Chapter 9: Problem 1
What is the difference between absolute advantage and comparative advantage? If a country has an absolute advantage in producing a good, will it always be an exporter of that good? Briefly explain.
/*! This file is auto-generated */ .wp-block-button__link{color:#fff;background-color:#32373c;border-radius:9999px;box-shadow:none;text-decoration:none;padding:calc(.667em + 2px) calc(1.333em + 2px);font-size:1.125em}.wp-block-file__button{background:#32373c;color:#fff;text-decoration:none}
Learning Materials
Features
Discover
Chapter 9: Problem 1
What is the difference between absolute advantage and comparative advantage? If a country has an absolute advantage in producing a good, will it always be an exporter of that good? Briefly explain.
All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.
Get started for free
Suppose you are explaining the benefits of free trade and someone states, "I don't understand all the principles of comparative advantage and gains from trade. I just know that if I buy something produced in America, I create a job for an American, and if I buy something produced in Brazil, I create a job for a Brazilian." Do you agree with this statement? When the United States imports products for which it does not have a comparative advantage, does this mean there are fewer jobs in the United States? In the example in Section 9.3 with China and the United States producing and trading smartphones and wheat, when the United States imports smartphones from China, does the number of jobs in the United States decline? Briefly explain.
(Related to the Apply the Concept on page 307) For several years, the United States imposed a tariff on tire imports. According to an analysis by economists Gary Clyde Hufbauer and Sean Lowry of the Peterson Institute, of the additional \(\$ 1.1\) billion consumers spent on tires as a result of the tariff on Chinese tires, the workers whose jobs were saved in the U.S. tire industry received only about \(\$ 48\) million in wages. Wouldn't it have been cheaper for the federal government to have raised taxes on U.S. consumers and given the money to tire workers rather than to have imposed a tariff? If so, why didn't the federal government adopt this alternative policy?
Patrick J. Buchanan, a political commentator and former presidential candidate, argued in his book on the global economy that there is a flaw in David Ricardo's theory of comparative advantage: Classical free trade theory fails the test of common sense. According to Ricardo's law of comparative advantage \(\ldots\) if America makes better computers and textiles than China does, but our advantage in computers is greater than our advantage in textiles, we should (1) focus on computers, (2) let China make textiles, and (3) trade U.S. computers for Chinese textiles.... The doctrine begs a question. If Americans are more efficient than Chinese in making clothes \(\ldots\) why surrender the more efficient American industry? Why shift to a reliance on a Chinese textile industry that will take years to catch up to where American factories are today? Do you agree with Buchanan's argument? Briefly explain.
What events led to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)? Why did the WTO eventually replace the GATT?
Briefly explain whether you agree with the following argument: "Unfortunately, Bolivia does not have a comparative advantage with respect to the United States in the production of any good or service." (Hint: You do not need any specific information about the economies of Bolivia or the United States to be able to answer this question.)
What do you think about this solution?
We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.