Module 6

Free trade is a policy set by governments that do not discriminate or attempt to control imports or exports to other countries. To determine if free trade is a good or bad policy, is highly dependent on one's perspective.

As an American, the cons against free trade are plentiful. First off, unemployment rates are already high in this country, and in my mind, free trade has something to do with that. Technical jobs, such as phone support, are already being sent in large numbers over to foreign markets such as India. These are American companies that could be supplying American jobs, giving back to the very people that keep them in business. Sure, the wages are much lower overseas, but that does not help a family here in America that has bills to pay. A quote from Friedman resonates with me in this chapter when he states “When you lose your job, the unemployment rate is not 5.2 percent; it's 100 percent” (pg 264). Although I myself have been fortunate enough to have never suffered such a hardship, I feel for those who have. I have had several friends and family members suffer through just an event. One was even directly related to free trade, as it was cheaper to have electrical wire made in another country, so his job was moved.

The positives I see resulting from free trade are lower overall cost for consumers, continued innovation of products, and higher exports for the United States. The increase in exports counteracts some of jobs lost to overseas companies. Free trade also helps developing countries pull out of poverty, as it brings their people opportunities and that they might not have had otherwise and improves their standard of living.

So when asked whether free trade is a good or bad policy, this is a question I have always struggled to answer. I'm not sure that I have completely made up my mind, but I would have to lean toward free trade being the best for all involved in the long run. I believe in freedom and capitalism, and those two things involve free trade.

As the world continues to flatten, free trade opens up, and the types of jobs that were once thought to be untouchable have slowly been reduced. Freidman refers to the “new middler” as the new middle class that will be less vulnerable to downward wage pressures of outsourcing, automation and technological change. He identifies eight traits that will hold up to this logic which I will briefly summarize. Great Collaborators And Orchestrators: This is defined as employees, and especially managers, who communicate well with others, and can orchestrate 24/7 supply chains. The Great Synthesizers: The next new hot selling item or product. People who innovate products or service in ways which you might not necessarily think would go together. The Great Explainers: As we gain more great synthesizers, these jobs will involve people who can explain the complexity, but with simplicity. The Great Leveragers: This refers to people who can design ways of leveraging technology to compete with cheaper foreign labor. The Great Adapters: Are employees who are willing to be adaptable and versatile. People are less likely to have one job that they are loyal to their entire career or the company loyal to the employee. People willing to adapt to change are more likely to find opportunities for success. The Green People: These jobs will involve terms such as “sustainable” and “renewable.” These jobs will become important with the amount of consumption the world experiences every day. Math Lovers: People skilled in math will be required to design and operate the technologies of today, as well as the future. The Great Localizers: This refers to businessmen who operate local small and medium size businesses. They have a major impact on the economy as a whole, and tailor to local needs of the community. Although I feel many of these jobs are an important part of the middle class today, I can certainly see Freidman's point of customizing your traits to satisfy the economies that keep one employed.

Friedman concludes that the equation CQ+PQ>IQ is important in the new flat world. Essentially spelled out, curiosity and passion surpass IQ. This is an interesting theory and one that has not really entered my mind. I would tend to agree with Freidman that curiosity and passion equal production in my mind. IQ is simply a measurement of intelligence, but that does not necessarily translate to productivity. With the wealth of knowledge that is accessible at our fingertips, new passions and curiosities are born. I can relate to this equation in my own life. I certainly do not consider myself to be as intelligent as many others out there, but my passion for my job and curiosity to learn new things in the IT world have driven my productivity and have provided opportunities with my employer which I enjoy today.