It’s a proven fact by history that business develops much better in a free-trade environment than in protected markets. And I think it’s a big error to believe that protectionism can create jobs in America. It’s just the opposite. And we will see that soon. Essentially we need to really worry about what having a closed market does to your efficiency and therefore to your competitiveness. You can always keep your market for yourself, but your market, unless you’re a gigantic country, is not enough. People in the international competition. They’re competing all over the world. Studies have been done on industries that have focused on international trade, where trade is a significant component of the business they do, the wages of those workers tend to be higher than the average wages and tend to be growing. The benefits of trade are not evenly dispersed, but those who participate in global trade have a much greater opportunity to expand jobs, raise wages and so forth. The potential downsides to global trade, of course, are the reaction of other countries. And we know already today that things which China might do to us will hurt us much more than the benefits of what we could achieve by basically putting sanctions on China. So that’s a very, very good example for a very, very complicated situation. In the current debate of, “Is trade decreasing manufacturing employment?” there are two views. There are these views that, “Yes, trade with – particularly with China or countries that are labor-intensive – it’s actually affecting the U.S.” But there is another view that is saying, “No, there is automation. There is technological improvement.” And mainly it’s very difficult because they are intertwined. But trade is probably less important as a driver of wage growth or wage loss than technology. And so, most studies would find that automation has played a bigger role in affecting wages and employment than has trade. I just got a fresh Gallup poll, and we asked the citizens, “Do you think that exporting and importing is good or bad.” 75% percent of Americans say It’s good. And if you listen to both sides, you know, to the news and everything else, you’d think that Americans were anti-trade. They’re not. They’re actually more pro-trade than they’ve been in 30 years. The interesting thing is, some of the most sophisticated exporters in the American economy have been agriculture. And that’s one of the reasons they are so concerned now about the implications of a trade war with China. Because they’ll be hit as hard as anyone. And some of them, interestingly, are core to the base of the current administration and leadership in Congress. So, it gets very interesting politically. I think trade is important; there’s no doubt about that. I’m not sure whether free trade, as it’s been defined or has been lobbied over the last few decades, is necessarily the way the world should have gone. I think global trade has certainly help GDP growth rate, because there’s activity. So GDP records activity, and there is activity, so it’s good. Has it helped wages? Well, if you’re the CEO, yeah, it’s helped your wage a lot. Not if you’re in a labor class. It doesn’t mean that everyone in the U. S. economy benefits. It doesn’t mean the people don’t experience job loss or economic dislocation from trade. But it means that on the whole, people benefit, both in terms of employment and also as consumers who have lower prices. And so, the political challenge in the short term and in the long term is how to compensate those who lose out from trade, to maintain support for keeping trade open and benefitting the country as a whole. There’s not been enough attention paid to those segments of society which are not necessarily benefiting or participating in those benefits from international trade. Going forward, the United States needs to pay much greater attention, both as a matter of trade policy and as a matter of domestic policy, in trying to be able to ensure that those workers are continued to be employed, continue to play a role in economic development. I think there are two or three different things. First of all, there’s to be a real deep look at how we train the workforce. not just people – 20-year-olds, but particularly people mid-career, those who aren’t as easily going to be able to adjust to the new economy. Through life-long learning, through skills retraining, as well as a social safety net for dislocated workers Not that global trade is bad, but recognize the impact that it’s having on communities and then try to figure out how do you maximize the benefit for the people living in those cities. That ultimately has to be the objective of every policy maker in every country.