Shaken, Not Stirred - HistorySmith
 
In reflection on our gin and vermouth producing countries, Here and There, I would like you to comment on your observations of how trade within a country and/or between two countries works best.  How could either country maximize the number of martinis it can produce, either alone or in trade with the other.  Who ends up most advantaged by a trade scenario?  How would this affect the workers of Here and There?  The companies producing gin and vermouth?  The government of Here and There?   Would free trade between Here and There be best?  What would need to be done to make the trade between the two produce an "equal" result so that they both benefit relatively equally from trading?  I will post a copy of the exercise on the Weebly website in case you want to  "crunch the numbers" again.  You can never have too much math!!
Baheya
9/28/2011 03:06:13

What is trade? How does it work and what are the benefits from it?
First all, in free trade there is competition between lots of companies in the same majors. Some companies know what they are doing and produce products of great quality but others produce poor products. In free trade, there are no barriers. So, sometimes a country's economy could go down if they weren't good at a specific thing and also have a back-up plan. The problem with that type of trade, the workers don’t get paid enough and work in unsafe conditions.
In today's activity, I realized something I never thought about. When each country do a specific thing they are good at and two companies would get together and create one type of product, is much better when each company does everything on its own, whether they have the ability to do it or not. Let's take the example of Here and There, they both produce Martinis but Here produces more Gin and then they do in There, and There produces faster Vermouth. When both of them got together they produced more Martinis than one on its own would do. This would affect the workers because everyone would be doing only the things they can do, it would be easier for them. Here and There would gain more profits because they are producing more Martinis. In order for this to work and for both to gain the same profit is to work to produce the best quality to get people's confidence when they are buying this product. In that way, they would be getting a lot of money and divide the profit equally.

Reply
Raya
9/28/2011 04:15:55

I observed that if a country is good at producing an item more than the other. The other country is good at producing another item better than this country. Then the two countries should rely on each other and collaborate with each other to make a third product made out of these two items.. So, I think, one country should make something that they are best at and another country should make what they are best at. Then they should depend amongst themselves to make a product out of these two products. So, it shows that trade increases the interdependence amongst the countries. For example, in our gin and martini producing country, if the two companies work together they have more product and lesser wastes. This way, both of them profit. If they would have made martinis on their own then they would have had more wastes and lesser products. The companies will definitely profit as they are the ones who produce lot of martinis as well as the countries will also profit. If Here and There work together, then the workers of Here will make only product that is Gin and There will Vermouth. It is advantageous for them as their time will be saved if they produce something takes them lesser time. This way, more Martinis could be produced than they would normally make if they work individually. Free trade amongst Here and There would be the better as Here and There both need each other to make martinis that would have the same cost in both the countries. Therefore, I think that the countries should produce something that they are good at and depend on other countries to make other products.

Reply
Nehal
9/28/2011 05:36:11

In our activity this class, it was proven that trade between two countries is more beneficial and productive than trade within a country itself. If each of the countries of Here and There tried to maximize the number of martinis they make, they won't succeed alone. They would have to either increase the working hours or make much faster, but less quality products. Either ways wouldn't help them produce that much more martinis. However, if the two countries join forces, they would produce about, for example, 400 martinis per day. While if each country would work individually, each would produce about only 40 martinis maximum. No one necessarily ends up with more advantage than the other. Even though Here makes way more gin, There's vermouth is much harder to make. They can have an agreement that they would split the number of martinis in half. The workers' won't be affected much by the transition. First of all, it would mean less work per individual because of much increased labor force. However, a worker who is specialized in making gin might find it hard and time consuming to get acquainted to the vermouth industry. Free trade between Here and There would be best. The governments of both countries will benefit because the companies' high sales and increased profit would strengthen the economy.

Reply
Hania
9/28/2011 05:51:10

According to our calculations today in class, The 2 countries HERE and THERE worked best and got the best outcome when they joined forces. That means if both Here and There were using Free Trade, Here would do what its best at and There would do what its best at and put all there focus and laborers to that specific thing. Take the examples we had in class we had today, Here can produce more Gin than There and There can produce can make more Vermouth than Here. So why would each country be doing their own separate thing if they can't do both well, to get the number of martinis they want without any leftover Gin or Vermouth. Free Trade will allow both countries to do that very easily because there are no barriers between countries. This will cause each country to do what its best at well and can make it international faster with less amounts of money to be payed. And at the end of the day they are making much more money together than on their own.

