Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: A. Pole
Pat has a good pen!

I disagree with him more than I agree with him.  But, when he's on target, well . . .

House Republicans who enjoy sporting Adam Smith ties should read a little more Adam Smith. In at least four cases, the father of free trade wrote, it must be "advantageous to lay some burden upon foreign (imports)," i.e., impose tariffs. Among Smith's reasons were "the defense of the country," "for the encouragement of domestic industry," for "revenge" and "retaliation" on nations that impose tariffs on one's own exports -- and to break open foreign markets.

Today, tariffs and taxes on U.S. exports entering China average around 30 percent. If the GOP were true to Smith, it would strip China of MFN and impose on Beijing the same tariff levels Beijing imposes on us -- both as retaliation, and to crack open the Chinese market to U.S. farmers and manufacturers. In 1997, we sold China a pathetic $13 billion worth of goods -- less than we sold to Singapore -- while we bought some 7 percent of China's entire GDP.

How Adam Smith Would Handle China July 24, 1998


8 posted on 04/18/2005 6:57:26 AM PDT by Racehorse (Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: Racehorse

Adam Smith would regard the Bush Trade Doctrine as a 'how-to' manual for running a house of prostitution. Bush & Co., of course, are the madams.

It's your sons and daughters who actually are getting scre*&^ without any kisses...


97 posted on 04/18/2005 9:51:09 AM PDT by ninenot (Minister of Membership, TomasTorquemadaGentlemen'sClub)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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