Strawman Alert!

Paul Craig Roberts writes at the Mises Blog:

I am amazed that some libertarians defend this redistribution on the grounds that the Asians could benefit by more than Americans (first world in general) would lose. If libertarians favor the international redistribution of income, why do they oppose the domestic redistribution of income?

Libertarians oppose coercive redistribution.

What PCR is describing is not coercive redistribution. He is describing general trend for production to move to different geographic locations due to differences in comparative advantage, a necessary consequence of the division of labor. This phenomenon has been occuring since the beginning of human civilization. As a result, some businesses win; others lose.

This is not coercive redstribution. It is the result of voluntary exchanges. To describe it the way PCR does is to turn the entire concept inside out. Rather, protectionism - something that PCR seems to be espousing even if he has not outright called for it - is coercive redistribution.

Don't let the concept be bastardized.

Share this

Roberts _is_ a

Roberts _is_ a protectionist:

Paul Craig Roberts is a fool

Paul Craig Roberts is a fool -- complete,
unadulterated, fool. He's not even arguing
against a strawman, he's seriously insisting
that 'international trade' is meaningfully
different from regional trade in economic
terms. Pfeh.
Why are we all paying so much attention, and
taking this so seriously, as if his
opinions mattered?


Because he has the ear of

Because he has the ear of politicians who would be happy to buy votes with protectionism.

Hear hear, Cap'n!

Hear hear, Cap'n!