Reply
Omar
9/28/2011 05:53:09

I think that trade within a country or between two countries works best in this case with the martinis with free trade. I say free trade because the since the countries have little control over each other they then must have some sort of agreement, and free trade might harm labors of consumers but the overall welfare of each county increases with free trade. Today we saw in class that they made 200+ martinis by trading together so the countries could maximize the number of martinis by trading with each other. But when they weren’t trading Here produced about 40 and while There produced 13. And clearly 200 martinis wins by a landslide. I think Here would have the most advantage because working by themselves they were able to produce 40 martinis and the distribution made more sense because you need 3 units of gin to 1 unit of vermouth. The workers might be in harm’s way because they might start getting lower wages because now the countries have to split the profit equally. As long as both the countries are benefiting then everything should be okay, but we live in the real world and its very difficult for everyone to be benefiting at the end.

Reply
Priyanka
9/28/2011 06:10:28

Today I learnt why trading between two countries can be beneficial. In the class activity I got Here and our group did the calculations. Here was better in making gin and There was better in making vermouth. In Here there were lots of Gin leftover but all the vermouth finished but in There they had vermouth leftover and the gin was all finished. Now if Here and There trade with each other then they will produce more Martinis. The gin left overs in Here and the vermouth leftovers in There can be used together to produce more Martinis. This will benefit both the company’s because they get their profit without having gin or vermouth being wasted and There can have all of it’s workers working in making vermouth and Here can have all of its workers making gin. So in this case there will be more gin and vermouth and they can produce much more martinis. Free trade will be the best because that way they can easily trade the vermouth and gin without having to pay more money. The government will rise because it will have a great profit. To make the trade “equal” you will have to equally divide the amount of martinis made so that it will be fair and both the companies will make equal profit because they are working equally.

Reply
Ranna
9/28/2011 06:18:46

After playing the Here and There trade game today, I really understood more on how trade works. I believe that it is much better for two countries to trade together because if one country is good at producing one thing, and another country is good at producing something else, they can rely on each other and produce more products. This way, both the countries will benefit and they will make more money. I think free trade between Here and There would be the best choice because both countries would make a lot of money and the economy would flourish. Of course, nothing is 100% good, and free trade can harm workers, but it is the best option for Here and There. Here made more gin and There made more vermouth. Here was limited because they didn’t have enough vermouth while There was also limited because they didn’t have enough gin. Free trade is needed between Here and There because that way, both countries will be able to produce more martinis and make a higher profit. It would be much easier for a country to be able to produce only one product that they’re good at. By joining together, Here will be able to produce only gin, and there will be able to produce only vermouth. This will definitely help both countries increase their profits.

Reply
Sarah
9/28/2011 06:45:16

Trade within a country works best when some workers make vermouth and some workers make gin to maximize the amount of martinis they can make. I suggest that more workers make gin, because the ratio for making martini's is 3:1, so balancing out how much vermouth and gin is made can maximize how much martinis are made in the end. Trade between two countries works best when one country makes something that they are good at. For instance, one country makes vermouth and one country makes gin, so that when they combine their companies or share their products to make martinis, then the number of martinis increases (practically doubles, if I remember correctly from our activity in class). Both countries end up benefiting when they "join" companies, because they both share the profits of the high production sales of martinis. The workers would all work doing one thing and probably would be paid the same amount. They could be most likely easily replaced because they could be paid cheaply. The companies would sell their one product on the global scale and benefit much from this. Every country should do what they are good at, potentially, and this is the purpose of free trade. The government would benefit due to a growing economy with industries selling their best product globally. Free trade would be the only way to go in this case. Both companies would need to make their best product and each sell them globally. This way, their own countries will benefit from this with a growing economy and the "joint" industry would benefit together with the many products they produce and sell (mass production). I think the only things to worry about in free trade are the environment suffering, workers losing their jobs, and a global or local monopoly arising.

