Sigh.
William asks, by e-mail, if my unconditional support for free trade is “unobjective (dogmatic) and poorly befitting a man privileged to educate our nation’s youth.” Surely, William writes, “trade with foreigners sometimes is beneficial and other times not.”
Sigh.
Dear William:
Do you think me to be “unobjective (dogmatic)” because I support a policy of complete free trade with people whose first names start with “W”? Do you truly believe that a policy that allows those of us with first names that start with a letter other than “W” to trade without obstruction with you and other W-folk is so likely to inflict harm on us non-Ws that it is “unobjective (dogmatic)” for me to oppose any and all restraints on trade between us non-Ws with you Ws?
Until and unless you convince me that my support for unconditional free trade between Ws and non-Ws is “unobjective (dogmatic)”, you will not convince me that my support for unconditional free trade between Americans and non-Americans is “unobjective (dogmatic)”.
Sincerely,
Don Boudreaux (a non-W)
