United States or Senegal ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
I shall try, by paraphrasing certain recent addresses of an able personal friend and enthusiastic protectionist, to illustrate the position taken by those persons who advocate the tariff, not upon economic grounds, but in the avowed interests of labor. Referring to the words "Free Trade," the speaker in question begins by asking, "What is the essential nature of that which we call trade?"
He then proceeded to deliver an ordinary protectionist speech; without, however, entering upon the questioner constitutional right. He merely dwelt upon the great benefits to be derived from affording to our infant manufactures "immediate and ample protection." That the Constitution interposed no obstacle, was assumed by him throughout.
Mackenzie was opposed to the principle of protection, and announced the determination of the government to adhere to a revenue tariff instead of resorting to any protectionist policy, which would, in his opinion, largely increase the burdens of the people under the pretence of stimulating manufactures. As a consequence of his unbending fidelity to the principles of his life, Mr.
The Liberals, the traditional upholders of freer trade, after some initial redemptions of their pledges, had compromised with the manufacturing interests. The Conservatives, still more protectionist in temper, voiced in Parliament little criticism of this policy, and the free trade elements among the farmers were as yet unorganized and inarticulate.
This was aided by Brussels' lukewarm welcome, discriminatory and protectionist practices, and bureaucratic indecisiveness. These worrisome tendencies are balanced by the inertia of the process. Politicians of all colors are committed to the European project. Carping aside, the countries of central Europe stand to reap significant economic benefits from their EU membership.
Any misunderstandings that may have for a moment irritated him seemed forgotten; he appeared conscious that he possessed the confidence and cordial regard of the great majority of the Protectionist party, although he chose to occupy a private post, and he was proud of the consciousness.
The time has passed for any public man to claim credit for "consistency." A person who, after forty years of public life, can truly say that he has never changed an opinion, must be either a demigod or a fool. We do not blame Mr. Calhoun for ceasing to be a protectionist and becoming a free-trader; for half the thinking world has changed sides on that question during the last thirty years.
Have you ever known a man of first-rate intellect in this country who was a Protectionist?" MARGOT: "I never thought of it, but Lord Milner is the only one I can think of for the moment." He entirely agreed with me and said: "No, you need not be anxious. Free Trade will always win against Protection in this country. This will not be the trouble of the future." MARGOT: "Then what will be?"
What difference, then, is it possible to discover between the petitioners of Bordeaux and the advocate of American restriction? One alone: the greater or less extent given to the word labor. The protectionist extends it to everything so he wishes to protect everything.
It is impossible not to admire the courage, the sound sense, and the elevation with which Cobden thus strove to diffuse the doctrine of moral responsibility in connection with the use of capital. In 1852, a Protectionist Ministry under Lord Derby came into power, and the Anti-Corn Law League was revived.
Word Of The Day