Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Tariff of 1789
wikipedia. ^ | wikipedia.

Posted on 08/29/2015 6:23:47 PM PDT by dennisw

Tariff of 1789

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Tariff Act of 1789, was the first major Act passed in the United States under its present Constitution of 1789 and had two purposes as stated in Section I of the Act which reads as follows;

"Whereas it is necessary for that support of government, for the discharge of the debts of the United States, and the encouragement and protection of manufactures, that duties be laid on goods, wares and merchandise:"[1]

The Federal legislature, acting under the recently ratified US Constitution, authorized the collection of tariff and tonnage duties to meet the operating costs of the new central government, to provide funds to pay the interest and principal on revolutionary war debts inherited from the Continental Congress.[2] It also provided a degree of protection. "The protective acts of the states furnished the experience on which the national legislators based their proceedings."[3] The general range of duties was by no means such as would have been thought protective in later days; but the intention to protect was there.[4]

The debates over the purpose of the tariff exposed the sectional interests at stake: Northern manufacturers favored high duties to protect industry; Southern planters desired a low tariff that would foster cheap consumer imports.[5] The final bill extracted concessions from both interests, but delivered a distinct advantage to maritime and manufacturing regions of the country.[6][7]

Representative James Madison of Virginia navigated to passage, but was unable to insert provisions that would have discriminated against British imports[8][9] and shift the carrying trade to French and American vessels.

The Tariff Bill was passed in the House by a vote of 31-19 on July 1, 1789; the resultant enrolled Bill was signed by the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate on July 2, 1789; and President Washington signed the Act in law on July 4, 1789. [10]



TOPICS: Business/Economy; History
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-100 next last
Comment #61 Removed by Moderator

To: jpsb; 1rudeboy
Reagan had nothing to do with NAFTA, perhaps as a senile old man he thought it was a good idea. However he had nothing to do with NAFTA as it was negotiated after he left the presidency.

I doubt president Reagan ever uttered the word NAFTA. Though he did speak of a US-Mexico-Canada trade bloc and pact

62 posted on 08/30/2015 6:49:28 AM PDT by dennisw (The first principle is to find out who you are then you can achieve anything -- Buddhist monk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
It was on his platform as he ran for President. To young to remember?

I'll bet Reagan never uttered the word NAFTA. Though he did speak of US-Canada-Mexico trade pact. A trade bloc to compete against the EU bloc. NAFTA really came into being during George Bush's term and got passed under Clintoon as did the vile GATT treaties

63 posted on 08/30/2015 6:51:01 AM PDT by dennisw (The first principle is to find out who you are then you can achieve anything -- Buddhist monk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

Whenever I get into an argument with a protectionist, and they post something without a link, I try to find it on the internet for giggles . . . you posted from a banned source, lol. It will be removed soon enough.


64 posted on 08/30/2015 7:01:31 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
I'll bet Reagan never uttered the word NAFTA. Though he did speak of US-Canada-Mexico trade pact.

Cognitive dissonance set to "high."

65 posted on 08/30/2015 7:03:02 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: jpsb

I don’t mean to sidetrack the thread, but when do you think Reagan became senile? I should probably review his policy proposals from that point forward.


66 posted on 08/30/2015 7:06:08 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

Banned? You are afraid of the truth chump. The US is worse off than before GATT-NAFTA and other rip-off trade deals. This is why Donald Trump is doing so well. Go vote for ¡Yeb! chump.


67 posted on 08/30/2015 7:11:07 AM PDT by dennisw (The first principle is to find out who you are then you can achieve anything -- Buddhist monk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg
China won't. U.S. consumers would.

Only if we bought crap from China.

And if you didn't have to pay any income tax, you'd be able to afford the stuff we make in the United States.

68 posted on 08/30/2015 7:43:51 AM PDT by P-Marlowe (Trump - because sometimes you need a big @$$hole to eliminate all the cr@p.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

LOL—Reminding people of Reagan’s legacy makes me a Jeb supporter, and my reluctance to consider that George W. Bush planted explosives to bring the Twin Towers down makes me “afraid of the truth.” LOLOL


69 posted on 08/30/2015 7:44:32 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe
And if you didn't have to pay any income tax, you'd be able to afford the stuff we make in the United States.

Only if your tariff approaches 100%, maybe more. And who are the U.S. manufacturers of consumer electronics we will be buying from?

