Artikels

Wat het veroorsaak dat die steun vir die Protectionist Party van Australië afgeneem het?

Wat het veroorsaak dat die steun vir die Protectionist Party van Australië afgeneem het?

Die Protectionist Party van Australië was een van die drie belangrikste federale partye ten tyde van die federasie en het die eerste twee eerste ministers van die land opgelewer, maar dit het nie lank geduur voordat hul stemme afgeneem het nie. In die verkiesings in 1901, 1903 en 1906 het die party onderskeidelik 31, 26 en 16 setels gewen (nog 4 setels in 1906 is gewen deur die Independent Protectionist Party). Alhoewel hul totale aantal stemme wat in 1903 ontvang is, eintlik hoër was as in 1901, was die toename aansienlik laer as die groei in die aantal stemgeregtigdes. Sedert hulle in 1901 36,75% van die primêre stemme gehad het, het hulle in 1906 tot slegs 16,44% gedaal (gesamentlik 'n totaal van 21,28% vir proteksionistiese partye).

Wat was die omstandighede wat gelei het tot so 'n vinnige afname in die aandeel van die stemme vir die Proteksionistiese Party en proteksionistiese partye in die algemeen in Australië? In watter mate het die optrede van die Proteksionistiese Party in die regering bygedra tot die verlies aan steun?


Die Australiese nedersetting is gestig in die vroeë federale parlemente (Stokes in AJPS; Wikipedia). Hierdie maatreëls in die vroeë parlement het 'n stelsel van tariewe en lone saamgestel wat die sentrale impuls agter die proteksionistiese party bevredig het. Op dieselfde manier hervorm die twee anti-Arbeidspartye hulself rondom anti-arbeidspolitiek, eerder as om verskille tussen regerende klaspolitiek. Dit moes duidelik gebeur in 'n tydperk van groeiende ALP -parlementêre sukses. In die tydperk 1901 tot 1920 het die Australiese samelewing 'n tydperk van toenemende klaskonflik beleef, en die ALP was die parlementêre begunstigde hiervan. cf: Connell & Irving (1980) Klasstruktuur in die Australiese geskiedenis


Pauline Hanson se One Nation

Pauline Hanson se One Nation (PHON of ONP), ook bekend as Een nasie of One Nation Party, is 'n Australiese regse [11] tot verregse politieke party. [12] Dit is gestig en word tans gelei deur senator Pauline Hanson. Hoewel One Nation tot dusver slegs beskeie verkiesingsukses behaal het, is dit die suksesvolste populistiese party in Australië. Die party het 'n kort, maar noemenswaardige suksesperiode in die laat 1990's gehad. Sy leiers is beskuldig, aangekla en later vrygespreek van bedrog, en die party het gely onder talle afwykings, bedankings en ander interne skandale wat sy aanvanklike agteruitgang veroorsaak het en uitgeloop het op Hanson se uittrede uit die party. Die beleid en platform van One Nation word wyd gekritiseer as rassisties en xenofobies, hoewel die party dit ontken. [13] Nietemin het One Nation 'n groot impak op debatte oor multikulturalisme en immigrasie in Australië. [13] Na die terugkeer van Hanson as leier en die federale verkiesing in 2016, het die party 'n herlewing in steun beleef.

One Nation is in 1997 gestig deur parlementslid Pauline Hanson en haar adviseurs David Ettridge en David Oldfield nadat Hanson as 'n federale kandidaat vir die Liberale Party van Australië ontken is. Die ontkenning kom voor die federale verkiesing van 1996 weens die opmerkings wat sy gemaak het oor inheemse Australiërs. [14] Oldfield, 'n raadslid in die Manly Council in die voorstedelike Sydney en op 'n stadium 'n werknemer van die liberale minister Tony Abbott, was die organisatoriese argitek van die party. [15] Hanson het 'n jaar lank as 'n onafhanklike gesit voordat hy Pauline Hanson se One Nation gestig het.

Met die argument dat ander politieke partye uit voeling was met die hoofstroom van Australië, het One Nation op 'n breed populistiese en proteksionistiese platform gehardloop. Dit het beloof om immigrasie drasties te verminder en "verdelende en diskriminerende beleid wat aan Aboriginale en multikulturele aangeleenthede verbonde is, af te skaf." One Nation, wat multikulturalisme as 'n "bedreiging vir die grondslag van die Australiese kultuur, identiteit en gedeelde waardes" beskou, het teen die immigrasie- en multikulturele beleid van die liberale regering saamgestem, wat volgens hom tot "die asiatisering van Australië" gelei het. [16]

Die party het ook ekonomiese rasionalisme en globalisering veroordeel, wat weerspieël die ontevredenheid van die werkersklas met die neo-liberale ekonomiese beleid wat deur die groot partye aangeneem is. Deur 'n sterk proteksionistiese beleid te aanvaar, bepleit One Nation die herstel van invoertariewe, 'n herlewing van die Australiese vervaardigingsbedryf en 'n toename in ondersteuning vir klein ondernemings en die landelike sektor. [17]


The Fourth Industrial Revolution-'n spelwisselaar vir Australië en die wêreld

Die Vierde Industriële Revolusie is 'n term waarvan baie nog nie bekend is nie. Maar net soos met vorige tegnologiese deurbrake, sal die implementering van 4IR -tegnologie, die gevolge daarvan en vele hervormings wat daarmee gepaard gaan, die wêreld binnekort heeltemal verander. Net soos die ontdekking van elektrisiteit, gemotoriseerde voertuie en die internet die wêreld in die 20ste eeu radikaal verander het, sal die vierde industriële revolusie (4IR) die mensdom radikaal verander namate ons verder in die 21ste eeu beweeg.

Om 'n paar analogieë te gebruik: daar was geen keer om terug te keer toe die mensdom wydverspreide toegang tot elektrisiteit gehad het en al die toestelle waarmee ons dit kon gebruik nie. Sodra ons motors, vragmotors, treine en busse gehad het, was daar geen terugkeer na perde of bulle vir vervoer nie. Sodra ons die internet gehad het en al die gerief, toegang tot inligting en verbindings wat dit meebring, was die wêreld vir ewig verander.

Die vierde industriële rewolusie gaan ook die wêreld verander. Baie diep. Miskien kan baie mense hulle nog nie voorstel nie.

So, wat is hierdie vierde industriële revolusie presies?

Die mensdom gaan vinnig tegnologiese vooruitgang maak op 'n wye verskeidenheid verskillende terreine. Van die ontwikkeling van kunsmatige intelligensie (AI), tot nanotegnologie, tot 5G-tegnologie, tot selfbestuurde voertuie (wat moontlik eendag in die lug kan word), tot genterapie, tot virtuele realiteit, tot nuwe fases van die internet (ooit afgelewer) -hoër snelhede), tot vordering in voedseltegnologie, gesondheid, produkontwikkeling, vermaak, wapens, groepsielkunde, en miskien op baie ander gebiede, sal die mensdom waarskynlik heeltemal verander.

Een van die belangrikste faktore wat 4IR aandryf, was die groei (en sukses) van die menslike bevolking. Aangesien wêreldwye hulpbronne eindig is en kommer oor besoedeling en enorme hoeveelhede vullis en afval wat geproduseer word onder die huidige laissez-faire-ekonomiese model, word die aansporing tot verandering al hoe duideliker.

Die ontwikkeling van 4IR -tegnologieë sal ongetwyfeld tot aansienlike veranderinge in ons huidige lewenswyse lei. Die huidige model van massaproduksie (en massaverbruik), vryhandel en oop grense is eenvoudig onvolhoubaar en sal byna seker verander. Die opkoms van opkomende "populisme" en patriotiese bewegings wêreldwyd dien ook as 'n belangrike fasiliteerder van verandering. So ook die veroudering van die bevolking, waar die gemiddelde lewensduur (ten minste in die eerste wêreld) toegeneem het, en verdere mediese en tegnologiese vooruitgang dit waarskynlik verder sal toeneem. So het ook die opkoms van die "tradwives" -beweging ontstaan, waar meer en meer vroue die waarde begin sien dat hulself meer tyd in die huis deurbring om na hul gesinne te kyk, eerder as om effektief te kompeteer met mans in die arbeidsmag.

