tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post495814678512723523..comments2024-03-28T17:08:15.784-07:00Comments on Social Democracy for the 21st Century: A Realist Alternative to the Modern Left: Protectionism and US Economic HistoryLord Keyneshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-82718141895296106062016-05-18T17:37:00.231-07:002016-05-18T17:37:00.231-07:00http://www.dartmouth.edu/~dirwin/docs/Growth.pdfhttp://www.dartmouth.edu/~dirwin/docs/Growth.pdfAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02642605296228157284noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-33328044513617452522014-06-09T10:43:42.599-07:002014-06-09T10:43:42.599-07:00"Notice the federal governments share of gdp ...<i>"Notice the federal governments share of gdp in the post civil war era. Notice that income taxes were nonexistent (save for the civil war era) until 1913) "</i><br /><br />Thanks for that red herring, given that nobody is disputing this fact, and it is not even relevant to the subject at hand.Lord Keyneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-6848458137020271582014-06-09T10:33:16.327-07:002014-06-09T10:33:16.327-07:00I noticed how carefully you qualified your argumen...I noticed how carefully you qualified your arguments. I would agree with those qualifications. In addition I would doubt that it is possible for politicians to recognize the concept of "increasing returns" industry rather than to apply a sweeping protectionism to all industries! perhaps this is why one of the architects of NTT (New Trade Theory) Paul Krugman was so CAREFUL to not draw sweeping conclusions from his own theories. (Indeed increasing returns can be used, in conjunction with the ideal free flow of labor, to argue that unemployed people in poor countries "ruined" by free trade can migrate to the developed world, where they can find employment in growing industries.<br /><br />You said that "although the average level of tariffs is not necessarily a guide to how effective and well targeted tariffs were in each country," I completely agree. Notice the federal governments share of gdp in the post civil war era. Notice that income taxes were nonexistent (save for the civil war era) until 1913) <br /><br /><br />Finally the biggest argument for free trade for me is the Cobdenite one NOT the Ricardian one. I don't care particularly if Portugal had a manufacturing industry killed off by free trade, what matters is the welfare of portugal and england's individual consumers, and the fact that when economies are intertwined, its much harder for countries to make war upon one another. <br />(Using World War I as an example against this doesn't work, because tariff rates rose dramatically in European Countries decades before World War I, free trade had been faltering)Edwardnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-47405916811221021542014-06-08T13:54:35.847-07:002014-06-08T13:54:35.847-07:00Very good. I did something on this a while back......Very good. I did something on this a while back...<br /><br />http://fixingtheeconomists.wordpress.com/2014/05/01/arguments-against-free-trade-and-comparative-advantage/Philip Pilkingtonhttp://fixingtheeconomists.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.com