Off-Topic: Basis for saying this?
(Bear Creek Reservoir Specific)
9 messages
Updated 11/3/2023 6:12:58 AM
Lakes Online Forum
83,591 messages
Updated 4/19/2024 9:05:43 PM
Lakes Online Forum
5,193 messages
Updated 4/3/2024 3:47:36 AM
(Bear Creek Reservoir Specific)
0 messages
Updated
Lakes Online Forum
4,169 messages
Updated 4/15/2024 11:05:05 PM
Lakes Online Forum
4,260 messages
Updated 3/24/2024 9:24:45 AM
Lakes Online Forum
2,976 messages
Updated 3/20/2024 11:53:43 PM
Lakes Online Forum
98 messages
Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM
|
|
|
|
Name:
|
GoneFishin
-
|
Subject:
|
Basis for saying this?
|
Date:
|
1/17/2010 12:40:33 PM
|
|
Adam Smith being the father of the free market was, indeed, against tarrifs. However, he did support a short term retalitory tarrif.
"There may be good policy in retaliations of this kind, when there is a probability that they will procure the repeal of the high duties or prohibitions complained of. The recovery of a great foreign market will generally more than compensate the transitory inconveniency of paying dearer during a short time for some sorts of goods. To judge whether such retaliations are likely to produce such an effect, does not, perhaps, belong so much to the science of a legislator, whose deliberations ought to be governed by general principles which are always the same, as to the skill of that insidious and crafty animal, vulgarly called a statesman or politician, whose councils are directed by the momentary fluctuations of affairs. When there is no probability that any such repeal can be procured, it seems a bad method of compensating the injury done to certain classes of our people, to do another injury ourselves, not only to those classes, but to almost all the other classes of them."
Adam Smith
|
|