Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Commodities - The Coming Bull Market -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: maceng2 who wrote (1103)	3/16/2002 5:00:27 PM
From: craig crawford	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1643

>> If the USA continually resorts to the tariff weapon (such as the lumber trade with Canada) You can bet your bottom dollar that other countries will resort to the same trick with trade against the USA, or conspire to use some other methods to negate it's effect on their trade. << here comes the same old argument again. america is the one starting the trade war and america is the one antagonizing everyone by resorting to protectionist measures. no one ever seems to consider that our foreign trading partners may be employing various forms of protection in an attempt to gain an advantage over us -- and we are the ones justified in retaliating. the appeasement crowd always howls that imposing tariffs is going to start a trade war and bring on massive retaliation which will hurt everyone. so should we just unilaterally practice free trade and let our foreign competitors take advantage of us? as i have said before, they have more to lose from a trade war than we do. negotiate peace through strength, not unilateral disarmament. appeasement in economic warfare doesn't work any better than appeasement in military warfare.