Hi all friends, 

Defenders and critics of free trade and globalization tend to present the issue as either/or it's inherently good or bad. The confusion starts when defining free trade and globalization.

While the Ricardo's concept is intuitively appealing because it's a win win situation for importers and exporters, regrettably it doesn't describe the consequences of capital mobility.

Capital, credit, cash, instruments and the intangible capital of expertise-- move freely around the globe seeking the highest possible return pursuing the prime directive of capital. The game is to inflate or die. In the world dominated by mobile capital, this scheme is the comparative advantage.

Capital that failed to expand will stagnate and shrink. If the contraction continues unchecked, the capital eventually vanishes.

The mobility of capital radically altered the simplistic conventional view of liberal trade. In today's world trade cannot be coherently measured as goods moving between countries because the capital of the importing nation owns the productive assets in the exporting nation.

If Apple owns a factory or joint venture in China and collects virtually all the profits from gadgets produced there, this really cannot be captured by the models of the simple conventional free trade accords. 

In today's globalized version of liberal trade, mobile capital can abridge labor, currency, interest rates, regulatory burdens and political favors by shifting between nations and assets. Attempting to account the conventional 18 th century of manners goods shipped between nations are nonsensical when components come from a number of nations and profits flow not to the nation of origin but to the owners of capital. 

A reasonable standards of course would recognize IPhones and IPads do not have a single country of origin. More than a dozen companies from at least five countries supply parts for them.

Analyst differ how much of the final price of the gadgets should be assigned to which country, but no one disputes that the largest slice should go not to China but to the United States. That intellectual property along with the marketing is the largest source of iGadget's value. 

Getting hold of these facts into account would leave China, the supposed country of origin of a paltry price of the pie. Analyst estimates that as little as $10 of the value of every iGadgets actually ends up in the Chinese economy in the form of income paid directly to Foxcon and other component makers. 

In the world dominated by the mobility capital, mobile capital is the comparative advantage. Mobile capital can borrow billions of dollars or equivalent in one country of low rates of interest and then use the money to outbid domestic capital for assets in another nation with few sources of credit. 

Mobile capital can overwhelm the local political system, buying favors and cutting deals, all with the cash borrowed at near zero interest rates. These capitals can buy up and exploit resources and cheap labor until the resource is depleted or competition cuts profit margins.

At that point, they close the factory, fires the employees and moves on. China's manufacturing slows? Their housing bubble worsen?  Then, what is the possible solution? And where's the opportunity? Will their stock market offers any kind of opportunities? What's the consequences if they unleash their monetary powerhouse? Did you notice their capital mobility has taken off to involve globally? 

Where is the free trade in a world in which the comparative advantage is always held by the mobile capital? 

And what renders the mobile capital it unlimited leverage? 

Why these fraudulent actions that occur during this modern globalization era cannot be prevented?

Central banks issuing trillions of dollars in nearly free money to banks and other fiscal institutions that funnel to corporation and financiers who can roam the world snapping up assets and arbritaging global imbalances with nearly free monetary policy. 

Will it be worse or better to abolish these corrupted free trade concepts that originally created to flourish and benefits the country of source? 

Is this the reason why they're willing to keep printing trillions of dollars and leveraging the power to suppress the poor to poorer? 

I'm thinking again. What is the best sector to profit from this mobility of capital. This also means I am working all the time, there's always a good work over a bad time,  just a bit dissimilar from what others think.

Till here then.

P/s: There are enormous opportunity/ instruments emerged from the disputes from this unforseen direction of capital mobility. Whether you are working towards it or otherwise, it's all about capital and how mobile it is. Nothing else.