Steven Landsburg, an economist at the University of Rochester, wrote the following in an article in the Wall Street Journal: Free trade is not only about the right of American consumers to buy at the cheapest possible price; it's also about the right of foreign producers to earn a living. Steelworkers in West Virginia struggle hard to make ends meet. So do steelworkers in South Korea. To protect one at the expense of the other, solely because of where they happened to be born, is a moral outrage. How does the U.S. government protect steelworkers in West Virginia at the expense of steelworkers in South Korea? Is Landsburg making a positive statement or a normative statement? A few days later, Tom Redburn published an article disagreeing with Landsburg. Redburn argued that caring about the welfare of people in the United States more than about the welfare of people in other countries isn't "some evil character flaw." According to Redburn, "A society that ignores the consequences of economic disruption on those among its citizens who come out at the short end of the stick is not only heartless, it also undermines its own cohesion and adaptability." Which of the two arguments do you find most convincing?

Step by step solution

01

Analyzing Landsburg's Statement

Landsburg is stating that the U.S government protects steelworkers in West Virginia, perhaps through things like tariffs, subsidies or other protectionist measures. These measures can make imported steel more expensive, which can help domestic steelworkers but at a cost to foreign ones. It's a normative statement, as he's expressing an opinion that it's morally wrong to favor one group over the other because of location.

02

Analyzing Redburn's Statement

Redburn, on the other hand, is arguing that a society must consider the impact of economic disruption on its less fortunate members. While this may seem to contradict free trade, it's essentially another part of the argument around globalization. He's not labeling caring about the welfare of people in the U.S more than people in other countries as a 'flaw', he's pointing out the social consequences of ignoring the economic disparity. Redburn’s statement can also be considered normative because he recommends what actions society should take.

03

Forming an Opinion

The task of forming an opinion is subjective and depends on the individual's values. Some individuals may be convinced by Landsburg's moral argument for a right to earn for everyone, irrespective of where they are born. Others may agree with Redburn's argument that a society must take care of its members and not undermine its own cohesion and adaptability. This can be considered as choosing between cosmopolitanism (world is one community) and nationalism/communitarianism (giving priority to your own country/community). Each argument has its merits and demerits, and the task of forming an opinion depends upon individual value judgment.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

• Full Textbook Solutions

  Get detailed explanations and key concepts

• Unlimited Al creation

  Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

• Ads-free access

  To over 500 millions flashcards

• Money-back guarantee

  We refund you if you fail your exam.

Start your free trial

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with Vaia!