[LowCountryJoe]

Samuelson and Stolper actually acknowledged that over-all, countries benefited from being more open to trade...they just were of the opinion that there would be losers as well. They found the need for the winners (the ones who were the owners of the main factor of production) to compensate the losers (those with the ot-of-favor factors of production). Of course this could be done because on the whole, the economy grows when resources are used for their most efficient purposes. You people that want to acknowledge Samuelson have also got to realize that at one time he was a supporter of trade only with the qualifier that those who gain would subsidize those who lost.

[curiosity]

Samuelson and Stolper actually acknowledged that over-all, countries benefited from being more open to trade...they just were of the opinion that there would be losers as well.

Yes, that's the thrust of this paper. Some countries can win and other countries can lose as a result of free trade. I don't think he's denying that on net there is more output generated as a result of free trade. Frankly, if we are on the losing end, it does not make me any happier that the winners could subsidize the losers, because in the real world such subsidies never materialize. That's why we should be conducting a trade policy to maximize our income, not China's or Japans or Mexico's or Europe's.