税收。
The diagram below shows the effect of introducing a tariff on a good in a previously unprotected market. This diagram is very popular with examiners for multiple-choice questions. It is important that you understand fully what is going on in this diagram.
下图显示了在一个以前不受保护的市场上对一种商品征收关税的效果。这张图在多选题中很受考官欢迎。重要的是，你要充分理解这张图中的内容。
This diagram is an extension of the one used in the Learn-It called 'The case for free trade'. Again, the world supply curve is assumed to be horizontal (SW). The domestic supply curve above point G no longer exists given that the world price (PW) now dominates. The effective supply curve, therefore, is the line JGSW. The demand at price PW is OQ4, of which OQ1 is supplied domestically. This means that the rest is imported (Q3 − Q4). Notice that consumer surplus is represented by the large triangle ACPW and that producer surplus is represented by the much smaller triangle GJPW.
这张图是Learn-It中使用的 "自由贸易的案例 "的延伸。同样，世界供应曲线被假定为水平的（SW）。鉴于世界价格（PW）现在占主导地位，G点以上的国内供应曲线不再存在。因此，有效供给曲线是JGSW线。PW价格下的需求量为OQ4，其中OQ1为国内供应。这意味着，其余的是进口的（Q3-Q4）。请注意，消费者剩余由大三角形ACPW表示，生产者剩余由小得多的三角形GJPW表示。
If the government now decides to protect the home industry be imposing a tariff (equal to PWPW T) on world imports, the world supply curve will shift up to SW T and the new price will be PW T. At this higher price, demand falls back to OQ3, of which OQ2 is supplied domestically (more than before). Imports, therefore, have now been reduced to Q3 − Q2.
如果***现在决定对世界进口产品征收关税（等于PWPW T）来保护本国产业，那么世界供给曲线将上移到SW T，新的价格将是PW T。在这个较高的价格下，需求回落到OQ3，其中OQ2由国内供应（比以前多）。因此，进口现在已经减少到Q3-Q2。
The higher price has reduced consumer surplus from ACPW to ABPW T. Some of this welfare loss has been transferred to other parties. The black shaded trapezium (PWPW THG) is now extra producer surplus (or profit for the domestic producers). The green rectangle (BEFH) is now government revenue from the tax on imports (number of imports times the tax per unit). The two red triangles represent losses to society.
较高的价格使消费者剩余从ACPW减少到ABPW T。这种福利损失的一部分已经转移到其他方面。黑色阴影的梯形（PWPW THG）现在是额外的生产者剩余（或国内生产者的利润）。绿色矩形（BEFH）现在是***对进口征税的收入（进口数量乘以每单位的税收）。两个红色三角形代表社会的损失。
The first red triangle (FGH) represents the loss due to the fact the quantity between Q1 and Q2 used to be imported at a total cost in terms of resources used of FGQ1Q2 (number of units supplied times cost per unit), but is now produced domestically at a higher cost (HGQ1Q2). The upward sloping domestic supply curve shows that the cost per unit is rising for the domestic firms, whereas this cost per unit is constant for foreign producers.
第一个红色三角形（FGH）表示由于Q1和Q2之间的数量过去是以FGQ1Q2的资源使用总成本（供应单位数量乘以每单位成本）进口的，但现在是以更高的成本（HGQ1Q2）在国内生产的。向上倾斜的国内供应曲线表明，国内企业的单位成本在上升，而国外生产商的单位成本是不变的。
The second red triangle (BCE) is simply the loss of consumer surplus due to the fact that consumers used to be able to buy the quantity between Q3 and Q4 at price PW and now they don't, because at the higher price the demand is only Q3.
第二个红色三角形（BCE）仅仅是消费者剩余的损失，因为消费者过去能够以PW价格购买Q3和Q4之间的数量，而现在他们不能了，因为在更高的价格下，需求只有Q3。
Non-tariff barriers 非关税壁垒Due to the fact that the tariff has always been the main method used for protection (although that is not so true nowadays), textbooks often lump all the other methods of protection into one group called 'non-tariff barriers'. Here is a quick look at these other forms of protection.
由于关税一直是用于保护的主要方法（尽管现在已经不那么正确了），教科书经常把所有其他的保护方法归为一类，称为 "非关税壁垒"。以下是对这些其他保护形式的简要介绍。
There are a number of reasons why some people think that it is justified to use trade barriers. Many of them, some would say, are a little old fashioned in today's global economy. The first is probably the one that is normally used by politicians in the heat of an election campaign, especially in the USA.
有些人认为使用贸易壁垒是合理的，原因有很多。有人会说，在今天的全球经济中，其中许多理由都有点老套。第一个可能是通常由政治家在选举活动中使用的，特别是在美国。
Protect domestic jobs 保护国内就业It always looks good as a politician to be seen to care about domestic jobs at election time. Cheap imports may put domestic firms out of business creating unemployment. Perhaps barriers could be used to protect these jobs.
