Quote:
Originally Posted by Trolly McTrollson
OK but what do the incredible economists think?
Trolly McTrollson, this is a transcript of my response to within another group's discussion thread.
Respectfully, Supposn
//////////////////////////
MasterHawk, your interesting link to the Atlantic magazine site refers to the “IGM Economic Experts Panel”. Yes, the panelists responses were as you described them to be. I linked to the article's actual source,
www.igmchicago.org/surveys/free-trade .
[The free trade statement to be considered by a panel of 10 highly credible USA economists selected by the University of Chicago's Booth School of Business. I do not doubt that the panelist are all credible economists, and I chose not speculate as to the impartiality of the school choosing the panelists.
The school's question we're discussing was, “Question A: Freer trade improves productive efficiency and offers consumers better choices, and in the long run these gains are much larger than any effects on employment”.
[Note the wording of the question does not refute those contending an annual trade deficit indicates its nation's annual GDP, numbers of jobs, and their aggregate payroll amounts were less than otherwise].
On a scale of 1 through 10, 35 of the responding panelists agreed or strongly agreed with the statement. Of the 6 remaining respondents, 2 were uncertain of the answer, and 4 chose not to answer the question.
Some of those experts accompanied their vote with an additional comment.
Four, (4) of those comments did not refer to any detrimental affects due to free trade.
The 13 other comments directly or indirectly referred to to segments of populations that were to some extent detrimentally affected by pure free trade.
I'm a populist that agrees with the contention that “we all do better when we all do better”. I'm among the proponents of the improved trade policy described within Wikipedia's “Import Certificates” article.
Respectfully, Supposn