The free movement of goods across national borders
The free movement of goods across national borders has long been a controversial issue. Some people argue that it is necessary for economic growth, while others claim that it damages local industries.
Discuss both views and give your own opinion. You should write at least 250 words.
One of the most disputable issues has been the extent to which international trade benefits or harms national economies. Some people think that it is essential for economic growth, while others contend that it hurts the local industry. In my opinion, the free movement of goods should be encouraged.
People favouring the expansion of global free trade claim that economies grow faster when they can specialise in just a few industries in which they have a definite advantage. Consequently, each region or country produces something of value to the world economy. For example, East Asia manufactures electronic goods, the Middle East exports energy, and the EU provides luxury items. Free trade proponents claim that dependence on global trade helps to strengthen international cooperation and prevent wars.
On the other hand, opponents of free trade, sometimes called “protectionists,” claim that the unrestricted movement of goods and services causes damage to local communities. It is because jobs are lost when it becomes cheaper to import a product than to produce it domestically. They also argue that the vast distances travelled by food, oil, and consumer goods are harming the environment and making our lives unsustainable. Protectionists are in favour of tighter controls on the movement of products and services to protect jobs and livelihoods.
To sum up, free movement of goods is the need of the hour and necessary to meet demand. I believe that global trade is inevitable and should not be restricted. It is no longer realistic for nations to source all of their energy, food, and manufactured goods entirely within their own borders.