Of course, as Ev Ehrlich once said, carry that argument to its conclusion, and we would have 80 million people employed today in hunting and gathering, all of them receiving government subsidies as they look for nuts and berries...
Why isn't it a better policy for the long run--even for the medium run--to tax and spend to accelerate the long-run structural evolution of the economy (along with a healthy social-democratic program of redistribution) than trying to freeze the sectoral distribution of employment and production in the pattern it held in 1950? The pattern of income redistribution implicit in the Multifiber Agreement is... not progressive.
Brad DeLong