Source item

@LHSummers is right with two caveats. First, as he admitted you don’t want to depend on China for some high tech products that have national security importance: thus the need for the “narrow yard and high fences” for such goods as the Sullivan/Biden policy argued for. Second, comparative advantage is dynamic rather than static: China subsidized for decades the cost of capital, labor, land, energy and water - on top of many other state capitalist policies - to achieve a 30% and still rising share of global manufacturing. That created serious jobs and employment issues in both advanced economies and emerging markets. And that loss of dynamic comparative advantage in industries of the present and the future can reduce the potential growth of such economies while increasing that of China. It is this unfair competition.