You're the one who refuses to acknowledge that.
I agree that the feds place a burden on domestic industry. So does a unionized workforce. So, why is it good for America to make steel consumers pay $150/ton for American steel if they could buy Korean steel for $120/ton?
We creating a lot of steel worker jobs by doing that? How many steel jobs are there now? 10 million? 20 million?
Excerpted and condensed from:
Of Restraints upon the Importation from Foreign Countries
of such Goods as can be produced at Home
"There seem, however, to be two cases in which it will generally be advantageous to lay some burden upon foreign for the encouragement of domestic industry...
- The first is, when some particular sort of industry is necessary for the defence of the country....
- The second case, in which it will generally be advantageous to lay some burden upon foreign for the encouragement of domestic industry is, when some tax is imposed at home upon the produce of the latter. In this case, it seems reasonable that an equal tax should be imposed upon the like produce of the former....
The economic burdens that you admit the feds place on domestic industry are essentially a form of taxation. Therefor, the steel industry qualifies for tariff protection under BOTH conditions specified by Adam Smith.
How many steel jobs are there now? 10 million? 20 million?<
Employment in the steel industry declined to about 170,000 wage and salary jobs in 2002.
63% of the workforce is nonunion, so it is disingenuous to showcase labor organization as a boogeyman.