Trade Treaties Go South


Brazil's leftist president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva is proposing that the Group of 20, a bloc of developing nations that walked out on the WTO's September talks in Cancun, start a free-trade area of its own.

[Via Al Giordano.]

NEXT: Should We Have Invaded Iraq?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. No trade is “free” trade as long as there is government interference in the process. Countries do not trade with one another, individuals do. The “individual” is the one entity most often neglected in this discussion, routinely replaced by (take your pick) “union”, “organization”, “council”, “commitee”, etc.
    Except in Libertarian circles, you will never hear the word “individual” mentioned in any discussion on free trade. And without it, no discussion is meaningful.

  2. MighSo these countries get the a solution to their protectionist prisoner’s dilemma (no one cane be the first to drop his nation’s barriers), reduce their dependance on the US for their exports, enjoy a GDP boost, and the South as a whole increases its resistance to “divide and conquor” tactics by the mercantilist Norte.

    How long before the White House starts calling South American social democrats “terrorists?”

  3. Meanwhile, Glenn Reynolds asks “Whither the Free Trade Left?”

    Because, you know, if you’re against the IMF and unfair WTO rounds, you’re against free trade.

  4. Can I just say, thinkng about the coming civil war among the economic right, and the contrtions they’re going to make Shrub conform, gives me a chubby.

  5. contortions…perform. My typing’s been shitty all day.

  6. Okay, question here.

    When is the developing world going to stop being a pack of money grubbing free-loaders, and actually declare themselves “developed” and capable of standing on their own legs without massive loan and grant support from everybody else?

    Just wondering.

  7. Hey ho, the Group of 20 has got to go!

    We want fair trade, not free trade. If the governemnt gives free health care and nationalizes (ends corporate rule) over most of the economy, that is real free and fair trade.

  8. Free trade is by definition fair trade, as truly free trade takes place only on terms freely agreed to by the parties.

    What most lefties characterize as “fair trade” is trade that is managed by government, that is, trade that does not take place on terms freely agreed to by the parties.

    Which is more “fair” – a deal that you agree to on you own volition, or a deal that is controlled by some bureaucrat?

  9. Free trade among 20 countries has got to be a good thing, at least for those countries.

  10. I am thinking this must be a good looking plan, right? It is free trade, but it is also developing nations working together to help each other develop. I think even lefties want free trade if all the players can get equal (enough) footing.

  11. Does forming their own free trade block count?

    Anyway, they’ll probably declare themselves developed when they’re, you know, developed.

  12. Although I do like the idea of declaring your nation to be at a stage of development you haven’t actually reached, for political purposes.

    Very Lennin.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.