Q. Even though it is very clear in the context of the Specific Factors model that an expansion of international trade will make losers as well as winners, economists still claim that the country as a entair gains. The general claim that a country gains even though some identifiable group within it systematically loses needs subjective judgements concerning the relative importance or weights to be given the economic welfares of individuals or groups. Do you believe that this is, in general scientifically or ethically possible to do? Illustrate your answer. In what sense, then, do economists nevertheless claim that the country as a whole gains?
Answer: This could be considered chosen an intractable issue, for which modern welfare economics actually has no solution. For instance in the early 1980s it was decisive not to subject blood supplies to ( at that time) extremely expensive tests for positive HIV factors, as it was decided that this would cause blood shortages for large numbers of people, as well as that the number of people who might gain from applying the stringent tests was extremely small. Specifically the good of the several was deemed superior to the good of the few. Regrettably, the only some happened to be just about every person suffering from Haemophilia at that time. Approximately all of these people died as a result.