International Trade

supports the conclusions of the Heckscher-Ohlin model.

rejects the usefulness of government protectionism

supports the concept that the government should support only high-tech industries

provides support for government protectionism.

supports arguments for free trade

does not provide more support for R&D as compared to other forms of investment

provides support for R&D by imposing high tariffs on R&D intensive products

provides support for R&D by providing direct subsidies for such activities.

provides support for R&D through tax legislation.

provides support for R&D through grant incentives.

unfair competition.

wildcat destructive competition.

environmental negative externalities associated with pollution.

limited competition.

lack of excess returns.

the "multiplier" effect of government expenditures.

the military-industrial complex.

the forward and backward linkage effects of certain industries.

the deterrent effect of the subsidy on foreign competition.

the economies of scale once the company enters the market.

the problem of insufficient information

the problem of likely foreign retaliation

the problem of harm to interests of consumers

the problem of adverse effects of trade policy politics

the problem of simultaneously causing harm to other industries

how strategic planning may backfire and cause a large waste of resources.

how externalities may be successfully exploited by protectionist policies.

how excess returns may be successfully exploited by protectionist policies.

how government intervention may create a meaningful comparative advantage.

how monopolies can outlast government intervention.

trade tends to worsen the conditions of unskilled labor in rich countries.

trade tends to worsen the conditions of owners of capital in rich countries.

trade tends to worsen the conditions of workers in poor countries.

trade tends to worsen the conditions of workers in rich countries.

trade tends to worsen the conditions of highly skilled workers in rich countries.

social costs that exceed private costs.

social benefits that exceed private benefits.

social costs that exceed social benefits.

private benefits that exceed social benefits.

social benefits that undermine private benefits.

tax the high-tech firms.

subsidize the high-tech firms.

protect the high-tech firms.

outsource high-tech production.

discourage high-tech investments.

the budget of the Department of Education.

systematic protection through the levying of tariffs.

systematic protection through the establishment of NTBs.

relatively accelerated "depreciation" of R&D investment in the Federal tax codes.

subsidies for high-tech firms.

the national security argument.

the technological spillover argument.

the environment preservation argument.

the high value added argument.

raising the national income.

aircraft industries.

excess returns present in highly competitive markets.

excess returns, or rents, available in non-competitive markets.

the futility of government bureaucrats' attempts to build an airplane.

natural advantages in foreign technology firms.

government involvement in business or in the economy tends to fail.

government subsidies tend to waste taxpayer's money.

government subsidies cannot create a successfully competing export.

government tends to distort when it displaces Adam Smith's Invisible Hand.

government subsidies can produce profits that exceed the subsidy's value.

Boeing made the first move in this strategic game.

Europeans tend to be better strategists than corn-fed Americans.

the Airbus actually was a better plane than the Boeing 747.

U.S. laws actually prohibit U.S. exporters from bribing foreign officials.

the subsidy removed the advantage that Boeing gained with their head start in production.

the European government made an explicit subsidy offer, but the U.S. government did not.

Airbus' prices were better when adjusted for quality and warranty services.

Boeing traditionally refused to undertake any exchange rate risk in its transactions.

the U.S. acted in accordance with its ideological reliance on market solutions, whereas the Europeans ignored market and technological factors.

the Airbus plane benefited from more advanced technology.

because of trade secrets, the government does not know true cost relationships in any given industry.

if the government had all the relevant information in a given industry then it could decide whether a subsidy would enhance the public's welfare.

even if the government had all the relevant information in a given industry, it still could not decide whether a subsidy would enhance the public's welfare.

due to recent cuts in the Department of the Census' sampling budgets, industry surveys are no longer reliable, so that there is no way to determine if a subsidy is in the public's interest.

the government would need to employ its intelligence agencies in order to gain a complete understanding of the market.

strengthens the argument for subsidies.

makes sense if the international Keynesian multipliers exceed unity.

applies only to rich countries most of whose trade partners are very poor countries.

weakens the argument for subsidies.

does not apply to rich countries who can influence relative world prices.

in order to promote the WTO's goals of "Trade-not Aid."

in order to laud the WTO policy orientation which would bust local monopolies and therefore help ordinary relatively poor consumers everywhere.

in order to laud the WTO policy of disallowing government sweetheart deals, which typically meant that corrupt governments subsidized their in-laws' conglomerates on the backs of poor taxpayers.

in order to support the WTO efforts of bringing about a universal shift of resources in poor countries to higher efficiency and productivity uses, which would raise the real incomes of everyone.

in order to protest WTO free trade policies that they believed hurt workers.

must help low skill workers on both sides of the border.

is likely to hurt high-skilled workers in the U.S.

is likely to hurt low-skilled workers in the U.S.

is likely to hurt low-skilled workers in Mexico.

is likely to help highly skilled workers in Mexico.

is inconclusive due to poor statistical design of the underlying samples.

is inconclusive due to the poorly funded Central Statistical Office of Mexico.

is inconclusive due to the ambiguous theoretical implications of the findings.

is conclusive.

does not take into account the Heckscher-Ohlin model.

is consistent with the Invisible Hand paradigm.

is consistent with the market failure approach.

is consistent with the Ricardian theory of comparative advantage.

is consistent with the scale economies approach to trade theory.

is consistent with the principles laid out by the WTO.

to further neo-imperialist colonial exploitation.

to charge these countries with crimes against child-labor standards at the Hague.

as a protectionist tool by import-competing producers in industrial countries.

as a means of spreading U.S. Corporate Values and destroying local cultures.

to hinder investment in foreign-based multinational corporations.

the line between domestic policies and de factor protectionism is often fuzzy.

it is a supra-national organization with the power to overturn governments.

it determines which nations may trade what with whom.

it punishes naughty nations.

it exempts the U.S. and other powerful member nations from many of its edicts.

agricultural products.

primary products.

mineral products.

manufactured products.

high-tech products.

land owners in poor countries.

capital owners in rich industrialized countries.

land owners in rich industrialized countries.

production workers in both rich and poor countries.

terms of trade in developing countries.

trade tends to worsen the conditions of unskilled labor in rich countries.

trade tends to worsen the conditions of owners of capital in rich countries.

trade tends to worsen the conditions of workers in poor countries.

trade tends to worsen the conditions of workers in rich countries.

trade is mutually beneficial to the countries that engage in it.

they believe this would involve a loss of their national sovereignty.

they believe this would limit their ability to export to rich markets.

they believe this would create an uneven playing field.

multinational corporations control them.

they do not want to improve wages for their workers.

justified this view.

led to similar structuring of industrial policy in the U.S.

lent support to the Brander-Spencer model.

helped shift the focus of economists away from Japanese-style industrial policy.

propelled Japan into the leading country in high-tech manufacturing.

prove that the gains-from-trade arguments of the Ricardian model are false.

may be a fact of life, but economists don't care.

are facts emphasized by U.S. labor in its contract negotiations.

prove that the gains-from-trade arguments of the Ricardian model are true.

prove that international trade is exploitative.