Reply
Faisal
9/28/2011 07:14:32

Trade is an interaction between two nations that affects them in a good way dramatically. When two nations interact in trading, their economy is greatly affected well. Countries don't just trade goods, they trade tradition. For example, a country might exchange cultural beliefs and traditions. It is the perfect relationships for nations. Here and There always work better when they partnered up, Martinis would make the best profit for both countries if they used free trade. After studying the examples we did in class we could make the conclusion that here has the potential to produce more gin then there, while there can produce more vermouth than here. Free trade can benefit both countries because there are no obstacles between countries this will make trade easy going.

Reply
Youssef
9/28/2011 07:29:22


The process of free trade had a positive affect on me today while we did the activity of trading martinis. There are two countries “Here” and “There” that worked together in forming a maximized amount of the drink. To form a martini, vermouth and gin are mixed together. Each country had an advantage of either making a higher quality vermouth or gin. Therefore, when they traded, both made over 200 martinis. On the other side, when they worked individually, “Here” produced 40 martinis, while “There” produced only 13. In that case “Here” would benefit more due to the higher amount they contain. But, when both countries trade the profit will be shared equally. As a result, profits will increase for both countries due to the huge amount of martinis they made. Although laborers won’t have much of a salary, they will have less working hours. In that case, they won’t get too much harm. Both martini companies will benefit because their business will become more international and trading will increase. Also, government will benefit due to the fact that they will have a percentage of the companies’ profits because of taxes. The process of trading will also strengthen the countries economy. Finally as there are no barriers between them, the concept of free trading between both countries will be useful for each country as a whole, although some individuals could be harmed.

Reply
Farah
9/28/2011 15:37:33

In my opinion, both countries make more martinis if they work together. If HERE is good at making Gin and THERE is good at making Vermouth, they should work together to make the most martinis in their histories. However, if they won't be able to work together, they shouldn't split the workers equally. For example, THERE makes 10x more vermouth than gin because it's easier for them to make vermouth. They should have a 9:1 ratio instead. They'd be able to make 9(workers)*1(gin/hour)*8(hours)=72 gins/day and 1(worker)*10(vermouth/hour)*8(hours)=80. With a 3:1 ratio 3(gin) and 1 vermouth per martini, they'll be able to make 24 martinis and still have 56 vermouths left. Free trade is better than fair trade for this specific example because the goverment won't put any terrifs or taxes on the vermouth/gin. If the taxes aren't added to the martini's original cost, its price will remain constant. People would happily buy it and both countries (HERE and THERE) would both benefit because instead of throwing the excess vermouth/gin away, they'll be able to make money. So they're basically making money from selling their "garbage".

Reply
Ashley
9/28/2011 17:18:01

To maximize the production of martinis, the best way to go is free trade. Here and there will become more successful, if they join hands with each other. Each one of them should do something that they are good at and put their whole work force in creating more of their ingredient. Later, after they both have done their parts, they can join together in making a lot more martinis, therefore, having more profit. Mass production usually increases the chance of succeeding in that field. Also, since this is all free trade no tariffs are required for the exchange.

Reply
Hussein
9/28/2011 17:31:59

Producing Vermouth and Gin to make Martinis was an exercise that we practiced in class to show how trading is needed around the world all the time. Each country, Here and There, each were better at producing one thing, Vermouth or Gin. When each country was making martinis on its own, they weren't making it sufficiently, but when they combined forces, they made Martinis in a much more efficient way and more successful. This is like any product in the world that is mass produced. Lets take a pot for an example. A Tefal pot bought in Egypt is not 100% French. The raw pot, in a round flat form, is shipped from France to Egypt, along with the handles also produced in France. They are shipped separately. In the Egyptian factory, the flat pot is punched by a machine to put it in the concave form then the handles are riveted on the sides and finally they pots and pans get the final touches and are sold. This is done because it costs less to ship smaller objects and it costs less to form it in Egypt. Trade is an excellent method to get what you want, where you want it.

