Another principle of Free Trade was that if it was thought advisable
to put a tariff on to anything coming into the country which could be
produced in the country, then you would have to put what was called
“_an equivalent excise_” on the thing produced at home. For instance,
in order to get revenue, one might put a tax of a 1d. on the pound
on sugar coming from Germany, but, according to the doctrine of Free
Trade, you must put a similar excise (that is, a home tax of 1d. on the
pound) upon any sugar produced in England. If you did not do that you
would be benefiting the sugar manufacturer in England at the expense
of all other Englishmen, which would be unjust and also make England
less wealthy because it would be inducing Englishmen to make sugar by
offering them a reward and so take them away from some production for
which they were better fitted.
This idea, that Free Trade must necessarily be of advantage to
everybody, and that it was only stupidity or private avarice which
supported Protection, was very strong in England, and, in the form you
have just read, it seems beyond contradiction.
But if you will look closely at Formula No. 3 written in the last
division on page 59 you will see that there is a fallacy hidden in this
universal Free Trade theory. It is perfectly true that free exchange
over any area tends to make the wealth of all that area greater, and
if the area include the whole world, then free exchange all over the
whole world, that is, complete Free Trade, would make the world as a
whole richer.
_But it does not follow that_ EACH PART _of the area thus made richer
is itself enriched_. That is the important point which the Free Trade
people missed, and it is this which supports, in some cases, the
argument for Protection.
If we allow free exchange everywhere throughout England, England as a
whole will, of course, be the richer for it; but it is quite possible
that Essex will be the poorer. If we allow Free Trade throughout all
Europe, Europe will be the richer for it; but it is quite possible that
some particular part of Europe, Italy or Spain, may be made poorer by
the general process, and as they don’t want to be poorer they will
by Protection and tariffs cut themselves off from the area of free
exchange.
=There are conditions where an interference with free exchange over
the boundaries of a particular area make that area richer: when those
conditions exist, there is what is called an Economic Reason for
Protection.=
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account