-
Obama’s Labor Department Shakes Down AP
June 6, 2013 | 1 comment
-
Leftists Off-Message: Liberal Think Tank Praises Maggie Thatcher
April 11, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Obama’s Gun-Grabbing Judge Nominee Implodes
March 28, 2013 | 1 comment
-
Obama’s Radical, Tasteless Defilement of 9/11
September 9, 2011 | 5 comments
-
Vadum vs Thom Hartmann on Registering the Poor to Vote (Cloward-Piven Strategy)
September 8, 2011 | 3 comments
The Spectacle Blog
As I wrote previously, it seems as if the disastrous Smoot-Hawley protectionist statute has been quietly revived. Protectionism has come back to America, and only now have we begun to notice.
Predictably, the Canadian Federation of Municipalities has endorsed a plan to support communities that refuse to buy products from countries that slap trade restrictions on Canadian products and services, Reuters reports:
The measure is a response to a provision in the U.S. economic stimulus package passed by Congress in February that says public works projects should use iron, steel and other goods made in the United States.
The United States is Canada’s largest trading partner, and Canadians have complained the restrictions will bar their companies from billions of dollars in business that they have previously had access to.
“This U.S. protectionist policy is hurting Canadian firms, costing Canadian jobs and damaging Canadian efforts to grow our economy in the midst of a worldwide recession,” said Sherbrooke, Quebec, Mayor Jean Perrault, also president of the federation that represents cities and towns across Canada. […]
It’s only going to get worse.
View all comments (20) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Matthew Vadum
http://spectator.org/blog/2009/06/07/smoot-hawley-lives
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Overheated Frauds and Fools
- Back in the Fray
- His Reach Exceeded His Grasp
The Spectacle Blog
Democrat Dan Maffei Blames Budget Cuts for Girl’s Rape, Mother’s Murder
Robert Stacy McCain | 6.18.13
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Oldefarte| 6.7.09 @ 11:35AM
Additionally, this disguised protectionism is most probably in violation of the NAFTA trade agreement-------oh well, dictators can do just about anything they wish, until such time as their stupid voting populations wake up and realize who and what these dictators truly are!!!!
Sean| 6.7.09 @ 2:28PM
Well who has the most clout in a trade war Canada or the US? We could crush them in a trade war. I think in this instance government money should not be spent at all, but if it is it should be spent in the US.
Also before we can have true free trade abroad we must have free trade in the US. Why are we trying to restrict the use of mail for tobacco products from outside the country and between the states? Could it be to protect high tax states?
Bob| 6.7.09 @ 3:06PM
Vadum -- this is one of those few occasions on which we agree. Protectionism is a dangerous precedent. The "buy American" provisions of the stimulus bill are clearly protectionist in nature. On the other hand, we need to deal with FAIR trade. When the Chinese subsidize their steel industry and have steep tariffs on rice, we must respond in kind without hesitation and be clear about what we have done. On this topic, the Obama administration does scare me.... But then again, the Bush administration was also too easy on Chinese trade....
ds80| 6.7.09 @ 9:56PM
Pssst. Bob ....
Bush aint prez no mo'.
Let it go.
Angel| 6.8.09 @ 12:28AM
'Good Republican' Bob strikes again.
Roy| 6.8.09 @ 1:59AM
In a "trade war", both sides lose, Sean. Let's say Canada loses 30% of their GNP and the US only loses 10%... ok we "crushed" them but..yeah, it still kind of stinks.
Bob| 6.8.09 @ 8:19AM
ds80 -- it doesn't surprise me that you missed the point. The point is that ALL administrations seem to have weak knees when it comes to standing up to trade fairness, i.e., it is NOT an ideology thing. We need to stand up for our country when we are treated unfairly.
JP| 6.8.09 @ 9:07AM
Free Trade is not a zero sum game when one's GDP depends the export of hundreds of billions of dollars of its goods. Canada has a relatively small population. Yet, we exports large amounts of goods and services to them. Canada could more easily replace the US than vice versa. The MSM and various cause groups have painted a picture that indicates that the US no longer exports anything other than Molly Cyrus and Big Macs. This is far from the truth. We export billions in foods, processed foods, telecom, machine tools, IT services and hardware/software, areospace products, automobiles, financial services, lumber, cement and other building materials, not mention entertainment, steel, and precison instruments. In each one of these areas, we have overseas competitors who would love to replace us. If Canada slaps on a tarriff in response to our own monkey business, we lose.
Both parties have been guilty of protectionism, just as there are free trade proponents in both parties. California would be the biggest state to lose out.
Tim| 6.8.09 @ 9:28AM
What the hayell does this administration have against Canada?
Maybe they should start a nuclear weapons program, that would get them some respect.