Losers??
31 December 2006
The Editor, New York Times
229 West 43rd St.
New York, NY 10036
To the Editor:
David Abraham wisely rejects protectionism as a means of helping those, such as U.S. textile workers, whom he describes as "losers in free trade" (Letters, Dec, 31).
But the very concept of "losers in free trade" is questionable. Almost no one "loses" from free trade without first winning from it. Take those U.S. textile workers. Many of the machines they work with were produced by foreign firms. Also, we Americans can buy closets full of clothing in no small part because international trade makes us so wealthy. Without trade, many of today's jobs in American textile mills would never have been created -- and those that would still have been created would pay wages far lower than are now paid in these mills.
Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Chairman, Department of Economics
George Mason University
The Editor, New York Times
229 West 43rd St.
New York, NY 10036
To the Editor:
David Abraham wisely rejects protectionism as a means of helping those, such as U.S. textile workers, whom he describes as "losers in free trade" (Letters, Dec, 31).
But the very concept of "losers in free trade" is questionable. Almost no one "loses" from free trade without first winning from it. Take those U.S. textile workers. Many of the machines they work with were produced by foreign firms. Also, we Americans can buy closets full of clothing in no small part because international trade makes us so wealthy. Without trade, many of today's jobs in American textile mills would never have been created -- and those that would still have been created would pay wages far lower than are now paid in these mills.
Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Chairman, Department of Economics
George Mason University
Posted by Don Boudreaux on
Tuesday September 11, 2007 at 5:01pm