For “Communicating Economics” taught by Russell Roberts we were given the assignment to write a 1000 words on the topic of comparative advantage. In my opinion, our previous two assignments were more straight forward because they were on topics that most people have erroneous beliefs about (the minimum wage, and the hazards of capitalism as a social system). Starting the writing process for each was easy because you knew what you were up against. But before I could write something coherent on comparative advantage I had to get over the fact that I think we’ve generally won this battle.

I think the days of supporting domestic labor markets for the sake of high employment rates is almost over largely because of generational effects. Don’t get me wrong, Ricardo’s theory is awesome. I remember when I first learned it in an undergrad class, I literally yelped “neato!” when I summed up the columns and saw objectively more products in a global economy than when isolated countries produced everything domestically.
There’s also plenty of really simple stories to be told with Ricardo’s insight. My favorite: even if a brain surgeon happens to also be a great typist he’s still going to hire a secretary to run his office because time spent typing is time not spent in surgery.
As revealing as I think these heuristics are I think that the insights of comparative advantage have won the day against protectionism because people experience globalization first hand. Most people my age couldn’t imagine a life without their Japanese cars and electronics, their Indonesian made clothing, and their European designed clothing. We’re a generation that was crammed so full of diversity and multiculturalism that it’s only natural for us to prefer a basket of goods from all over the world.