作为一个政治家，在选举时被视为关心国内就业总是很好的。廉价的进口产品可能会使国内公司失去业务，从而造成失业。也许可以用壁垒来保护这些工作。
Free traders would argue that consumers suffer from higher prices and resources may well be misallocated if the market is distorted with barriers. The whole point of free trade is that whichever country is relatively better at making a certain good should be allowed to do so for the benefit of the world economy. Those in developed economies working in old fashioned manufacturing industries where the good can usually be made cheaper in a developing country must accept the fact that developed economies are moving away from the production of manufacturers towards the service sector. Trade barriers are a short-term solution, but long-term career prospects are best served in a newer, higher productivity industry.
自由贸易者会争辩说，如果市场被壁垒扭曲，消费者会因价格上涨而受到影响，而且资源很可能被错误分配。自由贸易的全部意义在于，为了世界经济的利益，应该允许哪个国家在制造某种商品方面相对更好。那些在老式制造业工作的发达经济体必须接受这样一个事实：发达经济体正在从制造商的生产转向服务部门。贸易壁垒是一个短期的解决方案，但长期的职业前景最好是在一个较新的、生产力较高的行业。
Dumping 倾销Dumping is where goods are sold (or 'dumped') in a foreign country at below cost price in order to kill off the competition and increase future market share. It is very similar to the concept of predatory pricing used in the topic called 'Market structure'.
倾销是指在外国以低于成本的价格出售（或 "倾销"）商品，以消灭竞争对手，增加未来的市场份额。它与 "市场结构 "专题中使用的掠夺性定价概念非常相似。
Dumping is a widespread activity, so much so that countries that are being dumped upon are allowed, if approved by the WTO, to take retaliatory action. Some dumping is simply a short-term measure to get rid of excess stock that a company may have found difficult to sell in their domestic market. This is broadly acceptable. It is the predatory dumping that the WTO does not like.
倾销是一种广泛的活动，以至于被倾销的国家，如果得到世贸组织的批准，可以采取报复性行动。有些倾销只是一种短期措施，以摆脱一个公司可能发现在其国内市场难以出售的多余库存。这在很大程度上是可以接受的。世贸组织不喜欢的是掠夺性倾销。
Retaliatory duties do not officially count as tariffs. If they did, the average level of tariffs in the world would be much higher than the 5% figure given in the previous Learn-It. The number of complaints about dumping made to the WTO has been rising throughout the 90s.
报复性关税并不正式算作关税。如果算的话，世界上的平均关税水平将远远高于上一节课中给出的5%的数字。在整个90年代，向世贸组织提出的关于倾销的投诉数量一直在上升。
Japan often gets accused of dumping. This is why you see many Japanese companies setting up factories in the country to which they normally export. These investments are often called 'screwdriver' plants (e.g. Nissan in Sunderland). All of the parts are taken to the new plant and then the parts are 'screwed together' to make the final car (in the case of Nissan). These cars now become UK domestically produced cars. These cars can then be exported around the EU barrier-free because the EU is a barrier-free customs union.
日本经常被指控倾销。这就是为什么你会看到许多日本公司在他们通常出口的国家建立工厂。这些投资通常被称为 "螺丝刀 "工厂（例如桑德兰的日产）。所有的零件都被运到新的工厂，然后将这些零件 "拧在一起"，制成最终的汽车（以日产为例）。这些汽车现在成为英国国内生产的汽车。然后，这些汽车可以无障碍地出口到欧盟各地，因为欧盟是一个无障碍海关联盟。
The infant industry argument 新生代工业的说法This is a rather old fashioned argument but countries do still protect infant industries if they can get away with it. If a country is planning to start up a new, but major, industry that is already established in many other countries, then they will start at a huge disadvantage. It will take time to develop experience economies and grow large enough to benefit from economies of scale. This is recognised by the WTO and some protection is allowed as these new industries find their feet.
这是一个相当老套的论点，但如果国家能够逃脱的话，它们仍然会保护新生工业。如果一个国家计划建立一个新的、但主要的、在许多其他国家已经建立的产业，那么他们将在开始时处于巨大的劣势。它需要时间来发展经验经济，并成长到足以从规模经济中获益。世贸组织承认这一点，并允许在这些新产业找到自己的位置时提供一些保护。
The difficult question is when do you stop protecting this industry? Whilst it is harsh to face world competition straight away, it is also damaging for the firm to get used to this artificial short-term crutch. What if the industry is never strong enough to stand on its own two feet? Did the country in question choose the wrong industry (in which they did not, after all, have a comparative advantage)? This would be a horrendous waste of resources. If these infant industries face true competition from the start then only the fittest would survive and resources will have been allocated efficiently. What do you think?
困难的问题是，你何时停止保护这个行业？虽然直接面对世界竞争是很残酷的，但对公司来说，习惯于这种人为的短期拐杖也是有害的。如果这个行业永远都不够强大，无法自力更生怎么办？有关国家是否选择了错误的行业（毕竟他们在这个行业没有比较优势）？这将是一种可怕的资源浪费。如果这些新生产业从一开始就面临真正的竞争，那么只有适者生存，资源将得到有效分配。你怎么看？
The strategic industry argument 战略产业论Some would say that this is also a slightly old fashioned argument given the unlikelihood of another World War. To be fair, though, it is always wise, as a country, to make sure that, in times of trouble, certain basic foodstuffs can be produced. As was said earlier, the EU spends most of its budget subsidising farmers through the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). 'Strategic' industries can also refer to those linked to defence. The steel industry is an example of an industry that has been protected in the UK for this reason. Some would say that the UK coal industry held on for longer than made economic sense given the low cost imports on offer.