Sommige kommentators meen dat die mensdom kultureel en wetenskaplik 'gestagneer' het. Die werklike aantal nuwe innovasies in beide populêre kultuur en wetenskap het afgeneem noudat ons in die 21ste eeu is. Op velde soos musiek, vermaak, dans en mode word gereeld ou idees herhaal, dikwels herverpak. Daar is 'n siening dat kunsmatige intelligensie die mensdom in die toekoms op baie terreine vorentoe sal bring.

Dit is onvermydelik dat kunsmatige intelligensie (AI) toenemend baie arbeid sal vervang wat nou deur mense uitgevoer word. Dit sal baie veranderings veroorsaak en waarskynlik die houding van die samelewing en die regering ten opsigte van werk, ontspanning, opvoeding, spiritualiteit en in die Weste verander, tot die herstel van meer tradisionele geslagsrolle. In die toekoms sal baie mense minder ure werk, en miskien werk baie nie. In plaas daarvan om op lone vir inkomste staat te maak, sal baie mense op ander bronne staatmaak. Die vraag na 'n Universal Basic Income (UBI) sal ongetwyfeld toeneem.

Die vraag na immigrante -arbeid sal ook aansienlik verminder. As die mensdom byvoorbeeld selfbestuurvoertuie goedkoper kan vervaardig, is daar nie dieselfde vraag na al die Indiese taxibestuurders nie!

Die eis dat vroue soveel tyd in die arbeidsmag moet spandeer as wat hulle tans doen, sal in die toekoms waarskynlik verminder. As regerings dit aantreklik maak vir vroue om meer kinders te produseer en groot te maak (soos wat Hongarye en Pole tans doen), kan ander Westerse lande moontlik ook hul erg uitgeputte blanke Europese geboortesyfers ophef.

Onder ander veranderinge is dit waarskynlik dat kliënte baie meer dienste tuis sal ontvang, eerder as om by te dra tot groter verkeersopeenhopings in stede deur winkels of klantewinkels te besoek. In die toekoms sal baie meer produkte, hulpbronne en dienste waarskynlik aanlyn beskikbaar wees, aangesien verbetering van tegnologie dit sal laat gebeur. Meer mense sal waarskynlik ook meer tyd aan die werk spandeer, eerder as om werkplekke te besoek.

Verwag dat die onderwys ook 'n groot opknapping ondergaan. Omdat kunsmatige intelligensie in die toekoms voortdurend die vraag na menslike arbeid vervang, hoef die mensdom eenvoudig nie soveel mense vir die arbeidsmag op te lei nie. Aangesien minder mense in fabrieke moet werk, kan ons verwag dat die industriële skoolstelsel wat in die weste al meer as honderd jaar lank in die Weste bestaan, eendag sal ontwikkel, sodat dit baie kan voorsien. meer na die individuele vereistes van kinders. Namate meer dienste aanlyn beskikbaar word, verwag dat tuisonderrig in die toekoms 'n baie groter rol sal speel.

Die wêreldwye skrik vir koronavirus sal ongetwyfeld gebruik word as 'n geleentheid om 'n reeks ekonomiese, opvoedkundige, sosiale en tegnologiese hervormings met betrekking tot die Vierde Industriële Revolusie teweeg te bring.

Ekonomiese modelle wat gebaseer is op 'n foutiewe oortuiging in 'eksponensiële ekonomiese groei', sal waarskynlik nie in die toekoms 'n rol speel nie. In plaas daarvan sal ekonomiese modelle waarskynlik gebaseer wees op volhoubaarheid, en meer op die prioriteit van mense, samelewings en die omgewing, nie net op die groei van die BBP nie. Die Vierde Industriële Revolusie sal die mensdom help om die kwaliteit van die produk te verbeter en om baie meer doeltreffend te raak met hulpbronne. Ons is eintlik op die punt om 'n seismiese verskuiwing te maak van die era van industriële kapitalisme na wat bekend sal staan ​​as 'The Space Age'.

Nuwe modelle en nuwe idees sal hopelik die verouderde geloof van die mensdom in die kapitalisme versus sosialisme se valse tweedeling verminder. Die baie onlangse neiging tot deglobalisering sal waarskynlik toeneem. Baie lande kan weer proteksionistiese ekonomiese beleid aanneem, aangesien dit kan help om kulturele integriteit te behou, omgewingsvriendeliker te wees, hulpbronne te bespaar, besoedeling te verminder, die afhanklikheid van ander lande en wêreldwye handel te verminder en werk te behou en nywerhede "plaaslik".

Daar is 'n mening dat met groter vrye tyd en minder klem op materialisme en materiële dinge, die moderne hoogs verbruikersweste iets van geestelike herlewing kan ondergaan. Sommige van die nuwe tegnologie kan ons ook op ander maniere verander. Byvoorbeeld, die ontwikkeling van hoogs gesofistikeerde seksrobotte kan die vraag na prostitusie en pornografie aansienlik verminder (hoewel niemand dit noodwendig bepleit nie, is dit 'n moontlike toekomstige ontwikkeling).

Vleis wat deur laboratorium vervaardig word (wat al hoe meer in die VSA geproduseer en verbruik word) kan uiteindelik die houding van mense teenoor diere verander, en dit kan help om sommige van die bekommernisse van baie mense oor dieremishandeling, fabrieksboerdery en vermorsing en besoedeling te verlig. Baie ander voedsel word ook in laboratoriums toenemend in massa geproduseer.

Die Vierde Industriële Revolusie beloof 'n baie ander en uitdagende pad vorentoe, waardeur die mensdom die drumpel na 'n nuwe era oorskry. Die World Economic Forum (deur sommige beskryf as 'n elite "skaduwee" regeringsorganisasie) het 'n video gemaak wat 'n paar voordele van die komende Vierde Industriële Revolusie verduidelik.

Die komende veranderinge sal ongetwyfeld baie nuwe kommer, baie nuwe etiese dilemmas veroorsaak, en baie kommer veroorsaak oor die nuwe tegnologie en hoe dit gebruik kan word. Hoe nasies en gemeenskappe hulself regeer, kan op nuwe maniere ontwikkel, veral met die bekendstelling van AI. Die komende tegnologiese veranderinge sal die mensdom groter mag oor die natuur en oor mekaar gee. Met groot krag kom daar groot verantwoordelikheid, en soos Lord Acton eens beroemd (en baie insiggewend) opgemerk het, "mag korrupteer, en absolute mag korrupteer absoluut".

Ons het al met die wêreldwye reaksie op die COVID19 -koronavirus gesien hoe aanloklik dit kan wees vir maghebbers om die merk te oorskry en allerhande onnodige outoritêre beheermaatreëls op die gewone mense af te dwing.

Die Vierde Industriële Revolusie sal die mensdom veel groter krag gee om kreatief te wees, maar ook om vernietigend te wees. Die geskiedenis het ons getoon dat nuwe tegnologie vir die mensdom geweldig bevrydend kan wees, maar in die verkeerde hande kan dit ons tot slawerny wees. Die belangrikste faktor is miskien nie die wonderlike nuwe tegnologie op sigself nie, maar WIE beheer dit en HOE word dit gebruik.

Daar word gesê dat historiese politieke stryd altyd op een of ander manier 'n stryd was tussen 'vryheid versus slawerny'. Die toekoms bied ongetwyfeld baie nuwe uitdagings in hierdie verband. Samelewings soos Australië, wat eens baie vertrouenswaardig was, het nou toenemend lae-vertroue-samelewings geword, en die maghebbers sal ongetwyfeld in die versoeking kom om groter polisie-, regs- en toesigkontroles op te lê.

