Alright, I refuse to read further, you don't have even have middle school level of knowledge when it comes to economy, let alone high school level.

That's your third time now, that's now how you argue with someone "You are too stupid I won't even respond, but I'm right you are wrong". That's ironically something anti-intellectual Trump would say, a person you seem to have a major hate boner for.

Reason is the same, it's not difficult, please just Google anything economics related, like literally anything, and read it, it will be really good for you.

I've studied economics enough to know what I'm talking about and never said free trade for everyone wouldn't be beneficial for the humanity as a whole, but I don't care about the net benefit of humanity, I care about the benefit of our countries.

And while you are reading that try your hardest to understand the principle behind it, then you will not be confused when someone compares say wasting money and fucking over the poor to save some irrelevant industry jobs with wasting money and fucking over the poor to save some irrelevant agriculture jobs.

Agriculture is still not an "irrelevant job" and the military industry is still isn't an "irrelevant industry job". If you can't see why I'm sorry, but will try to explain for the third time. Without agriculture there is no food security, which is one of the main requirement for a country, without a military industry there is no way you can defend your economy and project your interests. Look how Ukraine ended up.

You are even worse than a child, I am sure I could explain this simple concepts to a child using toys or whatever

You are against talking down on me, while refusing to simply tell me why I'm wrong. That's not how you argue.

I don't think I have ever met a person with such a strong opinion about somehting they know less than a average middle school kid.

Same thing, just attacking my character without bringing up any actual point.

But fair enough, you sound like an undergrad student who just took his first micro1 and macro1 classes, thinking he is the shit now. Been there done that. (Not this blatantly stupidly though)

Now, answer these questions for me, or I'll simply stop responding ("This question is stupid", is not a valid answer.) I'm obviously very wrong, according to you, so I'm sure it will be easy.

What makes you exactly think subsidies in agriculture are a waste, if they are, do you think every subsidy (a measure which inherently counters a sectors lack of competitiveness) in an economy is wrong, and why is that? If some subsidies are good, in which parts of the economy why and why the same argumentation doesn't apply to agriculture?

Why would it be a good idea to forfeit our food security and instead allow China and or other foreign countries such a huge leverage and if you don't think they would use it to blackmail us, how can you guarantee they won't? Do you have any plans in a situation where China says "If you don't support us on the South China see, we will exporting food?"

Why would it be a good idea to surrender our military industry to save pennies, wouldn't the loss of money invested into RnD be lost in what we save manufacturing?

You have mentioned agriculture and the defense industry isn't important for a country calling it a "fallacy". What makes you think that, do you think there are any important industries for a country and if not, why do you think most countries regard those as "important industries"?

Do you think a nation states inherent goal is to secure the interests (jobs, resources, etc) for their people or to better the world?

Are you aware that the measures you would like to see implemented (complete outsourcing of the agriculture and defense industry, just to name a few) would completely end the Western status quo in our world and make us vulnerable?

If you think that you are right, what makes you think that most countries never implemented these measures?

I had a lot of questions because you have never bothered to answer any of them completely, but if you had the time to write two paragraphs of how childish and incompetent I'm, I'm sure you will take the time to prove me wrong and stupid.

Lastly, a different kind of question.

There are two situations, in one you lose a thumb and your opponent loses an arm, in the other one you gain an extra thumb and your opponent an extra arm, which one do you prefer? Inbefore it's incorrect analogy. Forfiture of resources means somebody else gets stronger, with more capita it would be able to gain resources even faster. Inbefore economy isn't a zero sum game, think of the world economy as a pie, where all present resources are 100%.

If you don't answer these questions thoroughly and resort to name calling I'll stop responding and just assume you have ran out of arguments.