有人会说，鉴于再次发生世界大战的可能性不大，这也是一个略显老套的说法。不过，公平地说，作为一个国家，确保在困难时期能够生产某些基本食品总是明智的。如前所述，欧盟通过共同农业政策（CAP）将其大部分预算用于补贴农民。战略性 "产业也可以指那些与国防有关的产业。钢铁行业是英国出于这个原因而受到保护的行业的一个例子。有人会说，鉴于所提供的低成本进口产品，英国煤炭行业坚持的时间超过了经济意义。
Multinationals v. the Third World 跨国公司 v. 第三世界Most economists agree that free trade is a good thing. The theory of comparative advantage is, for most logical economists, an open and shut case. The arguments against free trade above are all valid, but overall, the world economy prospers with free trade. World trade (in terms of value of world exports) has grown by a factor of 20 since 1950, mainly due to the efforts of all countries to free up trade. This compares with world GDP that has only risen by a factor of six since 1950.
大多数经济学家都认为，自由贸易是一件好事。对大多数有逻辑的经济学家来说，比较优势理论是一个公开的案例。上述反对自由贸易的论点都是有道理的，但总的来说，世界经济在自由贸易中是繁荣的。自1950年以来，世界贸易（按世界出口价值计算）增长了20倍，这主要是由于所有国家都在努力解放贸易。相比之下，自1950年以来，世界国内生产总值只增长了6倍。
More recently, though, a growing number of bodies have emerged that are vehemently against free trade. Consumers International, a federation of 247 consumer groups in 111 countries, is one such huge body. Others include Oxfam and Friends of the Earth. They argue that, although the world economy does gain overall from free trade, nowadays nearly all that gain goes to multinationals owned by a tiny proportion of the world's population. The groups who lose out are consumers generally and poor countries in particular. The environment usually suffers too.
但最近，越来越多的机构出现了，它们强烈反对自由贸易。消费者国际是一个由111个国家的247个消费者团体组成的联合会，就是这样一个庞大的机构。其他机构包括乐施会和地球之友。他们认为，尽管世界经济确实从自由贸易中获得了整体利益，但如今几乎所有的利益都被世界上极少数人所拥有的跨国公司拿走了。损失的群体一般是消费者，特别是贫穷国家。环境通常也会受到影响。
These feelings against free trade and the policeman of free trade, the WTO, were highlighted at the summit at Seattle, USA in November 1999. The summit was meant to be the first major meeting of government ministers to mark the beginning of a new 'round' of negotiations, the aim of which was to further reduce trade barriers.
1999年11月在美国西雅图举行的峰会上，这些反对自由贸易和自由贸易的**--WTO的情绪得到了强调。这次峰会是***部长们的第一次重要会议，标志着新一轮谈判的开始，其目的是为了进一步减少贸易壁垒。
Some final thoughts 一些最后的想法Notice how nearly all of the arguments above come back to the first issue of saving domestic jobs. Dumping creates competition and might force domestic firms to close, resulting in job losses. Infant industries create new jobs. The government does not want the embarrassment of the resulting huge job losses if the industry does not succeed. Some would say protecting strategic industries if just an excuse to protect the jobs in these industries. It is cynical to say it, but governments do not like job losses because they translate into vote losses!
注意到上述几乎所有的论点都回到了拯救国内就业的第一个问题。倾销造成竞争，并可能迫使国内公司关闭，从而导致就业机会的丧失。新兴产业会创造新的就业机会。***不希望在产业不成功的情况下，出现由此带来的巨大就业损失的尴尬局面。有人会说，保护战略产业如果只是为了保护这些产业的就业岗位的借口。说这话很愤世嫉俗，但***并不喜欢失业，因为这将转化为选票的损失。
It should also be noted that any form of protection might result in retaliation, and, in the worst-case scenario, a full-blown trade war. This helps nobody and is very destructive. If two countries both put 20% tariffs on all imports, then all consumers simply pay higher prices for all imports. What's the point?
还应注意的是，任何形式的保护都可能导致报复，在最坏的情况下，会导致全面的贸易战。这对任何人都没有帮助，而且是非常具有破坏性的。如果两个国家都对所有进口商品征收20%的关税，那么所有消费者就会为所有进口商品支付更高的价格。这有什么意义？
Finally, the main argument in favour of free trade is that countries produce what they are best at producing, so world resources are allocated efficiently. Any form of trade barriers distorts the free workings of these forces and leads to a misallocation of resources.
最后，支持自由贸易的主要论点是，各国生产他们最擅长的产品，因此世界资源得到有效分配。任何形式的贸易壁垒都会扭曲这些力量的自由运作，导致资源的错误配置。