Daarom is dit uiters noodsaaklik dat die gewone mense hardnekkig leer om fundamentele vryhede soos spraak- en godsdiensvryheid, vryheid van assosiasie en vergadering, privaatheidsreg, die reg op selfverdediging en die reg om mediese behandeling te weier, te verdedig en uit te brei. . As ons nie vir ons vryhede veg nie, sal ons dit waarskynlik verloor. Die bevryding van die mensdom van skuld-slawerny (woeker) kan een van die grootste uitdagings bly.

Sommiges sal bespiegel dat die mensdom sielkundig nie gereed is vir die Vierde Industriële Revolusie en die veranderings daarvan nie. As dit die geval is, is dit beter om ons gereed te maak, want die veranderinge is ongetwyfeld op pad, en ons sal daarby moet aanpas.


Groot depressie

In die tweede helfte van die twintigerjare het die Australiese ekonomie gebuk gegaan onder dalende koring- en wolpryse, en mededinging van ander lande wat produkte produseer. Australië leen ook groot bedrae geld, wat verdroog het namate die ekonomie verlangsaam het.

Toe lei die Wall Street -ineenstorting van 1929 tot 'n wêreldwye ekonomiese depressie. Die Australiese ekonomie het in duie gestort en die werkloosheid bereik 'n hoogtepunt van 32 persent in 1932.

Dit het Australië amper 'n dekade geneem om van die Groot Depressie te herstel.

Hedendaagse kinderrympie:

Ons is nou op die susso,
Ons kan nie 'n koei bekostig nie,
Ons bly in 'n tent,
Ons betaal geen huur nie,
Ons is nou op die susso.

Voorspoed uit die land

Australië het 'n hoë inflasie beleef van 1919 tot 1920 en daarna 'n ernstige resessie tot 1923. Met die ekonomie wat op landbouproduksie gebaseer was, het Australiërs welvaart met die land geïdentifiseer. Teruggekeerde soldate is hervestig op plattelandse blokke en meer as 200 000 Britse immigrante wat deur die regering geborg is, het aangekom, en baie het na plattelandse dorpe verhuis.

Maar in die middel van die twintigerjare, net soos die plattelandse ekonomie in Australië begin herstel het, so ook die Europese lande wat deur die oorlog geraak is. Die Verenigde State, Kanada en Argentinië het landbou -oorskotte vir die mark begin produseer. Dit het 'n wêreldwye ooraanbod van Australië en groot uitvoere veroorsaak: koring en skape.

Swaar leen

Gedurende die twintigerjare het die federale, en veral die staatsregerings, 'n groot hoeveelheid lenings by oorsese instellings gehandhaaf, veral toe belastinginkomste begin daal. Baie van hierdie geld is aangewend vir openbare infrastruktuurwerke.

Australië was gedurende die dekade die grootste lener van die City of London, maar toe kommoditeitspryse vanaf 1927 daal, het leningsfondse uit Londen opgedroog.

Goud standaard

In April 1925 keer Winston Churchill, as kanselier van die skatkis, Groot-Brittanje terug na die Gold Standard, waardeur die Britse pond in goud omgeskakel kon word teen die koers waarop dit in 1913 vasgemaak is. Die goudprys is egter te hoog geraam en Britse uitvoer het duurder geword op die wêreldmark.

Die Australiese pond is gewaardeer in verhouding tot die Britse pond, en dus is die Australiese uitvoer ook deur hierdie verandering geraak. Wolpryse het vanaf die middel van die twintigerjare geleidelik gedaal en koring het skerp gedaal vanaf 1930. Die waarde van die uitvoer van koring en wol uit Australië met halveer in 1929 en 1930.

Bruce -regering val

Die federale begroting van 1927 het Australië met 'n tekort van £ 5,5 miljoen gelaat en premier Stanley Bruce wou besteding en lone verminder.

In 1928 gee die federale tesourier Earle Page sy sesde en strengste begroting af met nuwe belasting en dieper uitgawes om die groeiende tekort te kontroleer.

Die regering het ook gepoog om die wetsontwerp op maritieme nywerhede te aanvaar, wat die Statebond van Versoening en Arbitrasie sou afgeskaf het. Stakings en arbeidsonrus het gedurende 1928 en 1929 dramaties in Australië toegeneem.

Die kwessie het gelei tot 'n wantroue in die parlement. Die regering verloor, wat Bruce dwing om te bel en te verkies.

Scullin regering

Die Arbeidersparty het Bruce uitgebeeld omdat hy die arbeidsisteem van Australië wou vernietig en in die verkiesing van 12 Oktober 1929 het Labour sy destydse grootste meerderheid in die federale parlement gekry. James Scullin word die nuwe premier en Bruce verloor sy eie setel van Flinders, die eerste sittende Australiese premier om dit te doen.

Op 24 Oktober 1929, 'n week nadat Labour die mag oorgeneem het, het die Amerikaanse aandelemark egter neergestort. Te midde van wêreldwye ekonomiese onstabiliteit, was dit die katalisator wat lande regoor die wêreld depressief gemaak het.

Die Scullin -regering het 'n verskeidenheid reaksies op die krisis probeer: tariefhindernisse is verhoog, die vlakke van migrasie is verminder en die aksyns, die belangrikste bron van inkomste van die federale regering, het toegeneem.

Niemand het 'n uitwerking gehad nie, en in Augustus 1930 nooi Scullin die direkteur van die Bank van Engeland, sir Otto Niemeyer, om Australië te besoek om advies te gee oor ekonomiese beleid. Op 'n vergadering van federale en staatsregerings in Melbourne het Niemeyer 'n benadering aanbeveel wat gebaseer is op konserwatiewe, gebalanseerde begrotings en dring daarop aan dat leningsrente, 'n groot deel daarvan aan Britse banke, betaal word.

Die plan van Niemeyer en rsquos vereis nog 'n ronde ernstige besnoeiings aan die regering se infrastruktuurprojekte, lone, maatskaplike welsyn en besteding aan verdediging. Die staatshoofde en Scullin het ingestem tot die plan.

Die federale tesourier Ted Theodore het egter 'n beleid van verhoogde staatsbesteding aangeneem om groei te stimuleer, soos voorgestel deur die Britse ekonoom John Maynard Keynes. Die premier van die Arbeid van Nieu -Suid -Wallis, Jack Lang, bepleit 'n einde aan rentebetalings op Britse lenings.

Die planne van beide Theodore en Lang is deur die regering verwerp en 'n skeuring het in die Arbeidersparty ontstaan.


Wit Australië -beleid

Ons redakteurs gaan na wat u ingedien het, en bepaal of hulle die artikel moet hersien.

Wit Australië -beleid, formeel Immigrasiebeperkingswet van 1901, in die Australiese geskiedenis, fundamentele wetgewing van die nuwe Statebond van Australië wat alle nie-Europese immigrasie na die land effektief gestop het en wat bygedra het tot die ontwikkeling van 'n ras-geïsoleerde wit samelewing. Dit weerspieël 'n jarelange en verenigende sentiment van die verskillende Australiese kolonies en bly 'n fundamentele regeringsbeleid tot in die middel van die 20ste eeu.

Die Australiese kolonies het reeds in die 1860's beperkende wetgewing aanvaar. Dit was spesifiek gerig op Chinese immigrante, maar later het 'n gewilde kreet ontstaan ​​teen die steeds meer Japannese-veral na Japan se oorwinning oor China in die Sino-Japannese oorlog van 1894–1995-en ook teen die Suid-Asiërs en Kanakas (eilandbewoners in die Suidelike Stille Oseaan) . Vrees vir militêre inval deur Japan, die bedreiging vir die lewenstandaard wat deur die goedkoop, maar doeltreffende Asiatiese arbeiders gedink word, en wit rassisme was die belangrikste faktore agter die White Australia -beweging.

