Topic: Main countries in Unions and alliances handle better economy issues (Read 172 times)

It's all about reducing trade barriers and accepting that certain countries will have natural advantages over others. Anything adding friction to trade, like customs checks or tariffs, will ultimately end up costing the consumer more - so if you are able to create a trading bloc that eliminates most of them, it makes it much easy to move goods around. Globalization is often frowned upon, but it has allowed countries to specialize and others to benefit from lower prices of goods, so we should all be happy in reality - as long as those goods are produced reasonably ethically and a country does not try to abuse the situation by gaining economic advantages, like through subsidies to dominate certain markets.

Thats a good point on theory vs practice, it shouldn't matter on the order of the countries but the way the macro economic bias is setup its about who you know.  What should actually matter most is the product, quality and efficiency of production.

Whats happened is a big bias towards the global reserve system setup decades ago even though it failed in the gold standard in the 70's and has never got back to being equal in any way globally.    The bias is new dollars are produced exclusively inside USA (gold was global in its origins though not perfect either) and the closer you are to that source of new money the greater the benefit you receive.   That's not a product bias for trade but far more political, allies, friends, unions or alliances however you want to put it.

The EU is a cartel, it doesn't serve the people with cheapest products it serves the members of the cartel with protected prices for their chosen goods from those outsiders who might try and compete.  Maybe its the EU way of reacting to the dominance of USA but its worked to further exclude any country further afield.  Alot of poverty around the world shouldn't exist and overall the world is worse off because of these closed clubs, but the people in power aren't worse off so its not a problem is the unsaid view.

Venezuela has  wicked constitution. They just don't follow it.
Its a mixture of the German and French constitutions. The German Constitution from the outside looks nice just every law is handled by another paragraph ina bundeslaw which mostly contradicts the nice one.   

All sits in education. And making the law abide, from the top to the bottom.

Sometimes most of all this alliance is because they wants Favor or they have what they want to benefit from the country they are joining alliance with and rushing to make such decisions could even make the country to be indebted to that country. The disadvantage is more than the advantage and sometimes the smaller countries might see it as a previllge and other country will see it as an opportunity to leach on the small one even when it comes to their resources and This is part of the reason why I don't think alliance is necessary is about businesses it should be then strictly on business. Even in past centuries according to historians a lot of countries have branch contracts and the whole thing will end in conflict.

And the mistake that some of this politicians  make is that they don't consider the consequences that their decision will come with when they are no longer their they are always found of making decisions on their own thinking is for the best, and I have a feeling that of of this countries going to war will be because of a breach in contract so something worst than that and people that might have caused the issue might not even be alive any longer.

It's an unfortunate fact of life that the smaller dog will always get pushed around by the bigger dog if it serves their interests. Allies like America and the EU go a bit easier on each other but are still ultimately in a trade competition, the fact they are of similar size means they both have to make concessions. Then there are more ruthless countries like China that have much more opaque governments which do not necessarily serve their citizens in the best ways and like to bully those around them now they've gotten a bit richer. Ultimately these countries might be able to buy favor in certain ways, but it is a shallow form of trust and the relationships they make are prone to shattering much more easily.

While I do not know if this is true, I can say that it depends on the country. A worse off country could become part of a union and do fine, whereas a great nation could become part of one and get worse trying to help with smaller nations. So this isn't really one single answer, it depends on the nation that gets into a union and depends on which one. Germany in EU for example isn't benefiting that much, not hurting neither but not benefiting as much as for example Greece is benefiting.

Greece would have bene bankrupt and doing very very poorly today if it wasn't for EU so they got a lot better whereas Germany had to pay for it. As you can see, there are different results based on different nations. For example in BRICS, do you think China and Brazil are getting same amount of benefit? Of course not, it is not something that makes sense at all. This is why I think it depends on the union and it depends on the nation to decide how it does.

Maybe NATO nations and the EU members are benefiting from the organization. They gain security guarantees and economic cooperation which is good. I am sure that the reason why some countries have not been attacked is because of their members of NATO. However, my observation of the war in Ukraine and Russia shows that it is better to make peace with a neighbouring country than to have assistance from a third party to fight a war.

But most of the time, it is the big nations that benefit more from these alliances. Smaller or less powerful nations are not given equal opportunities like the big nations. They might have equal voting rights but the rich nations still influence the decisions of weaker nations. My country has gained more loans with outrageous interest rates from these international organizations. For, every country should weigh the benefits that will be derived from such an association before joining.

Source: https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2023

Many countries (if not all) as well as unions have good laws, but the problem arises in the application and compliance of those laws. Where laws are respected and applied, people live better and better, in countries where there is a lot of corruption, things are different...

Unfortunately, my country is at a distant 106th place on this list and that is why the economy in my country is very bad, that is why minimum wages and spending power are at a very low level. And it's not that we don't have good laws, it's just that they are broken at all levels...

Countries in Unions gain in security but lose national sovereignty. In a globalised, hyperconnected world, however, you need allies like never before: autarchy is not an option in most regimes anymore, if you are not China at least; and even China is in the BRICS.

