|
I knew it would fall out this way, too, but HIP HIP HOORAY!!!! (Sorry for the shouting, but it is nice when common sense wins the day every once in a while, even if it is purely fortuitous.)
Ever since I studied economics, I have viewed tariffs thusly;
You impose an embargo on some nation because you think that economic sanctions will impose some kind of hardship. Unfortunately, that hardship is never on the government -- they can just tax the serfs to pay for the added cost of doing business. The common people get hurt because they cannot get cheaper goods from other nations, then they get whacked again when the gov't raises taxes to pay thier bills.
So if indeed embargos are Bad ThingsTM, why, oh why would any nation voluntarily impose a tariff, quota or other restriction, in effect a mini-embargo, upon itself? Oh, yes, because it doesn't affect the government. It ly affects the people, and that can be propagandized as some evil action of some evil other nation.
[EDIT]
I do find it ironic that this body, who allegedly stands for free trade, decided that in response to trade restrictions, there should be other restrictions. Hey, if the US civilian population has to pay more for their steel, why shouldn't European civilians have to pay more for their goods, too...
[/EDIT]
[EDIT2]
Don't get me started on our "farm" subsidies. Over 60% of it goes to "farmers" such as David Rockefeller (yes, of that Rockefeller family), The Hartford Insurance Group, 66 members of Congress, including 3 multi-millionaires, Sam Donaldson and Scottie Pippin. The Environmental Working Group put up a page with the names of the recipients, and it was eye-opening to say the least...
[/EDIT2]
[ 03-27-2003, 07:22 PM: Message edited by: Thorfinn ]
|