This past year I hosted Chairman of the George Mason Economics Department Don Boudreaux at my alma mater to provide the “pro-free trade” side of a debate on trade. In a stellar post yesterday over at CaféHayek, he proves that I am incredibly brilliant for choosing him.

According to Professor Boudreaux:

If it's true that theory and evidence in favor of protectionism are sufficiently strong to warrant economists abandoning their conclusion that free-trade policy is generally sound, then why shouldn't economists -- led by Dani Rodrik -- also start exploring the potential benefits of intra-national protectionism? Surely a scholar not benighted with the free-trade "faith" ought to take seriously the possibility that, say, Tennesseans could be made wealthier if their government in Nashville restricts their ability to trade with people in Kentucky, Texas, Rhode Island, and other states?

Indeed, such an objective scholar should be open also to the possibility that residents of Nashville can be made wealthier if their leaders restrict their ability to trade with people in Knoxville, Memphis, Chattanooga, and other locales in that state.