Oh, Krugman. It's a trope among economists that the plebs do not understand comparative advantage. They seem to loathe admitting that the idea is, in fact, not that hard, yet the assumptions its relevance hinges on are much harder to justify, so even reasonable people can persist in their skepticism. Krugman laments having to stoop to baby-talk, but it's precisely beyond the baby-talk level, the "wine and cloth" stuff, where the unadulterated virtue of free trade starts to unravel. Real nations have limited and unequal state capacity, human capital, resource pool, and they also have geopolitical ambitions, alliances, values beyond profit; which is precisely why they, not just some laymen, sometimes discard Ricardo and bail out of profitable international deals. How does America calculate Huawei-CCP ties and Taiwan sovereignty into its trade policy? How does China factor in the increase in dependence on a capricious partner who can weather separation better, thanks largely to its unprecedented role in the global financial system?
On net, Ricardian logic is sound and the case for international trade is still stronger than the case for autarky. But you do not need to look for "intellectuals" to have some legitimate holes in the narrative pointed out to you. Literally HuffPost would suffice. Or "Kicking away the ladder".
Do you have a preferred version of a medical school pharmacology textbook? I am thinking of getting this one:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0702074489/
beta-phenethylamine?
That is the one William Gibson claims gives you the sensation of falling in love but W. G. is not a doctor or pharmacist and the probability of error there is close to one.
Try amazon smile to donate to a charity of your choice automatically at no cost to you!
https://smile.amazon.com/dp/0702074489/
^^^I'm ^^^a ^^^bot ^^^and ^^^this ^^^action ^^^was ^^^performed ^^^automatically.
There is an android app called stoop where you could organise your newletters. I've been using it for a while now and can't suggest it enough.