NYT columnist Nicholas Kristof apparently believes that he would benefit if the United States had access to a huge supply of foreign columnists who could write as good or better than him and who would be willing to work at a fraction of his salary. That is effectively what he is arguing in his column today when he says that low-income families benefit from being able to obtain cheap imports from China. Of course low-income families benefit from being able to buy cheaper imported goods, just as Mr. Kristof would be able to pay less for his newspaper and for the products that are advertised there, if NYT columnists would work for $15,000 a year. But, he would lose far more from having to accept a lower salary as a result of foreign competition, just as less educated workers are likely to lose out as a result of being placed in direct competition with low-paid workers in the developing world. The column also includes gratuitous name-calling (the term "protectionist" is used repeatedly) and the use of the term "free trade" when "trade" would be more appropriate. Where are those Chinese columnists when you need them?
--Dean Baker