Reply
Adam
9/28/2011 17:44:40

In class, we learned more about the trading system of free trade and fair trade, and we got to learn about the necessity of trade on a global scale. We learned this by having two fictional countries, "Here" and "There." Here had more gin than vermouth, and There had more vermouth than gin. I believe that if the two countries worked together in a trading system, they would benefit greatly and make a lot more profit and make a lot more products, which means more consumers, and of course, as said, more profit. I observed that countries in trade should work on what they are more professional at, since that way, they will have a more successful system. Unfortunately, many countries either don't do this, or they do to an extent that isn't magnified greatly to the expectations that could really deliver a greater result. When two countries work together, they will get a lot more from it, but it depends firstly on what the products are, and if the products can work together. If Here and There worked separately, Here can sell the excess gin as its own product, and There can do the same but with vermouth. This way, both countries get more money, and to some extent, benefits the customers because they can make the martinis themselves, although from some perspective, most customers would prefer the final product. From all of this, trade is a crucial and critical factor in allowing a variety of products to not only reach different places, but to also come into existence.

Reply
Autumn
9/28/2011 17:53:54

After the discussion about Martinis, I have fallen deeper in love with free trade. After seeing it's obvious advantages over fair trade, I am certain that it is the right path too chose. In the case of the Martinis, I believe that each country should make and produce whatever they are exceptionally good at making. Whether that be gin, or vermouth, I think that as long as they produce alot of what they know will sell alot, they should keep producing it, and then join sides with another country that produces the counter product, which when combined, will make a martini. In the case of here and there, if here produces what their good at, and here produces what they're good at, I think that they will both improve in the end, producing more martinis together rather than if they were to produce them alone, each country seperatley. Now, if we take this on a global scale, I believe that if every country in the world were to follow this procedure, we would not have so much competition, and we would be able to manufactore items more affordably, and in mass ammounts. The example of here and there was a perfect demonstration as to way Free trade holds alot of benifits for the consumer, I mean, if I you were the consumer, wouldn't you want to have 4 martinis rather than 2? Anyways, that is just an example. It just goes to show you, when countries work in tandom, alot more is made, and a lot more people are happy.

Reply
Mounzer
9/28/2011 18:10:18

We had an exercise to do in class, it was about making Martinis! We did that exercise because it helped us understand how trading is needed all over the world. Every country has good resources than others, and some produce things better. In our exercise there were two countries, Here and There each. One of them was better at producing Gin, and one was better at producing Vermouth. Each were making martinis, but they weren’t making a lot of Martinis, yet when they combine their products, they can make much more, and became much more successful. We learned that when you trade, it benefits both countries. In the game Here and There, if they traded supplies they both would make more martinis.

Reply
Nadim
9/28/2011 18:37:59


We did an activity in class, which showed us how momentous the trading system is. We were divided into two different groups, which represented two countries, Here and There. Both countries were producing martinis. There are two ingredients in a martini, gin and vermouth. The country Here made more gin than vermouth and the country There made more vermouth than gin. They weren’t making as much martinis as they would make if they joined forces. We then looked at how many more martinis they could make if they trade their excessive ingredients and combine them to make extra martinis. It resulted in many more martinis, which shows us how trade can be very beneficial, and can result in a larger production rate. This activity really showed me how trade can help increase a countries production and income, and it also benefits the traders and the consumers.

Reply
AbdelRahman
9/29/2011 05:29:20

Trading is always good, if you are smart. for example if you trade a piece of gold for a normal rock you are NOT smart. In this case of martinis and Here & There; the number of martinis can definitely increase either by putting more workforce in the right place, most probably the product which you produce less of, Or by trading. In the case of trading, the country that is giving out less and receiving more of something really needed is most advantageous, in this situation, Here, would be the advantageous country in my opinion, because after they are done making all the martinis they possibly could with their local products, they will have a lot of excess gin if they split the excess gin and give a half to There in return for vermouth they could make much more martinis, as well as money, and because they don't need THAT much vermouth, There can not charge them too high of a price for it. If they trade 'freely' one country is always going to be gaining or benefit more than the other, but if they trade fairly, then there is a chance they could both have equal results, but then the government would be involved and they wouldn't gain or profit as much as in free trade, not to mention that products and merchandise would be taxed.

Reply



Leave a Reply.