70 posted on 08/30/2015 7:49:39 AM PDT by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Praxeologue

GATT ended 1995 with the creation of the WTO. The WTO agreements allow the imposition of tariffs for countries faced with chronic trade deficits, which we are. And I believe there is also a provision to deal with currency manipulators which could be used to target China specifically.

Tariffs are better than a consumption tax. Tariffs protect our industries. I’m not sure funding the government entirely by tariffs or consumption taxes is a good idea. Both are subject to the ups and downs of consumer psychology. Which means that during an economic downturn, government revenues fall off as well, making it harder for the government to use fiscal policy to do anything to soften the downturn. And it means debt grows more rapidly as safety net payments rise even as gov’t revenues fall.

The Income Tax is more stable.


71 posted on 08/30/2015 9:03:05 AM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

You really are dense. NAFTA-GATT are a Bush-Clintoon project with minimal input or blame on Ronald Regan. Maybe 5%. NAFTA-GATT would not have passed during the Cold War. But then you are clueless when it comes to geo-politics. China, Korea and Japan, not clueless because they are mercantilist nations that pursue strategic advantage. Which you free traitors are clueless about or make money off of via sell out trade deals that have only increased our trade deficits in the last 25 years


72 posted on 08/30/2015 9:03:14 AM PDT by dennisw (The first principle is to find out who you are then you can achieve anything -- Buddhist monk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

Hard to say, symptoms were apparent in 94. My reading indicates that the disease is progressive and a person can have it for 6 to 8 years before symptoms become apparent. Reagan clearly was not the man in his second term that he was in his first. Amnesty was a monumental mistake. But mistakes and all he was still the best president I’ve seen. Ike was the other very good president and Ike also made some big mistakes.


73 posted on 08/30/2015 9:17:09 AM PDT by jpsb (Believe nothing until it has been officially denied)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg
And who are the U.S. manufacturers of consumer electronics we will be buying from?

If you tax it, they will come.

Most of those computer electronics are built by robots in Thailand. The biggest cost is R&D and packaging. If there were an incentive to make that stuff here, the robots would be here. We have an overabundance of packagers working at McDonalds right now. This would free up the fast food industry for use by high school teens like it was 40 years ago.

Admit it, if you didn't have to pay income tax, you could afford to pay double for everything you purchase from foreign countries.

FWIW, there is no such thing as "Free Trade". But right now what we don't have is "Fair Trade". America is screwed by everyone. We just bend over and let it happen. In the meantime our middle class is working for lower wages and paying higher taxes. Today's middle class blue collar or even white collar worker can never expect to retire in comfort.

74 posted on 08/30/2015 9:19:53 AM PDT by P-Marlowe (Trump - because sometimes you need a big @$$hole to eliminate all the cr@p.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: dennisw; 1rudeboy
Free Traders are just globalists that only care about the cost of goods relative to how much money they have in their pocket.

Free trade works in the USA between the several states because the federal government enforces thru law a level playing for all the states. For free trade to work globally a global government enforcing a level playing for all nations would be necessary. You simply can not have real free trade between nations without a multinational government enforcing multinational laws. Free trade means given up our constitution and our country for some TBD multinational entity.

75 posted on 08/30/2015 9:24:48 AM PDT by jpsb (Believe nothing until it has been officially denied)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: ETL

Thanks! :) I will give it a watch.


76 posted on 08/30/2015 9:33:23 AM PDT by Politicalkiddo ("No punishment...is too great for the man who can build his greatness upon his country's ruin."-G.W)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: central_va
Tariffs are voluntary taxes, don't buy don't pay.

LOL!

You have any specific, real world examples to back up your claim?

77 posted on 08/30/2015 9:44:08 AM PDT by Toddsterpatriot ("Telling the government to lower trade barriers to zero...is government interference" central_va)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: FirstFlaBn

Not only did they jack up the prices, but General Motors then awarded big bonuses to their executives to celebrate. I swore that day that I would never buy another GM product, and to this day, I have not.


78 posted on 08/30/2015 9:46:04 AM PDT by sparklite2 (Voting is acting white.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

Yeah, just Google “Uruguay Round” and let me know what you think, if you can.


79 posted on 08/30/2015 9:52:02 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
Tariffs protect our industries.

Excuse me. Tariffs protect some of our industries, and punish other of our industries.

There's no such thing as a free lunch, despite what the protectionists claim.

80 posted on 08/30/2015 9:55:06 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-100 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson