In: Economics
Suppose your state had a chance to reach a major trade agreement by making substantial concessions. The agreement would produce $5 billion in new wealth for your state, but $10 billion for each of the other states involved. The other states are political allies, but economic rivals. What would a mercantilist think about the deal? What about a liberalist? What would you do if you were the leader of the subject country?
According to point of view from a mercantilist accept this deal as per the trade agreement by making substantial concessions that produce $5 billion. because they only function within the boundaries of government regulations and policies.The always maintain control in the hands of government also some restrictions towards imports of finished goods or services. And they can't promote the things with connected states of political allies.
According to liberalist the deal that which one is better to whole state that selected and there is no matter in the states which political allies.The only focus the economic rivals and getting advantage from that.The always maintain a democratic ways i.e. they ready to free and fair trade they promote.They always consider the international way.
If i am a leader i can choose the first one agreement because they trade within the regulations and policies of the government. Always try to accept this trade agreement because of one additional growth.