But the world has limits that Friedman ignores. He seems to assume reasonably good intentions on the part of both parties.
Suppose the other party undercuts our prices, ends up owning the entire industry, and finances our spending not by buying the stuff we make but by loaning us back what we spent. Then, when we are used to buying stuff without making anything to sell in return, they pull the rug out. We would be hosed.
Left alone, we'd eventually get back on our feet. But if the other party has nefarious purposes behind this, we certainly would not be allowed to do so easily.
Would China be hurt if this happened? Certainly, but it might be ok with their leaders as long as they ended up on top.
At the end, Milton asks why we should refuse foreign aid. Foreign aid doesn't have that good a history. It's worked a couple of times, such as Europe and Japan, but has a lousy record in other places and times. Checkout the book title (something like) "Confessions of an Economic Hitman". You want to be real careful about the terms of foreign 'aid'.
Milton is right about tariffs in a non-hostile world. But that's not always reality.
“Milton is right about tariffs in a non-hostile world. But that’s not always reality.”
You’re assuming that economic ties are independent from foriegn relations.
If two nations trade together and are dependent upon on another, then what sense does it make to go to war?
Suppose we have a government that inflates the dollar supply for over half a century. Prices and wages are continually higher than they would have been, making our goods and labor too expensive to compete.
You're speculating in semi-Marxist baloney. What I'm saying has actually happened. And, yes, we're hosed. You've reached the correct conclusion, you're just mistaken about how to fix it.
You protectionists, who will defend your other freedoms to the death, are all too willing to suddenly let government regulate our economic lives -- all for the common good, of course.
Well, there's a long history of people calling for "small" infringements on freedom -- for the common good. Funny that the common good is never advanced by them.