|
> protectionism just doesn't work well in the long term. If that were the case, the US, China, Japan, South Korea, Britain, France, etc wouldn't be major economic powers. Every major economic power today copied the US protectionist model of the 19th century to become rich. Every single one. The US was explicitly protectionist well into the 1900s. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protectionism_in_the_United_St... Since 1945, we became implicit protectionists while touting free trade. Without protectionism, japan and south korea wouldn't have toyota, sony, samsung, etc. Without protectionism, china wouldn't have baidu, tencent, etc. Without protectionism, our industries would be owned by britain and europe and we'd only be a raw materials supplier. "Washington and Hamilton believed that political independence was predicated upon economic independence. Increasing the domestic supply of manufactured goods, particularly war materials, was seen as an issue of national security. In his Reports, Hamilton argued that the competition from abroad and the “forces of habit” would mean that new industries that could soon become internationally competitive (“infant industries”) would not be started in the United States, unless the initial losses were guaranteed by government aid (Conkin, 1980). According to him, this aid could take the form of import duties or, in rare cases, prohibition of imports. He called for customs barriers to allow American industrial development and to help protect infant industries, including bounties (subsidies) derived in part from those tariffs. He also believed that duties on raw materials should be generally low (Dorfman & Tugwell, Early American Policy, 1960). Hamilton explained that despite an initial “increase of price” caused by regulations that control foreign competition, once a “domestic manufacture has attained to perfection… it invariably becomes cheaper”." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariffs_in_United_States_histo... Washington, Hamilton and most of our founding fathers were protectionists because our industries were young and needed protection against more established industries of britain. > There is a consensus among economists that protectionism has a negative effect on economic growth and economic welfare, while free trade, deregulation, and the reduction of trade barriers has a positive effect on economic growth. When you have to lean on consensus it usually means they have no idea what they are talking about or are pushing political ideology. We have historical proof that protectionism works. It's called the US, China, Britain, Japan, South Korea, etc. Always take evidence over consensus. |