Die begeerte na 'n gekoördineerde immigrasiebalk teen nie -blankes was 'n aansporing in die 1890's na die Australiese federasie. Die wet was dus een van die eerste stukke wetgewing van die Statebond wat uitgevaardig is. In 1901 het die Immigrasiebeperkingswet alle nie-Europese immigrasie effektief beëindig deur voorsiening te maak vir toelatingseksamens in Europese tale. Die noodsaaklike bepaling van die wet, eerder as om spesifieke rasse of groepe vir uitsluiting te noem, het voorsiening gemaak vir 'n dikteertoets in 'n Europese taal wat aan voornemende immigrante toegedien moet word. 'N Suid -Asiër met kennis van Engels kan 'n toets in Frans, Duits of, indien nodig, Litaus, aflê. Die wet het alle “bruin” mense feitlik uitgesluit. Aanvullende wetgewing in 1901 het voorsiening gemaak vir die deportasie teen 1906 van die land se Kanakas.

Gewilde steun vir Wit Australië, altyd sterk, is versterk tydens die Vredeskonferensie van Parys in 1919–2020 toe die Australiese afvaardiging die stryd gelei het om 'n Japannese geborgde rasse-gelykheidswysiging aan die Volkebond te verslaan. Alhoewel die wet nog nooit herroep is nie, het die beleid vanaf ongeveer 1950 al hoe strenger geword, eers onder liberale regerings en ook (meer duidelik) onder Arbeid van 1972 tot 1975. Tussen 1947 en 1981 het die aantal persone in Australië van nie-Europese afkoms meer as verdubbel. Teen die vroeë 21ste eeu was ongeveer twee vyfdes van die Australiese immigrante Asiaties.


Vrae en antwoorde

Vraag: Veroorsak invoertariewe handelsoorloë?

Antwoord: As een land tariewe op invoer hef, kan die lande wat geraak word, dikwels vergeld deur hul eie invoertariewe op te lê. Dit kan 'n reeks titels aan die gang sit vir vergeldingstariewe wat bekend staan ​​as 'n handelsoorlog. Die meeste ekonome glo dat handelsoorloë makliker is om te begin as om te stop, en dat almal oor die algemeen op die lang termyn verloor.

© 2017 Paul Goodman


Internasionale vryheid

Die goeie nuus is dat president Trump ekonomiese groei wil bevorder, wat 'n lofwaardige doelwit is ná die swak prestasie van die ekonomie tydens die Obama-jare.

Die slegte nuus is dat hy sy goeie hervormings van belastingbeleid en regulering met proteksionisme kan saboteer.

In 'n rubriek vroeër hierdie maand vir die Wall Street Journal, Waarsku Robert Zoellick oor die moontlike gevolge.

Die Trump -administrasie het 'n hoop handelsake opgestapel wat vroeg in 2018 sal val. Belangriker as enige spesifieke geval is die teken van 'n strategie van ekonomiese nederlaag. …Mnr. Trump se taktiek sal waarskynlik weerwraak van ander lande veroorsaak. … "voorsorgmaatreëls" om die invoer van sonpanele en wasmasjiene te blokkeer … vereis nie eens 'n eis van onregverdigheid nie. Dit kom neer op 'n ouverture tot die groot vertoning: waarskynlik onttrekking aan die Noord-Amerikaanse vryhandelsooreenkoms, die vryhandelsooreenkoms tussen die VSA en Korea of ​​albei. Die president maak staat op die ondersteuning van ekonomiese isolationiste wat dit makliker vind om ander te blameer as om Amerika meer mededingend te maak. Om Nafta te vermoor, pas by die rekening.

Charles Hughes behandel dieselfde onderwerp vir Economics 21 en verduidelik spesifiek dat die netto effek van handelshindernisse op sonpanele die vernietiging van werkgeleenthede sal wees.

President Trump het nuwe tariewe vir die invoer van sonkrag goedgekeur en#8230 Vervaardiging van sonpanele is slegs een komponent van die sonkragbedryf, wat tussen 260,000 en 374,000 werknemers in diens het. Uit hierdie groep werk slegs 38 000 in die vervaardiging. Selfs dit verkoop die aantal mense wie se werk geïsoleer sou word van mededinging deur invoer, aangesien Solar Energy Industries Association skat dat slegs 2 000 van hierdie sonvervaardigingswerkers die produkte maak wat deur die tariewe gedek word. Aansienlik meer mense werk in die installasie. Hulle werk is in gevaar as gevolg van hoër sonpaneelpryse wat die vraag na installasies sal verminder, met een skatting dat die tariewe in die eerste jaar 23,000 Amerikaanse werkgeleenthede sal kos.

Hierdie getalle is nie 'n verrassing nie. Daar is baie studies wat kyk na die impak van proteksionisme en verlore werk is die gewone gevolg, beide omdat handelshindernisse ondoeltreffendheid veroorsaak, verbruikers se koopkrag verminder en insetpryse verhoog.

Soos so dikwels die geval is, is dit 'n kwessie van die gesien versus die onsienlike.

Maar moenie my woord daarvoor neem nie. Hier praat president Reagan oor handel kort voordat hy die amp verlaat (h/t: Cafe Hayek).

Terloops, sommige mense probeer Trump se proteksionisme regverdig deur 'n paar proteksionistiese beleide gedurende die Reagan -jare aan te dui.

Soos verduidelik deur Colin Grabow en Scott Lincicome in Nasionale hersiening, dit is historiese revisionisme.

Trumpistiese pogings om Amerikaanse werkgeleenthede te red deur hoër tariewe, bilaterale handelstransaksies en laer handelstekorte, kan geen 'konserwatiewe' regverdiging in handelsaksies in die Reagan-era vind nie. Eintlik is dit net die teenoorgestelde. Die Reagan-administrasie het inderdaad eensydige invoerbeperkings en "handhawing" -aksies van buitelandse handel gevolg, maar die geskiedenis toon aan dat - in teenstelling met die proteksionistiese beleid wat deur Trump voorgestel is - sulke bewegings bedoel was om handel te liberaliseer, en dat Reagan ook gereeld probeer het om sy mede -Amerikaners op te voed oor die Amerikaanse handelsbalans, selfs tydens 'n perskonferensie in 1985 dat handel tekorte korreleer dikwels met werkgroei en ekonomiese lewenskrag. Reagan onderhandel en sluit die vryhandelsooreenkoms tussen Kanada en die Verenigde State van 1988 - die basis vir die Noord -Amerikaanse vryhandelsooreenkoms (NAFTA). Onderhandelaars van Reagan -administrasie het ook gehelp om die Uruguay -ronde te begin onder die Algemene Ooreenkoms oor Tariewe en Handel (GATT), wat in 1994 die grootste slag vir vryhandel in die afgelope 70 jaar sou slaan deur die oprigting van die Wêreldhandelsorganisasie (WHO).

Amen. Miskien moet ek my beoordeling van Reaganomics hersien en die Gipper 'n nog beter graad gee.

So, wat sou dit beteken as Trump se proteksionistiese stoot tot soortgelyke statistiekbeleid deur ander lande gelei het?

'N Wêreldbankstudie gee ons 'n idee van die moontlike implikasies.

Hierdie artikel kwantifiseer die omvangryke koste van moontlike stygings in wêreldwye handelshindernisse …a gekoördineerde wêreldwye onttrekking … van alle bestaande bilaterale/streekshandelsooreenkomste, sowel as van eensydige voorkeurskemas tesame met 'n styging in die koste van verhandelde dienste, na raming na drie jaar jaarlikse wêreldwye reële inkomsteverliese van 0,3 persent of $ 211 miljard tot relatief tot die basislyn. Deur die belangrikheid van voorkeure te beklemtoon, word die impak op die wêreldwye handel na raming meer uitgespreek, met 'n jaarlikse afname van 2,1 persent of meer as $ 606 miljard in vergelyking met die basislyn as hierdie hindernisse drie jaar bly. Tweedens sou 'n wêreldwye verhoging van tariewe tot wettig toegelate tariewe, tesame met 'n styging in die koste van verhandelde dienste, lei tot jaarlikse wêreldwye reële inkomsteverliese van 0,8 persent of meer as US $ 634 miljard in vergelyking met die basislyn na drie jaar. Die verdraaiing van die wêreldwye handelsstelsel sou beduidend wees en 'n jaarlikse afname in die wêreldwye handel van 9 persent of meer as 2,6 biljoen dollar relatief tot die basislyn in 2020 tot gevolg hê.

