When I say (as I often do) that free trade has been a disaster for this country, I'm not saying that nobody benefits from it, for surely some do. Nor am I saying that free trade doesn't produce cheaper consumer products for all or most Americans, for surely it does. What I'm saying is that the main beneficiaries of free trade are people who are already wealthy and powerful. What good is it to have cheaper consumer products when you no longer have a job, when your community is disintegrating, when your family is suffering, and when you've lost your self-respect?
Suppose, for the sake of argument, that free trade produces, in the aggregate, more good than bad for Americans (in the cost-benefit sense). That doesn't resolve the issue of whether free trade is on balance a good thing, because the gainers from trade don't have to compensate the losers. This column by Robert Reich explains what I'm talking about. (Please don't say that I'm siding with the enemy by agreeing with Reich. There is common ground between progressives and conservatives when it comes to protecting working people from globalists.)
