What to Expect When You’re Free Trading

New York Times ^ | January 16, 2008 | STEVEN E. LANDSBURG

[LowCountryJoe]

Rochester

IN the days before Tuesday’s Republican presidential primary in Michigan, Mitt Romney and John McCain battled over what the government owes to workers who lose their jobs because of the foreign competition unleashed by free trade. Their rhetoric differed — Mr. Romney said he would “fight for every single job,” while Mr. McCain said some jobs “are not coming back” — but their proposed policies were remarkably similar: educate and retrain the workers for new jobs.

All economists know that when American jobs are outsourced, Americans as a group are net winners. What we lose through lower wages is more than offset by what we gain through lower prices. In other words, the winners can more than afford to compensate the losers. Does that mean they ought to? Does it create a moral mandate for the taxpayer-subsidized retraining programs proposed by Mr. McCain and Mr. Romney?

Um, no. Even if you’ve just lost your job, there’s something fundamentally churlish about blaming the very phenomenon that’s elevated you above the subsistence level since the day you were born. If the world owes you compensation for enduring the downside of trade, what do you owe the world for enjoying the upside?

[Snip]

One way to think about that is to ask what your moral instincts tell you in analogous situations. Suppose, after years of buying shampoo at your local pharmacy, you discover you can order the same shampoo for less money on the Web. Do you have an obligation to compensate your pharmacist? If you move to a cheaper apartment, should you compensate your landlord? When you eat at McDonald’s, should you compensate the owners of the diner next door? Public policy should not be designed to advance moral instincts that we all reject every day of our lives.

[Osage Orange]

Good post...........

[William Terrell]

I think all our vital components should be made here or by our close allies"

I think all components for our defense machine should be made here. Allegiances change, even those from the same roots as we.

How long was it before we could fight a war on the level of WWII, during WWII? And who would we be fighting this WWII level war against?

Not long, because we had the manufacturing infrastructure to make machines, weapons, ammunition, clothing and equipment we needed. Such infrastructure is vanishing. In ten years we will be well and truly screwed.

Lord knows, but wars happen, and they are most likely to happen when a potential enemy thinks we are weak enough.

[William Terrell]

Oh, so there aren't monopolies? Great.

There are no setups for domestic monopolies. Haven't you read my last two posts to you.

But none have happened yet. Thanks.

Before US law ended the techniques of domestic monopoly, people who were buying cheap from the hucksters would have said the same thing.

When one happens, its too late, my friend. We should have policies and discipline to dig the kudzu vine up before it takes root.

But all I hear from your ranks is trade! trade! cheap! cheap! joy! joy!

[William Terrell]

North Korea is not setup like we are and have been, Huck. We have already done it, and it worked out well for us. This new type exchange is novel and untried.

Now, why would we abandon something that is tried and true for something risky and novel, that violates basic commonsense on its face?

[William Terrell]

You really want to believe in faeries and elves, don't you?

[William Terrell]

Give examples of this monopoly. What is it? What industry is it in?

Again.

The basic monopoly requires the setup of a span of underpriced items, running competition out of business. This takes a span of time.

Any industry in America that is loosing its foothold on the market for its product because of the same cheap foreign product.

Why is this so complicated for you? I'll repeat it for months until it sinks in. It is really the Trojan horse that will defeat us and force us into ceding national sovereignty for global governance.

Ignore it to your, and my, peril.

But, I know, I know, if we have a world government, the aliens will finally let us join the Galactic Union.

[William Terrell]

Read the papers. Listen to world events. Plot the loss of manufacturing infrastructure in this country over the last four decades.

"Facts" will not keep you from wanting to believe in fantasies, even when what you are against has been the MO of this country until lately (since about the '70s, I figure) and has worked to make us a world power.

"And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."

[Toddsterpatriot]

North Korea is not setup like we are and have been, Huck.

Sometimes autarky works, sometimes it doesn't?

Now, why would we abandon something that is tried and true for something risky and novel,

Trading with other countries is risky and novel?

[scarface367]

Read the papers. Listen to world events. Plot the loss of manufacturing infrastructure in this country over the last four decades.

Show me actual facts that back up your assertion that trade is harming our economy. It is an indisputable fact that our nation's GDP is at all time levels. It is up to you to show where trade is hurting this.

[Louis Foxwell]

Your attempts to ameliorate suffering by dumbing down tyranny is sophistry.
I am refferring to the Stalinist type gulags where people are imprisoned to create a labor force. China is notorious for this.

[LowCountryJoe]

I am refferring to the Stalinist type gulags where people are imprisoned to create a labor force. China is notorious for this.

And surely you have inside knowledge of these things from unbiased and recent sources.