Ek wonder of hierdie getalle die bedreiging onderskat, gegewe hoe proteksionisme teen belasting vir baie groter skade gedurende die 1930's veroorsaak het.

Laat ons in elk geval afsluit met 'n baie effektiewe (en bondige) video van Matt Ridley oor die beginsel van vergelykende voordeel. Dit handel oor handel tussen twee mense, maar dieselfde beginsel geld vir handel tussen nasies. Eenvoudig gestel, handel maak voorsiening vir spesialisasie, wat hoër produktiwiteit (en dus hoër lone en lewenstandaard) moontlik maak.


ECON1269 Opdrag vir internasionale handelsmonsters

Op 11 Maart 2014 in Seoul onderteken premier Stephen Harper in Kanada en die Koreaanse president Park Keun-hye 'n onderhandeling oor 'n nuwe vryhandelsooreenkoms tussen Kanada en Korea. Kanada het ingestem om die tariewe op 98,4% van die invoeritems binne tien jaar af te skaf, en Korea het ook ingestem om die tariewe op 98,4% van die invoeritems af te skaf (Kim, 2014).

1.1 Seekosektor

Die vryhandelsooreenkoms tussen Korea en Kanada het geleenthede vir marktoegang vir die seekosbedryf in Kanada geskep deur die hoë Koreaanse tariewe op alle seekos uit te skakel.

Die belangrikste inhoud van die seekosveld van die Korea-Kanada-vryhandelsooreenkoms is soos volg. Alle Koreaanse tariewe op seekosprodukte sal onder die vrye handelsooreenkoms tussen Korea en Kanada uitgeskakel word. Produkte wat voordeel trek uit die onmiddellike eliminasie van tariewe, sluit in bevrore kreef en vars, verkoelde en gerookte salm van die Stille Oseaan en die Atlantiese Oseaan. Voor die vryhandelsooreenkoms was daar 'n maksimum van 20% tariewe. Byna 70% van die seekostariewe sal binne 5 jaar na die inwerkingtreding van die Koreaanse-Kanada-vryhandelsooreenkoms uitgeskakel word, en alle oorblywende tariewe op seekos sal binne 12 jaar uitgeskakel word. Hierdie ooreenkoms sal die tarief van 16,5% uitskakel van die 47% gemiddelde tarief van Korea (vryhandelsooreenkoms tussen Kanada en Korea, 2014).

1.2 Die uitwerking van handelsbeleid in Suid -Korea op die drie tipes ekonomiese agente: verbruikers, produsente en die regering.

1.2.1 Regeringskant

Korea en Kanada sal 'n beter verhouding hê deur middel van FTA. Dit sal na verwagting handel en belegging verder uitbrei. Volgens 'n studie deur die Korea Institute for International Economic Policy, wanneer 'n FTA tussen Korea en Kanada alle tariefhindernisse en nie-tariefhindernisse tussen die twee lande uitskakel, word beraam dat die handelsvlak tussen die twee lande 1.8 keer sal toeneem vir die medium tot lang termyn. As gevolg van die ontleding van die ekonomiese groei en die gevolge van die welstand van verbruikers deur gebruik te maak van die berekenbare algemene ewewigsmodel wat gebruik word vir die ontleding van Korea-Amerikaanse vryhandelsooreenkoms en Korea-EU-vryhandelsooreenkoms, word die werklike BBP van Korea na raming met ongeveer 0,032%verhoog, en verbruikerswelstand is na raming ongeveer $ 358 miljoen bereik (Oh et al., 2013). Daarom word positiewe gevolge vir die makro -ekonomie verwag, vanweë die versekering van globale mededingendheid as gevolg van die komplementêre verhouding tussen die twee lande.

Deur voort te gaan met onderhandelinge oor vryhandelsooreenkomste met Kanada, een van die groep van agt, is dit moontlik om Koreaanse sterk wil bekend te maak, wat hervorming en openheid is, intern en ekstern, en om die wêreld te bevorder dat Koreaanse pogings om gevorderde lande te bou ( Kim, 2014). Daarom word verwag dat dit die aantrekkingskrag van buitelandse kapitaal sal versnel deur die versterking van die internasionale kredietwaardigheid.

Finally, a few years after this policy was implemented, it was announced that the policy's impact on Korea was positive. According to the Ministry of Trade and Industry in Korea, after the FTA took effect, Canada's investment in Korea from 2015 to 2017 was increased by 46.6% from 2012 to 2014, the last three years before its entry into force. In 2017, the trade volume between Korea and Canada also increased 10.6% over the previous year. Korean the amount of export fell 3.4 percent, but exports volumes rose 5.2 percent and Imports also rose 27.9% (Korea Policy Briefings, 2018).

1.2.2 Producers side

Tariffs elimination on seafood sector will demolish the entry barriers of the Korean seafood market and encourage Canadian seafood industries to enter the market more easily and quickly. This will result high competition in domestic and foreign producers. Companies with low competitiveness will not survive in the competitive market. This will frustrate the domestic seafood industry.

 The effects of imports on surplus

Figure 1 Customer& Producer surplus change after imports

  • Producer surplus before import= B+C
  • Producer surplus after import=C
  • Total surplus=A+B+C+D

Producer surplus is one of a measurement of producer welfare. Producer surplus is the difference between the actual amount the producer receives when the transaction is made and the amount the producer is willing to supply the goods. As amount of seafood imports increase, surplus of domestic producers will decrease due to price of seafood decreass. Therefore, increase seafood import affects the Korean producer&rsquos welfare negatively. Moreover, decline in production of seafood industry in South Korea due to the increase in imports of Canadian marine products is about 1 billion won annually, and 15 years cumulative is about 14.9 billion won, which is only 0.01% compared to the total production of marine products in South Korea. However, even if the decline in production is 0.01% of the total production of marine products, the decline has a negative impact on producers (Kim, 2014).

After the CKFTA in 2014, Canada became Korea's 13th largest supplier of seafood sector in

In 2015, Canada exported $60.5 million USD, an increase of 31.4% over 2014 (Chen, 2016). According to the chart above, Canada had a significant growth in market share, which is indicator of competitiveness, in the field of frozen seafood. Typically, frozen lobsters were 5.65% in 2014, but increased significantly to 17.69% in 2015. As Canada 's market share increases, it can mean a increase competitiveness of Canadian seafood industry and a decrease competitiveness of Korean domestic seafood industry.

However, there is not only negative side. The increase in import competition also brings active and ardent benefits by allowing domestic producers to be more efficient in order to compete foreign producers in low price market. Furthermore, lower prices can also have a positive impact on monetary policy. Since competition reduces the risk of inflation, central banks can pursue free monetary policy at low interest rates. These low rates help the investment and production sectors (Krist, 2019).

1.2.3 Consumer side

Declining prices and promiting competition by increase import expand consumer 's choice in terms of quality and quantity. As typical example, for lobster marine products, the supply is much higher than demand due to increasing imports of lobster increase as import tariffs disappear, so it causes supply surplus. As a result, prices will continue to fall until it reach equilibrium.As prices drop, purchasing power is increasing, so consumers can buy better or more products at the same price. Falling prices have substitution effects and income effects. The substitution effect is that customers want to buy more products because the products are cheaper than others. The income effect is that after a price drop, the consumer can buy the same product as before and there is still money to buy more. Demand increases as prices fall for two reasons (Greenlaw, Shapiro and Taylor, 2017.) Therefore, as demand increases in the future, prices will also increase followed demand.

