12-07-2005, 04:07 AM
I only noticed this long after it was written, but I disagree with GG on this one. In RL, most generalised free trade agreements have been built upon previous sector-specific ones. Three examples that immediately come to mind are:
I agree that auto manufacturing is probably too specific, but how about manufactured goods generally? This is how the European Free Trade Association (Britain and the Nordic hold-outs from the EEC, until they all begged to join) worked, leaving the politically more contentious issues of agriculture and culture out of the mix.
The basic principle is sound, namely giving an economic advantage to the UN in exchange for accepting limitations on human rights and environmental affairs.
Sorry I didn't see this sooner.
- NAFTA: the North American Free Trade Agreement, built upon the Canada-U.S. FTA and more distantly on the Autopact between Canada and the USA
- EU: the European Union, built upon the European Economic Community (which Britain wrongly insisted on calling the Common Market) and more distantly upon the European Coal and Steel Community
- Germany's Second Reich, built upon the North German Federation and more distanly upon the Zollverein. Sidebar: One of the most productive mines in Germany's industrial Ruhrgebiet area was named after this Customs Union.
I agree that auto manufacturing is probably too specific, but how about manufactured goods generally? This is how the European Free Trade Association (Britain and the Nordic hold-outs from the EEC, until they all begged to join) worked, leaving the politically more contentious issues of agriculture and culture out of the mix.
The basic principle is sound, namely giving an economic advantage to the UN in exchange for accepting limitations on human rights and environmental affairs.
Sorry I didn't see this sooner.