Great analysis, this is where our friend from Harvard fails to grasp. Yes in economic theory, we all should specialist because of comparative and absolute advantage.
For example, you wouldn't want to grow tomatoes in the artic. Because you would not be able to produce and compete with tomatoes growers in the Mediterranean without incurring additional costs like heating and greenhouses. Etc. So instead you should be specialising in ice making. In the theory both countries would gain because both countries are producing what they are best at.
This is what's been taught to countless heads of state in Africa for the past century. So the poor African states remain poor by extracting the minerals for the west to make because they are told the west had comparative advantage in making things and the African countries have comparative advantage in extracting things. The vicious cycles continues until China cones along.
Take shipbuilding. The West long have leads on this, and it can be said that it's pointless for any one to compete on this, let alone start up from scratch. 'Hey, you Africans, or anyone else don't bother making ships, just sell us the raw materials for pittance and we will make them for you and sell it to you for a huge sum'.
If China, or indeed south Korea before had listen to this economic theory, there will be no shipping industry to speak off. The start up cost alone would be a barrier to entry. Yet today China and south Korea corner the world market for ship building!
So once again, our friend from Harvard have read economic theories, granted........... But have not digest, analyse, apply critically thinking before coming out here and show us what he knows or lack of what he knows!