 Demand-Supply graph for surplus caused by import

Figure 2 Surplus of seafood industry caused by imports

 The effects of imports on surplus

Figure 3 Customer& Producer surplus change after imports

  • Customer surplus before import= A
  • Customer surplus after import= A+B+D
  • Total surplus=A+B+C+D

The increase in imports due to the elimination of tariffs is cause increase in supply, so consumption surplus increases because the price drops as the import supply increases, as shown in the graph above. Consumer surplus is the difference between the maximum price a consumer is willing to pay and the actual price paid (Greenlaw, Shapiro and Taylor, 2017). If the actual market price is lower than the price that the consumer is currently thinking of and willing to pay, customer will get benefit from the purchased product. Moreover, consumers who generate huge benefits from product purchases are likely to purchase again in the future. Thus, consumers get better by increase seafood import. Therefore, increase seafood import affects Korean customer&rsquos welfare positively.

To sum up, the Government of the Republic of Korea will reduce the revenue of the government by removing tariffs on the seafood sector. However, as it explained earlier, this CKFTA is beneficial to the Korean government by gaining the other benefits that have a good impact on the country in the long term. Therefore, KCFTA is beneficial to government. However, producers in the Korean seafood sector gain disadvantage benefits, which are bigger than they gain benefits from KCFTA. Therefore, KCFTA is a disadvantage to producers. Finally, consumers in the Korean seafood sector can purchase a variety of products at a lower price, and as described above, the consumer surplus has increased, which has had a positive effect on the consumer welfare. The exact amount of surplus is not estimated, but theoretically, the total surplus is higher than before the import tariff is applied, which can be seen to have contributed to the economic efficiency of the Republic of Korea.

Trade liberalization was realized in 2012 by easing sanctions on Myanmar (Naing, 2014). Therefore, many foreign capital and products are being imported into Myanmar. In Myanmar, it is not easy to come up with reliable and recent statistics, but some estimate that between 2005 and 2011, food imports are estimated to have increased by 40% annually (Rushdy, 2017). Myanmar is too dependent on imported products, which can create a huse risk. If the import is too much higher than the exports, it can generate deficit on trade and decrease the value of the currency. Therefore, some Myanmarese support protectionist policies in order to protect and grow domestic company. However, now Myanmar's situation is that Myanmar is exporting its main products, such as natural gas, wood products, pulses and beans, fish, rice, clothing, jade and gems, at low prices and importing manufacturing and investment goods (Naing, 2014) . As shown from the list of export product, most of the products are not manufactured. This means Myanmar has low manufacturing capacity. This also means Myanmar has lack of technology and education. Therefore, Myanmar should not implement protectionist policies to learn Myanmar's lack part through successful forign company.

As one representative example, Myanmar's milk industry has many problems. These are high cost of milk and dairy products produced domestically, low skill level, low livestock industry training, low research and expansion capability, low quality, and lack of product (Lee et al., 2014). Furthermore, according to the Myanmar dairy sector, it also reports that milk and dairy product industry does not have ability to control tick-borne and other diseases, and the number of bacteria in milk is surprisingly high. Thus, this situation makes Myanmarese continues to increase dependence on imports products (Lee et al., 2014). Therefore, the milk and dairy product industry in Myanmar has a big challenge to solve many these problems and to develop the quality of fresh milk and dairy products. To solve this problem, however, this industry need to learn skills, technology, education, training and product awareness.

Free trade is one of best ways to give oppourtunity to domestic industry to learn. Numerous foreign investors will enter to Myanmar through free trade, which helps to add capital to expand the domestic industry and promote domestic business (Froning, 2000). It also has the advantage of expertise and technology transfer. Global companies have higher professionalism in developing local resources more than domestic companies. Moreover, Myanmar can take advantage of the technology trasfer and job training to local labour from foreign companies. Domestic companies will develope more and more by learnning from foreign companies which is successful cases. Furthermore, by this experience, domestic industry will grow fast and this will soon lead to economic growth.

In addition, current trend of Myanmar is to increase the use of milk and dairy products by the growing middle class. Myanmar's middle class is expected to double over the next eight years from 2014, so dairy consumption is expected to increase at a similar rate (Lee et al., 2014). If the domestic industry attract domestic imported dairy customers to turn to domestic companies' customers by improving productivity, technology, and product quality through foreign companies, domestic companies' growth and competitiveness will be extraordinarily increased. Therefore, Myanmar should not implement protectionism policies. It wiser to find ways to develop domestic industries through free trade to enhance their competitiveness.

In the 1980s, Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad in Malaysia launched Proton which is the only national automotive company in ASEAN. Furthermore, in 1982, the National Car Project was homologated and the Heavy Industries Corporation of Malaysia signed a contract with Mitsubishi Motors Corporation from Japan (Kuchiki and Tsuji, 2010). National Car Project is an industrial policie or selective government intervention policie to foster national industries. The government continued to protect and help to grow the Proton by providing numerous subsidies (Tong, Terpstra and Lim, 2012). Proton advancement under national protection was great.

Automobiles of Proton were exported to more than 50 countries in 1996. (Abidin, 2017). In 1996, Proton City was established with initial investment of RM2.5 billion, which is 60,820,000 USD, and own the RM1.8 billion Proton autombile assemply plant (Wikipedia, 2019). Moreover, the Malaysian government also set up investment barriers for foreign companies to protect national company, Proton, but they may have inhibitted foreign investors and interruptted foreign company directly(Kuchiki and Tsuji, 2010). Additionally, in 1998, Malaysia government imposed imported tariff at least 140% up to 300% on completely built up (CBU) vehicles to protect Proton (United States Trade Representative, n.d.). It also has been got a tax benefit for that citizens was induced to naturally buy Proton cars.

However, Proton, which seemed to be a winner, entered a decline after entering the 2000s. The economies of scale to achieve under infant industry protection have not been achieved in long term. In 2002, Proton canceled its contract with Mitsubishi Motors Corporation, which resulted reduction productive capacity and technology. This has had a major negative impact on

Proton. Proton, which was called National Car of Malaysia, had the highest sales in the

Malaysian market at about 90%, but in 2005 it declined to 24%. (Kuchiki and Tsuji, 2010).

Passenger car sales of Proton fell 30 percent from 166,118 cars in 2005 to 115,538 cars in 2006 (Abidin, 2017). Furthermore, its sales in 2016 were 72,290 cars, while Perodua, the same national automotive company, sold 207,110 units. Perodua's market share was 40%, when Proton took only 14% in 2016(Abidin, 2017).

Today, car import tariffs are 0% to 30% (MALAYSIA: DUTIES & TAXES ON MOTOR VEHICLES, 2018). This is certainly a lower tariff than when the government was fully supported Proton in the past. This indicates that protection and subsidies from government have begun to disintegrate. Unfortunately, Proton has significantly lower ability to compete with other automotive companies without government protection. Theoretically, the government's excessive infant industry protection policy provides a trap of comfort that makes infant industry reluctant to leave from protection. This company has grown externally but without government protection, it can not do anything like a child. Therefore, Infant Industry protection policy on Proton in Malaysia has failed. It has grown in the short run, but it is starting to collaps in the long run. This is a prime example of the fact that if external competition is totally excluded, laziness and numbness are promoted and this will cause the industry to suffer from threaten of surviving.

Abidin, I. (2017). The way forward for Proton. [online] New Straits Times. Available at: https://www.nst.com.my/news/2017/03/225472/way-forward-proton [Accessed 7 Jan. 2019].

Canada-Korea Free Trade Agreement. (2014). [ebook] Public Works and Government Services Canada, pp.7-20. Available at: https://international.gc.ca/tradecommerce/assets/pdfs/agreements-accords/ckfta-fas-saf-eng.pdf [Accessed 4 Jan. 2019].

Chen, M. (2016). Sector Trend Analysis Fish and Seafood Trends In South Korea. [ebook] Ottawa: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, p.2. Available at: http://www.agr.gc.ca/resources/prod/Internet-Internet/MISB-DGSIM/ATS-SEA/PDF/6798eng.pdf [Accessed 8 Jan. 2019]

Froning, D. (2000). The Benefits of Free Trade: A Guide For Policymakers. [online] The Heritage Foundation. Available at: https://www.heritage.org/trade/report/the-benefits-free-tradeguide-policymakers [Accessed 7 Jan. 2019].

