| I think this is a fair point, but I'd argue that there are two separate issues, trade policy and job training programs, etc. We've seen a lot of innovation in the area of free trade, commerce, etc., but virtually no innovation in education, on the job training, and other areas where policy can help make the economy stronger overall. So in my view, tariffs are used in a way that is meant to undo the damage from decades of neglect of our educational and skills training infrastructure. This doesn't call for a more nuanced view on trade (freer is always better), it is a call for us to begin to think rationally about job training. Whatever job anyone has today, whatever product is demanded today, etc., will not necessarily be the same tomorrow. When we pretend otherwise -- such as the fiction that first world nations should manufacture steel -- we invite all sorts of bad policy when what we really needed was honest understanding that economies change. Keep in mind that most moral progress over time is not the result of rational people convincing others of something that was previously opaque, it is due simply to economic progress. In other words, moral progress is a luxury we buy with prosperity. Where we lag in this area most today is that we fail to understand that we must invest heavily in job training, education, entrepreneurship, and other areas that create new life when industries change, move abroad, or shrink. It so happens that in US politics there are some influential electoral districts that contain steel mills and which have suffered from economic globalization. Sure the easiest way to placate those districts is to introduce tariffs or use other means to offer welfare that prevent those impacted from adapting. Most of the buildings that house startups in urban parts of the US were once used for manufacturing or meat packing. This is a good thing in the medium term. But creating job training or investing in new industries to replace old ones is not economics, it's social policy. We should not make the mistake of confusing it with economics. |