Center for Business and Economic Research - Ball State University


CBER Data Center
Projects and PublicationsEconomic IndicatorsWeekly CommentaryCommunity Asset InventoryManufacturing Scorecard

About

Commentaries are published weekly and distributed through the Indianapolis Business Journal and many other print and online publications. Disclaimer

RSS Feed

Disclaimer

The views expressed in these commentaries do not reflect those of Ball State University or the Center for Business and Economic Research.

Recent

Two Key Economic Lessons in One BillHoosiers face trade-offs and opportunity costs in the wake of SEA1.

Time to Fix Economic Development PolicyAllocating tax dollars to land development won’t cause economic growth.

The Unanticipated Effects of SB1Businesses, governments and households may all feel the effects.

The Stupidest of PoliciesThis whipsawing of tariff rates has unnerved financial markets, which on Wednesday, were toying with a liquidity crisis.

View archives

Top Tags

jobs and employment 261
economics 201
state and local government 188
education 186
economic development 171
indiana 171
budget and spending 145
taxes 144
law and public policy 142
workforce and human capital 139
Browse all tags
Reporter / Admin Login

May 12, 2008

Blocking Free Trade is Expensive

Americans are in a tough spot when it comes to negotiating free trade agreements.  With the exception of a small Scandinavian country and a couple European principalities everyone we trade with has lower wages, weaker environmental standards, and less personal liberty.  So it is easy to argue that we shouldn’t trade with a country until they become like us.  This is the siren song of economic catastrophe.  Here’s why.

First, countries don’t trade with each other, people do.  The choice to buy goods and increasingly services from producers in other nations is a choice made by individuals. 

Countries can and do block trade to benefit special interests that abhor the freedom of consumers to make decisions.  The movement to open borders to trade is one that empowers consumers and citizens, those without political and economic power, the hungry and destitute.  The anti-free traders, from large agricultural interests to labor unions do so to protect themselves from the discipline of market competition.  They do this at the expense of everyone else.

The benefit of trade is probably the hardest thing for economists to explain to a lay audience.  The very liberal New York Times columnist and excellent economist Paul Krugman flatly refuses to do so without resorting to algebra.  I’ll hazard an attempt at it without an equation.

Visualize the world of two small farmers; both scratching out a living on hardscrabble farms, doing all the various tasks themselves.  Both would be hard pressed to raise themselves up from poverty.  Now suppose they decide to become specialists.  One raises animals, a year round job, while the other raises crops in the summer, and manufacturers clothing and tools in the winter.  A fine idea this, but it only works if they exchange the fruits of their labor with one another. And, of course, they become more skilled at their specific tasks if they specialize.  The result is that both farmers can actually consume more goods by specializing and trading than they could if they worked alone.

The critics say, sure, but this doesn’t work for countries, especially the U.S. where we are so much better at almost everything we do.  They are wrong.  Suppose one of the farmers was a bit dim, unschooled and lazy.  Suppose he took siestas, watched hockey late in the evening or whiled away his weekends watching football.  All the benefits of trade would still occur – the only loser would be the less productive farmer. 

Trust me; I can make the story as complex as we want, with asymmetric tariffs, pegged currency regimes, tradable emissions permits and unequal labor protections.  The result remains the same.  Trade benefits all but those protected special interests. 

But, why oppose free trade?  Clearly, trade hurts the special interests.  Sadly, many of these special interests have faces, and may be our neighbors.  But, we neither can nor should continue to protect them from the rigor of markets at the expense of the rest of us.  The results would be devastating to our economy.

Link to this commentary: https://commentaries.cberdata.org/114/blocking-free-trade-is-expensive

Tags: trade


About the Author

Michael Hicks cberdirector@bsu.edu

Michael J. Hicks, PhD, is the director of the Center for Business and Economic Research and the George and Frances Ball distinguished professor of economics in the Miller College of Business at Ball State University. Note: The views expressed here are solely those of the author, and do not represent those of funders, associations, any entity of Ball State University, or its governing body.

© Center for Business and Economic Research, Ball State University

About Ball State CBER Data Center

Ball State CBER Data Center is one-stop shop for economic data including demographics, education, health, and social capital. Our easy-to-use, visual web tools offer data collection and analysis for grant writers, economic developers, policy makers, and the general public.

Ball State CBER Data Center (cberdata.org) is a product of the Center for Business and Economic Research at Ball State University. CBER's mission is to conduct relevant and timely public policy research on a wide range of economic issues affecting the state and nation. Learn more.

Terms of Service

Center for Business and Economic Research

Ball State University • Whitinger Business Building, room 149
2000 W. University Ave.
Muncie, IN 47306-0360
Phone:
765-285-5926
Email:
cber@bsu.edu
Website:
www.bsu.edu/cber
Facebook:
www.facebook.com/BallStateCBER
Twitter:
www.twitter.com/BallStateCBER
Close