Kim, Y. (2014). Expected Effects and Prospects of Korea-Canada FTA. [online] Korea Policy Briefings. Available at:

http://www.korea.kr/news/contributePolicyView.do?newsId=148775741 [Accessed 3 Jan. 2019].

Kim, Y. (2014). Meaning and Influence of Korea-Canadian FTA. [ebook] Sejong Metropolitan Autonomous City: Korea Economic Research Institute.

%EC%99%80_%EC%98%81%ED%96%A5.pdf [Accessed 6 Jan. 2019].

Korea Policy Briefings (2018). Canadian investment in Korea increased by 47% in three years after the FTA took effect. [online] Korea Policy Briefings, Sejong Metropolitan Autonomous City: Ministry of Trade and Industry. Available at: http://www.korea.kr/news/policyNewsView.do?newsId=148849253&pWise=sub&pWiseSub=B 12 [Accessed 3 Jan. 2019].

Kuchiki, A. and Tsuji, M. (2010). From agglomeration to innovation. Basingstoke [England]: Palgrave Macmillan, pp.25-26.

Krist, W. (2019). Chapter 3: Trade Agreements and Economic Theory. [online] Wilson Center. Available at: https://www.wilsoncenter.org/chapter-3-trade-agreements-and-economictheory [Accessed 5 Jan. 2019].

Lee, J., Jong, M., Thant, A., Oo, T., Lynn, P. and Ren, X. (2014). The Myanmar dairy sector. [online] Wageningen: Wageningen UR Livestock Research, pp.13-31. Available at: http://edepot.wur.nl/330602 [Accessed 5 Jan. 2019].

MALAYSIA: DUTIES & TAXES ON MOTOR VEHICLES. (2018). [ebook] Petaling Jaya:

Malaysian Automotive Association. Available at: http://www.maa.org.my/pdf/duties_taxes_on_motor_vehicles.pdf [Accessed 7 Jan. 2019].

Naing, D. (2014). Trade Policy Reform in Myanmar. [ebook] Bangkok: United Nations ESCAP, pp.1-6. Available at:

https://www.unescap.org/sites/default/files/Trade%20policy%20reform-Myanmar%20as%20of%2023%20Sept%2014.pdf [Accessed 4 Jan. 2019].

Rushdy, K. (2017). How Protectionism Can Save Myanmar. [online] HuffPost. Available at:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/karim-rushdy/myanmar-protectionism_b_6140778.html [Accessed 4 Jan. 2019].

Oh, S., Kim, Y., Kim, H. and Lee, J. (2013). The current status and economic meaning of

Korea-Canada FTA. [ebook] Sejong Metropolitan Autonomous City: Korean Institute for International Economic Policy. Available at: http://www.kiep.go.kr/sub/view.do?bbsId=localEcoFocus&nttId=185615 [Accessed 4 Jan.

Greenlaw, S., Shapiro, D. and Taylor, T. (2017). PRINCIPLES OF ECONOMICS 2E. [ebook] Montreal: Pressbook, pp.71-73, 133-146. Available at: https://opentextbc.ca/principlesofeconomics2eopenstax/chapter/how-changes-in-income-andprices-affect-consumption-choices/ [Accessed 9 Jan. 2019].

Tong, JT, Terpstra, R & Lim, N-CE 2012, 'Proton: Its rise, fall, and future prospects' Asian Case Research Journal, vol. 16, nee. 2, pp. 347 - 348. DOI: 10.1142/S0218927512500150.

United States Trade Representative (n.d.). MALAYSIA. MALAYSIA. [online] Washington:

United States Trade Representative, pp.298-299. Available at: https://ustr.gov/archive/assets/Document_Library/Reports_Publications/2001/2001_NTE_Report /asset_upload_file764_6582.pdf [Accessed 6 Jan. 2019].


International Liberty

The good news is that Donald Trump is not imitating all of Herbert Hoover’s statist policies.

The bad news, as I explain in this interview, is that his protectionist mistakes could trigger a repeat of Hoover’s beggar-thy-neighbor protectionism that wreaked havoc in the global economy during the 1930s.

George Santayana is famous for warning that “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

Well, this is why I’m so agitated about what Trump is doing. It’s true that the economy will not be wiped out by the trade taxes he’s imposing today. But what happens when other nations retaliate, and then Trump doubles down with additional taxes on global commerce?

That’s a potential recipe for a big reduction in worldwide liberty. Which is exactly what happened in the 1930s, as illustrated by this chart from an academic study.

At the risk of understatement, that would not be good for American prosperity. And blue-collar workers would be among the victims since protectionism always destroys more jobs than it saves.

So what can be done about this?

Die Washington Post reports on some bipartisan legislation that would curtail Trump’s authority to unilaterally destabilize world trade.

Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) introduced a bipartisan bill Wednesday that would give Congress new authority to check the president’s trade moves… Corker’s bill would require congressional approval when the president enacts tariffs under the auspices of national security, as Trump did last week in imposing levies on aluminum and steel imports from Canada, Mexico and the European Union. The legislation, which Corker released with a total of nine Democratic and Republican co-sponsors, is the most forceful congressional response to date to Trump’s protectionist trade agenda. …The bill’s prospects are unclear. Corker acknowledged that some Republicans are unwilling to cross the president, and Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has ruled out bringing up the measure as a stand-alone bill. But Corker’s bill appeared to be gaining traction on and off Capitol Hill on Wednesday. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce announced its support, as did Koch Industries. …Corker’s legislation would require the president to submit to Congress any proposal to adjust imports in the interest of national security. The legislation would qualify for expedited consideration for a 60-day period. …The co-sponsors are Republican Sens. Patrick J. Toomey (Pa.), Lamar Alexander (Tenn.), Mike Lee (Utah), Ron Johnson (Wis.) and Jeff Flake (Ariz.), along with Democrats Heidi Heitkamp (N.D.), Mark R. Warner (Va.), Brian Schatz (Hawaii) and Chris Van Hollen (Md.).

I’m sympathetic to such legislation, not only to thwart Trump’s protectionism, but also because I don’t think any White House should have so much unilateral power. In other words, I’m philosophically consistent. I didn’t think it was right for Obama to have the authority to arbitrarily change provisions of Obamacare and I don’t think it is right for Trump to have the authority to arbitrarily change provisions of trade law.

But let’s stick to the trade issue. Lower taxes on global commerce are one of the great achievements of post-World War II era. Policy makers around the world have lowered barriers and allowed the free market more breathing room.

That’s been a very successful policy.

By the way, politicians from developing nations deserve special credit. They’ve been especially aggressive in lifting the burden of trade taxes. Here’s a chart prepared by the Confederation of British Industry.

I started today’s column by warning that Trump shouldn’t emulate Hoover. I’ll end the column by pointing out that Reagan is a better role model.

And if that doesn’t work, maybe we can educate the President on why it’s good to have a capital surplus, which is the flip side of having a trade deficit.

