
Globalisation’s critics say it benefits only the elite – Why They're Wrong - tdaltonc
http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21707926-globalisations-critics-say-it-benefits-only-elite-fact-less-open-world-would-hurt
======
bediger4000
This is one of those arguments where a specialist (in this case economists)
argue a point using a totally different definition of something than actually
happens in real life.

Yes, free trade, _as defined by economists_ , is probably a good thing for
all. Maybe. Japan became an industrial power with a pretty weird protectionist
policy.

But that's not the real world "free trade". As represented by NAFTA, CETA,
ACTA, TPP, TTIP and probably others, real life "free trade" doesn't just
reduce/eliminate tariffs, provide a bigger market for all, and the other
things that The Economist argues are great. All of these "free trade" treaties
came with limitations, harsher "intellectual property" penalties,
longer/infinite life of "IP", investor-state dispute systems, etc. That's not
free trade by The Economist's definition, and that's the part that people
don't like. It's more than a little disingenuous of The Economist to argue
technical merits of "free trade" when real free trade treaties in the modern
world have huge sops to large corporations built in.

