( Please answer each question in 300 words )Buy American! Buy Spanish! British jobs for British workers! The ideology of economic nationalism seeks to implement trade policies that help to keep jobs and investment at home while ignoring the advantages of open international trade and investment. Economic nationalism was popular during the Great Depression of 1929–1933 when it served to protect domestic firms from international competition. However, this led to curtailing international business activity, making the global economic slowdown worse. Widely recognized as a myopic policy, economic nationalism nevertheless reemerged during the global financial crisis that originated in the United States in 2008, prompting many analysts to wonder whether the public has learned anything from international business history.Soon after the U.S. stock market crash of 1929, Willis Hawley and Reed Smoot, two Republicans in the U.S. Congress, sponsored a bill to raise import tariffs to the highest level in U.S. history. Given the high rate of U.S. unemployment at that time, the bill was passed in order to keep jobs at home. This resulted in retaliation from other nations as they raised tariffs on exports from the United States and other countries. The net result was a ruinous fall in global trade and a worldwide depression.In late 2008 and early 2009, when the United States faced the worst recession since the Great Depression, the call for a new round of trade barriers was being debated. However, this time the focus was upon inserting nontariff barriers on items in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, which was meant to give the floundering U.S. economy a boost. This legislation, commonly known as the “stimulus package,” included a “Buy American” provision that restricted government spending to U.S. companies. As a result, public works such as infrastructure projects were required to use commodities, such as iron and steel, that was domestically sourced, despite that these products cost more than imports from countries such as China. Similarly, the development and delivery of computerized medical records would be restricted to domestic IT firms, even if such services could be sourced at a much lower cost from India.Some experts argued that such protectionism may violate international trade rules, and U.S. exporters feared retaliation against their goods and services. Canada, in fact, soon threatened retaliation. Meanwhile, other countries moved in similar directions. The British prime minister talked of “British jobs for British workers,” the French president urged French car companies to invest at home rather than elsewhere in the European Union, the government of Spain launched a “Buy Spanish” campaign. It may not be Smoot-Hawley, but the global implications could be the same.1)Is economic nationalism justified?2)Is the Smoot-Hawley plan better or worse than “Buy American”? “Buy Spanish”? Or “British jobs for British workers”? Explain fully.

Knowing Amazon's culture/structure from the last case study, how do Zappos and Amazon's cultures and structure differ? Is this a good fit from a merger/acquisition perspective? How would you assess Tony as a leader? As a boss? What do you think the employee's of Zappos feel going through this change? Would you want to work for Zappos pre-the change? Post the change? During the change? Why would 14% of employees take Tony up on his offer to leave the company? What are the potential benefits/drawbacks of Holacracy from a OB perspective? What do you think the response would be to this change from the people managers who are no longer going to hold those roles in the new structure? Why? What could or should Tony do next? Do you think Holacracy will increase or decrease workplace politics and conflicts? How could Zappos' structure effect customer service?