It became rather clear during the past three months that both the United States and the European Union will not be able to generate much economic growth for a while as neither of them has a plan to solve the issue of oversized government debt.

The loss of confidence in the United States and the European Union, which takes up the majority of Canadian exports, turned our eyes to China, our second-largest trading partner and one of the fastest-growing investors in Canada. Our ties with China have proven to be a lifesaver in the past. During the recent recession, when trade with every other major economy fell dramatically, exports to China kept rising.

Why must we strengthen ties with China instead of some other countries?

The amount of exports to Japan has hardly changed in a decade. Russia and Brazil are competitors as much as customers. India, although demonstrating great potential, will have to remain outside of our consideration for the moment as it is conveniently close to the Middle East, the main source of its oil imports.

In many ways, strengthening ties with China is no longer a matter of enlightened self-interest, but economic survival.

There are many risks associated with international trade. Generally, these risks can be categorized under political risks, commercial risks, economic risks, and other risks. Despite these risks, many companies are still eagerly looking to expand internationally. This is because there are various ways a company can use to lower risks.  Some of the risk management tactics include a thorough market research, a comprehensive insurance plan, or partnership with a bank that has plenty of expertise. Therefore, with reduced risks, international trade becomes very attractive as it opens up new market or lowers cost depending on whether the company is importing or exporting.

Economic sanctions put into place by a government are a huge factor influencing international trade. When an economic sanction takes effect, the presumed outcome is that no company will trade with the country under sanction. However, in reality, this failed to be the case. One obvious reason is the high profit, which is accompanied by the high risks. While there is a way to get around the legal aspect of the economic sanction by going through another country, which acts as “the middleman,” the risks associated will inevitably become higher and harder to reduce.

I am intrigued by the “balance” that is present in the airline industry between being ethical and making a profit. The method of which an airline uses to decide when one will overrule the other in a given situation has always puzzled me a little bit.

For instance, if you are late for a flight, regardless of the reason, you will not be getting on that airplane. After all, it costs the airline more to open that cabin door than the profit it will make from your ticket. No matter how desperate you are, whether it is a family emergency or an important meeting you must attend, the airline doesn’t care. You are still going to be held captive in the airport, waiting for the next available flight.

On the other hand, if you are having a heart attack during a flight, then it is very likely that the plane is going to make an emergency landing at the nearest place possible regardless of the cost. It is, indeed, a very comforting thought to know that at least the airline will try its best to make sure that I don’t die on the plane.