Well, if we go back to some dictionary defintions, I think you're wrong. (Socialism: "general term for the political and economic theory that advocates a system of collective or government ownership and management of the means of production and distribution of goods. ") Applying a tariff to a foreign import equates to collective or government ownership of the MEANS of production/distribution? I think not.
It sounds to me like folks are throwing around terms that do not apply -- anything to sell the liberalizing of trade as the conservative method.
I'm sorry, but I really feel like I'm explaining the obvious . . .
I appreciate your answers. Even if I disagree with many of them.
Oh.... just great. Post 666, LOL.
By their “reasoning”, our Constitution is a socialist document and our Framers were socialists by virtue of the Commerce Clause. That same “reasoning” gives rise to their repeated attacks a great Constitutionalist like Ronald Reagan.
Well, if we go back to the word I used in my comment, "socialistic," I think you looked up the wrong word.
I was speaking of degrees. And if you consider that "socialism" also involves some form of government control of the economy in order to ensure "fair" outcomes (as determined by the collective, in theory), then it is not unreasonable to call tariffs "socialistic."
I should probably also add that, if we were on a different thread this wouldn't be much of an issue: it's just that we (collectively, there's that word again) have been playing semantics on this one.