You are right that a shared background and culture helps. In the USA tensions are less because of that and it is much easier to agree in different States, while in Europe there are more conflicting interests, partly also because different cultures make the world look different. There are great differences between Greece and Denmark, it's obvious, but between countries in the BRICS, like WillyAp and icalical said, there is a cultural abyss.

It's said that united we stand and dividend we fall meaning that there's strength in number. Amalgamations like the EU, BRICS, commonwealth, NATO, ECOWAS and the rest strengthens ties between member Nations. A country like Russia, will think twice if they intend to go to war with another European country that is among the NATO alliance no matter how weak the nation is. Economic ties can improve as a result of countries coming together with a common goal like what the BRICS nations are poised to gain. No nation can exist in isolation so they all need to form alliances with other nations, take for instant a superpower like America, they still build ties with other countries. It doesn't matter whether they're strong or weak because the alliances makes them to become stronger and we'll respected.

While that may be true, as large countries like the US or the EU have greater room for maneuver to bully small states, the world is not quite as simple as big powers seeking out weak opponents to pick on. Take, for instance, the expansion of BRICS recently into states like Saudi Arabia and the UAE. This again goes to say that even smaller countries can come together in their own bloc to balance against Western hegemony. These countries also go on furthering diversification of their economies-from Saudi Arabia's move away from dependency on oil and into technology and renewable energy, for example. It makes them less vulnerable to outside pressure and stronger actors on the international scene  .

On the other hand, even under these alliances, BRICS is not perfect. With the internal tensions and lack of formal structures within the bloc, though they may pose geopolitical clout, the actual economic impact caused by BRICS can be very limited. The group is still heavily dependent on Western financial systems-a large component of which is based on the US dollar-which complicates its effort to really become out of the clutches of the West. While alliances are good, they do not protect one fully from either economic or political pressure.

Countries should not be pressured to join other countries in alliance or unions. Some unions and alliances have worse effects on the lesser countries than gains. Some have been drawn into unnecessary conflicts that the bigger countries started with another country, some forced to increase export of agricultural produce or other materials to support in the conflict, and some forced to accept policies that the bigger countries demand. Alliances do not always have positive effects; this is why every country has to be selective of the country they want to enter into an alliance with.

Those countries need to share some cultural similarities to successfully form a community of states.
The EU needed 2 decades to form. 10 years on the start with the EURO, turned out worse for citizens as it was made to please business.
BRICS has not even a cultural common ground. They are united only in their wish to free themselves of the data collectors in the US, ironically data and the quality of it is a foundation for trust. Trust is needed to invest.

The EU like the USA attracts investment through juridical and reasonable save data.

BRICS on the other hand don't have much data. They don't collect data. Even China has an issue with it.
 

Offers some interesting insights into economic and geographic problems from a world viewpoint. Indeed, countries in economic groups or associations, say in the European Union or BRICS nations, tend to be stronger and more stable on account of the shared strength and interdependence of the cooperating countries in these unions. This can be used to fight against external pressures and unfair trade practices.

Those countries that are outside the alliances, however, may have greater difficulties. This is because they are at the mercy of the economic policies and decisions of greater and more powerful countries. As a matter of fact, the superpowers can affect trade and global economic conditions to their advantage. This at times may adversely affect the countries outside their circle.

The other well-served point of yours is geopolitical measures. So far, great powers have aligned with weaker opponents in order to avoid open conflict with equal enemies. One can see this logic across a variety of contexts, both in conflict and in competition, using power and resources to achieve positive results.

Membership in a company or organization can be a measure of protection and power that a sovereign state can utilize. This would help a small country or a weaker country to be stable and have a voice in the world.

In summary, the understanding of these forces is fundamental in problem-solving in international relations and economic strategy. It states that relationship and historical context are important in shaping the global environment.

European Union brics nations and other countries wich have trading agreements and are in economical alliances will be allright.

Those countries whos not in unions or alliances will take the burdens of those countries even with unfair trading rates even If their own countries economics and finances have done right ways by their leaders.

So what ever decision the usa or eu make...they have a lot options to play with everything that even of their own mistakes they can distribute their problems like inflation with those countries wich not their alliances.

Also...the economical and geopolitical power games between the countries and nations will lead to competation and war.
But smart way to fight and have competation If you fight with weaker and smaller then you that's why the big ones in this world never goes to head to head fight or competation really.

If USA need to fight and need some enemy then USA will choose that kind of enemy that for sure easy to win in war or any other competation.
Not just USA but maybe even france...or germany uk If they need to fight then always with weaker never stronger and never equal.

And countries like usa uk france can choose with who they fight they pick the one and they fight it's not questions asked If you want to fight If USA point finger on you then you are choosen one and you are in fight if it's war or econmical or political fight doesn't matter If you are much weaker you are good for competing....and usa will enjoy fight with you while you are a lot weaker.
That's why it's important to belong in union (the gang) so you get atleast some protection otherwise the powerful countries will do with you what they want.

Smart countries learn from history...that you can't fight with or compete with equal power as you are.