tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7439628176985419293.post455510608307677085..comments2023-11-02T08:28:40.590-04:00Comments on Twenty-Cent Paradigms: Can 'Free Traders' Handle Competition?Bill Chttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01081319025032071808noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7439628176985419293.post-74539429120996909222007-10-09T12:39:00.000-04:002007-10-09T12:39:00.000-04:00Thanks for your response. That's a good point - t...Thanks for your response. That's a good point - the existence of trade is definitely not proof of the absence of barriers. However, in the case of academic economics, there is relatively free labor mobility. Graduate schools are free to draw from a global pool of applicants - there are no quotas on how many Americans they must take (many have almost no Americans) and academic institutions can hire foreign-born PhDs with relative ease. The immigration system does clearly create real hassles for foreign economists and those that would hire them, but I don't see anything equivalent to a significant tariff or binding quota in this particular market. Of course, the whole credentialing process of PhDs can be viewed as a barrier to entry, but not a trade barrier (indeed, to the extent that American schools lag in mathematical training, it may favor foreigners!).<BR/><BR/>While an academic institution (or think tank) would never say 'we're hiring foreign labor because its cheaper,' no doubt wages for American PhDs would be higher if the portion of supply attributable to noncitizens was removed. I should note, of course, that when we're talking about factor movements, Stolper-Samuelson, etc., no longer applies since neoclassical trade theory assumes fixed factor endowments.<BR/><BR/>While I do think economists are sometimes guilty of rather sloppy, reflexive thinking on trade (see, e.g., my post "A Useful Corrective"), I don't think we're guilty of the particular hypocrisy of advocating trade liberalization while being protected ourselves by trade barriers.Bill Chttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01081319025032071808noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7439628176985419293.post-45634615136278174922007-10-09T06:23:00.000-04:002007-10-09T06:23:00.000-04:00Thanks for giving me a great example of the "Mexic...Thanks for giving me a great example of the "Mexican Avocado Theory of International Trade." The fact that a large percentage of econ students and future economists are foreign born hardly proves that we have no barriers to trade in economists, it just means that the barriers are not absolute prohibitions. (What percent of apparel is imported? Do we have free trade in apparel?)<BR/><BR/>It is illegal for me to explicitly hire foreign economists because they will work for lower wages than citizens green card holders. That is protectionism that does not exist for items like steel, clothes, and toys. <BR/><BR/>This sort of selective protectionism is a more important issue than the predicted effects from Stolper-Samuelson in shifting income upwards.<BR/><BR/>Thanks for your posting.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com