Cogito, I am not an economist. I have read works by the Austrian School economists, and never missed an address by Hayek when I lived in England, but I only understood economic arguments philosophically. So I do not know if David Stockman, at Lew Rockwell’s website, is right or wrong. However, I think the argument that a country should, if it can, be independent of other countries’ manufactures for such things as the basic needs of life and the means of defense is sound. A nation should support itself as far as it possibly can. Americans need to be encouraged to buy American products. Lower prices are a strong incentive, and tariffs on imports help to assure that.
What do you think of the article I quote part of here?
About the author:
Spencer P. Morrison is a lawyer, sessional instructor of law, and independent intellectual with a focus on applied philosophy, empirical history, and practical economics. Author of Reshore: How Tariffs Will Bring Our Jobs Home and Revive the American Dream and Editor-in-Chief of the National Economics Editorial. His work has been featured on major publications including the BBC, Real Clear Politics, Blaze Media, the Daily Caller, the American Thinker, and the Foundation for Economic Education.
From his linked article:
President George Washington learned the hard-fought lesson that political freedom flows from economic freedom, writing:
A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies . . .
To this end, President Washington’s first major piece of legislation was the Tariff Act of 1789, which raised taxes on imported manufactured goods, thereby encouraging American industry. Perhaps these tariffs made America’s economy less economically “efficient,” but they no doubt made the nation far more politically and militarily efficient. The anti-tariff crowd forgets that America is not a work camp but a nation with values that transcend money.
Thomas Jefferson was initially critical of Washington’s plan, but the War of 1812 brought him on board. America and the British Empire again found themselves at war, but this time, America could supply many of its own firearms and textiles—despite Britain’s blockade.
…
It was under the American System of tariffs—which were supported by the bulk of our Founding Fathers and every president carved on Mount Rushmore—that the United States transformed from an agricultural colonial backwater into an industrial powerhouse.
By 1870 America was the second largest industrial power in the world, behind only Great Britain. By the 1880s, America produced a quarter of the world’s industrial output, and our share continued to grow. We remained the most productive nation in the world for the next 150 years, until China stole the title in 2010. Now, America’s share of global industrial output has fallen to about 17%—half what it was during our industrial golden age.
In the 1970s, America abandoned the wisdom of protectionism and instead embraced economic globalism—international “free” trade and easy fiat money. This has resulted in the offshoring of factories, the neutering of America’s industry, and the impoverishment of the American people. Tied to this is the fact that America has become economically dependent on foreign countries like China to supply basic necessities.
…
President Trump’s tariffs are America’s last chance to reverse the damage and revive the American Dream. If not, be prepared to welcome the rise of China and the fall of the West.
.
My comment:
I don’t think America is a land characterized by a generally impoverished population, but otherwise - does his argument make sense to you?