Posted on 02/04/2009 2:40:10 PM PST by UCFRoadWarrior
"The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act caused the Great Depression" as a number of talk-radio show hosts, politicians, and cable news channel reporters have lamented in recent weeks.
"The 'Buy American' clause in the Stimulus Bill will be another Smoot-Hawley" rails others.
Did Smoot-Hawley cause the Great Depression? The answer to that is "no".
Did Smoot-Hawley continue the Great Depression. The answer to that is "no", also.
--------------------------------------------
When it was announced last week that the proposed "Stimulus Bill" would contain a "Buy American" clause, every advocate of Free Trade...from conservative GOP members to Socialist European Union politicians...decried the "Buy American" clause, claiming it would affect Free Trade, lead to a "trade war", and, also lead to another depression "like Smoot-Hawley did in the 1930's"
However, there is no evidence the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act caused the Great Depression, nor, did it exacerbate the Great Depression.
-----------------------------------------
The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, passed in the summer of 1930 in the wake of the Great Depression, was an attempt to try to preserve American industry from further economic erosion during the worst economic crisis in United States' history. The tariff was designed to protect American industry from potential predatory trade practices from foreign nations, mainly European (which was still reeling economically from the aftermath of World War I).
In recent years, the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act has been the de facto "Economic Bogeyman" for the Free Trade and Globalist crowd. In the wake of the worldwide economic failure, the Free Trade advocates are looking for cover in the wake of huge national trade deficits, growing wordlwide unemployment, and a collapsing world banking system.
Smoot-Hawley has been their proverbial whipping boy.
However, the economics do not back up the negative assertions from its critics.
---------------------------------------------
In the following chart, you will see that the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act had no real negative effect on the economy. In fact, in most years that Smoot-Hawley was in effect (1930-1945), the US national Gross Domestic Product actually GREW.
(Note that 1929 figures are included, as this was the year of the Stock Market Crash)
Table format
I Gross domestic product
II Personal consumption expenditures
III Gross private domestic investment
IV Exports
V Imports
VI Government consumption expenditures and gross investment
(Figures in billions of dollars)
I II III IV V VI 1929 103.6 77.4 16.5 5.9 5.6 9.4 1930 91.2 70.1 10.8 4.4 4.1 10.0 1931 76.5 60.7 5.9 2.9 2.9 9.9 1932 58.7 48.7 1.3 2.0 1.9 8.7 1933 56.4 45.9 1.7 2.0 1.9 8.7 1934 66.0 51.5 3.7 2.6 2.2 10.5 1935 73.3 55.9 6.7 2.8 3.0 10.9 1936 83.8 62.2 8.6 3.0 3.2 13.1 1937 91.9 66.8 12.2 4.0 4.0 12.8 1938 86.1 64.3 7.1 3.8 2.8 13.8 1939 92.2 67.2 9.3 4.0 3.1 14.8 1940 101.4 71.3 13.6 4.9 3.4 15.0 1941 126.7 81.1 18.1 5.5 4.4 26.5 1942 161.9 89.0 10.4 4.4 4.6 62.7 1943 198.6 99.9 6.1 4.0 6.3 94.8 1944 219.8 108.7 7.8 4.9 6.9 105.3 1945 223.1 120.0 10.8 6.8 7.5 93.0
NOTES:
Although trade declined after the Smoot-Hawley passage...and the GDP dropped each year between 1929 through 1933...the biggest percentage declined was in Gross Private Domestic Investment...it was not in trade. Private investment started to disappear in the US before Smoot-Hawley passage.
Also, trade was a small part of the US GDP before Smoot-Hawley. In 1929, the combined exports-imports were just over 10% of the GDP (well below today's current percentage of trade compared to GDP). Even if trade went to zero in the early Great Depression years, that would not explain the larger percentage drop in GDP (which was due mainly due to bad financial and business practices...pre-1929).
However, in years 1933-1937, the US GDP began to rise...and in much greater percentage than the total trade output. If Smoot-Hawley truly continued the Great Depression...why did GDP rise while trade not so much? If Smoot-Hawley truly continued the Great Depression...there would not have been the GDP growth.
1938 is an interesting year, because the GDP actually dropped from 1937 levels. Trade numbers also dropped....even though the overall tariff from Smoot-Hawley DROPPED from over 19% to over 15%. The reduction in tariff did not help the economy that year.
In 1939 and 1940, the GDP grew, while the trade totals still remained lower than before Smoot-Hawley. The percentage of trade-to-GDP continued to be smaller than in 1929
1941 saw the GDP finally eclipse the pre-1930 levels...while overall trade was much lower than pre-1930...Smoot-Hawley was still in effect at the time.
