>
>
>But if Roger will be hurt, it does not follow that African labor will be
>helped. Other capitalists will be helped. Despite what you write, I
>remain unconvinced that the workers in the Indonesian sweatshops are
>beneficiaries of free trade.
Even though the workers in Indonesian sweatshops today have three
times the material standard of living of their parents back on the
village a generation ago?
Even though it does look as if--since World War II--that closing
yourself off from world trade is a really bad idea? Even though the
most that Dani Rodrik (who is in the business of attacking the
trade-and-growth linkages) has been able to do is to fuzz the
standard errors and make them large without moving the size of the
estimated effect of trade on growth much?
>
>As a student of economic history, can you point me to one instance of a
>country that developed through free trade?
The usual case against free trade is a case for export
subsidies--invest heavily in export industries that as byproducts
build human and institutional capital, protect those industries that
generate big social learning externalities, subsidize exports so that
you can ride down a learning curve.
I know of *many* who have argued that tariffs and quotas on imports
into your country can be beneficial.
I haven't heard the argument that restrictions on your ability to
export--tariffs and quotas imposed on your products by others--are
beneficial...
