Economic Freedom VS. Protectionism

We often hear that free trade policies bring with it negative consequences for American jobs. In fact, Barrack Obama recently continued the myth that "not all free trade is good trade". And, why not? It is true that in some instances Americans will face increased competition when trade barriers are relaxed, however, the negatives consequences are merely short-term. The long-term benefits outweigh the short-term negative impacts - market specific job losses - by a very wide margin. A prime example is that when the majority of Americans are enabled to purchase products at a much cheaper costs, more of their earnings are available for the purchase of other products and services. Thus, making a win win outcome for the global economy.

Furthermore, Obama declares a presidential platform for enhancing education to compete with global economies. Why do we need to compete globally if, at the same time, their objective is to protect less efficient jobs and continue the misallocation of resources? I do, however, believe that Obama has part of this equation correct; education. We should start right away promoting education in free markets and the principals laid out by the classical economist (i.e. Ricardo and Smith).

Let us not continue the myths and fallacies of protectionism. Let us not continue the misalloaction of resources through government subsidies and job assistance programs that only continue the reduction of economic freedom and make us all worse off. "Trade creates wealth - and trade also conserves scarce resources. The unintended consequences of policies designed to obstruct trade exacerbate the problems they are intended to solve."

We hurt the entire nation when our leaders stifle free trade and competition.