Cordell Hull

  • Cordell Hull, U.S. Secretary of State, 1933-1944; Nobel Peace Prize winner, ardent free trader

Peter Gallagher

Trade Diversion blog

International Political Economy Zone blog

Scott Lincicome

Trade Matters - ECIPE Global Economy Blog

Global Conditions


Korea-U.S. FTA blog

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter


    Blog powered by Typepad

    Custom House Site Meter

    « What's in the Korea-U.S. FTA? | Main | I not sure they've got the spirit of the thing... »


    Richard Baldwin

    Did you see this?


    Wow! Thank you for such comprehensive sources in one place! Keep up the good work!

    Peter Gallagher

    Ben, Great round-up. I'm interested in the details agreed on agriculture and services but little of them have so-far been published (USTR has a bland statement congratulating themselves for their efforts..!). The information in the public domain suggests a lot of 'carve outs' in addition to rice. This would be a very poor template for future agreements if it's true.



    Mitch Scaff

    I'm curious to know how KORUSFTA stacks up against other FTA's in the areas of contention:

    1) Employment changes and job loss. The typical argument is that jobs lost to less developed countries as firms seek cheaper labor elsewhere is compensated by a growing demand for US goods. Most politicians and economics professors I have heard advance this argument fail to disclose figures. Is it a net loss of jobs? Are the resulting jobs in the US less lucrative? I noticed a little mention of US textile industry concerns in the above analysis but again, few employment figures.

    2) Lowest common denominator issues: NAFTA and the proposed FTAA both contained provisions by which firms in Country A could sue the government of Country B, if a labor or environmental restrictions in Country B was percieved to damage the firms profits. Are such provisions included in KORUSFTA? Were such provisions even examined in the negotiations, or did both sides just assume they would be included?

    3) IP provisions - does KORUSFTA require Korea to extend greater IP protections (length of pharma patents, patents on genetic material, copyrighted materials). I fear I am not familiar with how current FTA's justify extending asymetric access to information when classical free trade economic theory makes "everyone has the same information" a fundamental assumption. I would think that for a more competitive market, shorter patents and more open copyrights would be the goal. This would benefit consumers and tend to increase competition among suppliers. Who is hurt (other than patent holders and shareholders of patent holding companies) if a restrictive market is opened up?


    I love the blog that you have. I was wondering if you would link my blog to yours and in return I would do the same for your blog. If you want to, my site name is American Legends and the URL is:

    If you want to do this just go to my blog and in one of the comments just write your blog name and the URL and I will add it to my site.


    The comments to this entry are closed.