1942-1945 saw massive growth in the GDP, as the US was spending heavily on the World War II war effort. The percentage of trade-to-GDP continued to drop, with Smith-Hawley still in effect. It should be noted that, with World War II taking place, trade worldwide was affected.
---------------------------------------
While Smoot-Hawley did not help the economy prosper, it certainly did not cause, nor continue, the Great Depression, as critics claim. In most years the GDP still rose, with trade restrictions in effect.
In the first year after the rate of tariff on Smoot-Hawley decreased (1938, after it was decreased in 1937)...the level of trade and the GDP dropped. The drop in trade and GDP in 1938 demonstrates even strongly that lower tariffs did not lead to economic gain.
Critics of protectionism and favorable national trade practices will need to find a new "Economic Bogeyman". The evidence does not support that Smoot-Hawley caused the Great Depression, nor continue it.
Unfortunately, as current Free Trade and Globalist practices continue to lead to worldwide economic failure, those ignorant of the real history of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act will continue to critique, without presenting the facts.
The facts do not support their thesis...and the constant misinterpretation of facts regarding Smoot-Hawley well demonstrate the inability of those Free Traders and Globalists who cannot provide any explanation to why current international Free Trade practices have not worked.
Free trade has lead to the so called service economy which will never create wealth...only bubbles which burst...this latest one is the worst one because of those little H bombs floating around our economy.... called credit default swaps/derivatives courtesy of Wall Street. we need a 4 trillion taxpayer financed bad bank for these gems- a ‘gift’ from Wall Street to Main Street.
‘conservatives’ in favor of government limiting free trade, always surprising to me. Free trade will occur unless it is limited by government. Free trade has been one of the greatest uplifters of prosperity, it has always been the democrats and unions and communists (self sufficient communal villages etc..) that limit free trade.
Yes it does...and an entire world ‘court’ (WTO) which exist for the sole purpose of screwing America.
agreed
You apparently have not looked around and noticed we are rapidly approaching a depression...thanks to stupid free trade polices that destroyed American business. I am an American conservative...we are not free traders.
Must limit economic freedom in order to preserve it? You’re right, it doesn’t sound so simple. In fact, that sounds like the typical left-winged nuance shit that gets spewed. Good luck with selling reasonable people with that retarded logic.
Reagan was the last American president...the rest have been Global Presidents...with little concern for Americans in terms of the economy.
When did Reagan do “free trade” with our enemies?
You recall what happened right after Bush was elected. He imposed a tariff on imported steel and you see how that turned out.
In death, Reagan has become all things to all people. To Christians, he was seemingly second only to the messiah, to nationalists, he was a nationalist, to libertarians, he was a libertarian, etc.
Why do you think Wall street needed to invent these nifty little products...to create wealth? They knew what they were doing to the economy...they were betting against this country. The country prospers, trader wins, country doesn’t prosper, trader wins...it’s a win/win proposition for these guys and a lose-lose proposition for the American people...to bad Pres. Bush did not bail out Lehman...they would not have been caught with their pants down and revealed for the traitors they are.
And that's about all I have to say tonight. Except for one thng. The past few days when I've been at that window upstairs, I've thought a bit of the "shining city upon a hill." The phrase comes from John Winthrop, who wrote it to describe the America he imagined. What he imagined was important because he was an early Pilgrim, an early freedom man. He journeyed here on what today we'd call a little wooden boat; and like the other Pilgrims, he was looking for a home that would be free.I've spoken of the shining city all my political life, but I don't know if I ever quite communicated what I saw when I said it. But in my mind it was a tall proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, wind-swept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace, a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity, and if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it and see it still.
And how stands the city on this winter night? More prosperous, more secure, and happier than it was eight years ago. But more than that; after 200 years, two centuries, she still stands strong and true on the granite ridge, and her glow has held steady no matter what storm. And she's still a beacon, still a magnet for all who must have freedom, for all the pilgrims from all the lost places who are hurtling through the darkness, toward home.
We've done our part. And as I walk off into the city streets, a final word to the men and women of the Reagan revolution, the men and women across America who for eight years did the work that brought America back. My friends: We did it. We weren't just marking time. We made a difference. We made the city stronger. We made the city freer, and we left her in good hands. All in all, not bad, not bad at all.
And so, good-bye, God bless you, and God bless the United States of America.
Reagan was not a free trader as practiced today; He stood up for American business...he believed in fair trade and threatened Japan with tariffs on autos and motorcycles...as well as electronics.
Commerce is not free trade as practiced today...we import...look at our trade deficit, we hardly trade anything. Once auto’s are gone...it will look much worse.
Yep, I remember he was attacked viciously by his own party.
On trade, I am reading Brian Fagen's Fish on Friday" and it is interesting how the demand for herring and cod increased technology,population and wealth of European nations.
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.