Beoordeel hierdie:

Deel dit:

Soos hierdie:

Verwante

41 Responses

[…] last time the United States made a big push for protectionism was in the 1930s. At the risk of understatement, that was not an era of […]

[…] but it’s not looking good. He not only has a bad record on big issues such as spending and trade, but he also is prone to cronyist policies in other […]

[…] In other words, lower tax rates and less red tape have more than offset the pain of protectionism. […]

[…] It would be much better, as I discuss in this interview with Yahoo Finance, if Trump instead declared a ceasefire in the trade wars he’s started. […]

[…] say they’re imposing taxes on other countries, but people (consumers, workers, investors) are the victims. In the latter case, politicians say they’re imposing taxes on corporations, but people […]

[…] I’m tempted to also warn that Trump’s risky protectionism may lead to a victory for Crazy Bernie or some other Democrat in 2020. But Trump does have some […]

[…] Donald Trump is an incoherent mix of good policies and bad policies. […]

[…] some people complain that this is akin to disarmament in a hostile world. I reject that analogy. If my neighbor shoots himself in the foot, I’ve never thought I should “level the playing […]

[…] But the “unseen” costs are always far greater. […]

[…] Theory teaches us that government intervention is a recipe for economic harm. And we certainly have painful history showing the adverse consequences of […]

[…] some people complain this is akin to disarmament in a hostile world. I reject that analogy. If my neighbor shoots himself in the foot, I’ve never thought I should “level the […]

[…] what’s been happening thanks to the WTO (and GATT, the predecessor pact). Here’s a chart prepared by the Confederation of British Industry, which shows how trade barriers have been continuously dropping. And dropping most rapidly in other […]

[…] Trump’s view of global trade is so bizarre, risky, uninformed, misguided, and self-destructive that I periodically try to maintain my sanity by […]

[…] Since the video mentioned Santa sneaking in the country and evading tariffs, here’s a cartoon strip featuring a protectionist Scrooge. […]

[…] last time the United States made a big push for protectionism was in the 1930s. At the risk of understatement, that was not an era of […]

[…] big missteps are protectionism and fiscal profligacy, but he also does small things that are […]

[…] Great Depression was a very painful example of what happens when protectionists are in […]

[…] I’m embarrassed to admit that I forget to mention protectionism as another are where Trump is pushing in the wrong direction. […]

[…] Trump imposes protectionist trade barriers, he doesn’t realize that the harm imposed on other nations is matched by damage to the U.S. […]

[…] The bottom line is that Trump’s protectionism is bad policy. And risky policy. […]

[…] all worlds is for trade liberalization to happen simultaneously in all countries, and negotiations have produced considerable progress since the end of World War II, so I’m somewhat agnostic about the best […]

[…] if Trump goes really crazy with his protectionism (and he has lots of bad policies under consideration – dealing with NAFTA, auto trade, China, steel and aluminum, etc), then […]

[…] Remember the big debate about whether Trump was a closet free trader or a crude protectionist? […]

[…] a debate in Washington about what President Trump really thinks about trade. Is he a crude protectionist or closet free […]

[…] Simply stated, I like what Trump is doing on taxes and regulation, but I’m not a fan of what he’s doing on spending and trade. […]

[…] from the report showing the policies that help and the policies that hurt. Needless to say, it would be good if the White House understood that protectionism is one of the factors that undermine […]

[…] very irked by what Trump is doing on trade, government spending, and cronyism, but I give credit where credit is due. I suspect none of the […]

[…] what he’s doing on trade, he needs to boost his other grades as much as […]

[…] By starting a trade war, President Trump is playing with matches in a gunpowder factory. Other nations are retaliating, creating the risk of escalating tit-for-tat protectionism. […]

[…] be great news for the global economy. And it would be much better than a potentially dangerous tit-for-tat trade war, which seems to be where we’re heading […]

[…] Sadly, Trump seems oblivious to these concerns. So, just like 80 years ago, we’re heading down the tit-for-tat path. […]

[…] When Trump unilaterally imposes higher taxes on trade, other nations almost always respond with tit-for-tat protectionism. And when these other nations target American products, that necessarily reduces […]

[…] ago, I shared a segment from a TV interview about trade and warned that retaliatory tariffs were a painful consequence of Trump’s […]

[…] also a political case against protectionism because governments almost always respond to protectionism with […]

[…] A tit-for-tat global trade war that would repeat the mistakes of the 1930s. […]

[…] tit-for-tat global trade war that would repeat the mistakes of the […]

[…] and Trump partisans won’t like this column, but the sad reality is that both Obamacare and Trump’s protectionism have a lot in […]

[…] the second line is the most relevant since other nations will respond with their own destructive trade […]

[…] the election. And I didn’t change my tune once he got to the White House. I’ve written several columns bemoaning his protectionist approach, including a piece just two days ago where I criticized the […]

[…] protectionism is deeply troubling. It threatens American prosperity and could lead to tit-for-tat protectionism that caused so much damage to the global economy in the […]

I’m quite ambivalent about the tariffs.

On principle, of course, I am against free market distorting tariffs.

I’m also half amused by smug intellectual European politicians (who supposedly understand trade much better than our own simpleton president) applying revengeful counter-tariffs, as if that were something that moderates the damage. It is like an intellectual writer, who supposedly knows much better, who stops buying fish from the fisherman because the simpleton refuses to buy his sophisticated books. You may get some satisfaction, as idiotic duelers may have once said, but you are essentially adding damage to damage. There’s something weird when you do that as a smug intellectual who supposedly knows better.

But let’s return to why I’m ambivalent about the Trump tariffs….

I’m ambivalent about the tariffs because, from a tactical point of view I am more afraid of world harmonization into an ecumenical global government, global laws, and global culture.

Global trade tensions, as well as the other tensions they will precipitate, will significantly help us move away or at least stall the process of transition towards global governance by OECD, IMF, climate change and environmental commissars, G7s, G8s, G20s, unified laws and universal culture — all twenty first century vehicles of a new kind of totalitarianism. BTW, I think that many nations sense this new oppression and that’s why there’s upheaval amongst many electorates but they grossly misinterpret the causes and most often take actions in the wrong direction, making the situation worse, by supporting even bigger statists like Marine Le Pen.

In other words, I think globalization of competition is good, however global harmonization and homogenization of government, regulation, and laws, is bad — way bad.

Consequently, I think that the globalization of commerce, capital and people movement, is a great thing. Because it encourages competition and a multipronged approach to human advancement. Globalization of laws, regulations and culture is bad because it imposes a one size fits all dirigiste authoritarian straightjacket — be it labeled “progressive” or not.

So, in summary, I think that a few bad tariffs may not be that bad if they help prevent something worse.

Having said that I’m aware of the dangers and pitfalls of placing strategy before morals (morals to me are long term utility, as I’ve opined in the past).

Hence my ambivalence about the tariffs and the international animosity they

So, to the question : “Can’t we all just get along” — and be ruled by an ecumenical French style government ? I say no — thank heavens we cannot all just get along!

So, in my fantasy, I see Trump doing this as part of this greater plan against the globalization of government, laws, taxes and culture, and see Trump as a genius (ok, I said, it is just a fantasy, but I sometimes enjoy thinking it’s true).

Now, most voters, deep inside, are opposed to free trade for different reasons, which is accelerating the decline and eventual demise of currently advanced democracies.

Deep down in their primal instincts most voters fear competition, and thus even more so fear the globalization of competition because of their inner insecurities. This insecurity is partially justified. After all who feels the most competent person in the world, even in their own fields of expertise? What they don’t understand is that true free market competition creates such an abundance of jobs that there are plenty of positions– even for the less competent. In other words, even if you are not that competent you can still find a great job. Those more competent are extremely unlikely to “steal” your job, because those more competent have already been hired or are just busy doing even more important and impactful things — and still there are yet more openings than people to fill them even at those higher levels. In other words a truly dynamic free market creates way more jobs than there are people available to fill them in — and nearly everyone, whether competent or not, is much better off. Exponentially better off as high growth compounds into mythical riches and capabilities with time — a rather short time — an an ever shorter time now that humanity is irreversibly moving faster than ever. Human advancement is reaching escape velocity…

PS. The US is playing down its relationship with Europe and that is a good thing. Or at least it is an inevitable thing since Europe (with a structural growth rate way below world average) is in irreversible arithmetically deterministic decline, and so Europe’s economy will keep representing an ever smaller percentage of total world economic activity. That is realpolitik on behalf of the American president. The problem is that due to accumulation of progressive policies on this side of the Atlantic, the US is facing the same fate as its old continent brethren :decline — albeit with some delay and at a slower rate. But the end result will be the same unless the country changes course — doubtful. Countries under the stress of decline typically double down on coercive collectivism as resentment imposes the forceful recruitment of individual to serve the cause of perceived communal goals.


Kyk die video: Wat veroorzaakt al die chaos in je hoofd? (Januarie 2022).