To: craig crawford who wrote (1104 ) 3/19/2002 1:39:22 AM From: Dan B. Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1643 Craig, don't be blind to the fact that your own posted sources tell us that prior to the removal of tariffs, the British people often suffered greatly to afford food, whereas after the lifting of the tariffs- with a 50% greater population to feed in place by 1871 to boot and farmers(as expected) moving to the cities for lack of farming profit- approximately noone suffered for food as often happened in the past. Isolate that, and think about it. No fantasy, no utopia, but fed people. You'll clearly have to back off of responding to my contentions with indications that repeal of tariffs almost starved Britian to death, let alone your notion that they'd eaten well prior, WITH the tariffs. Just wasn't so, right? Right. I repeat, farm output declined while population rose by 50%, yet Britian, I can fairly say, fed its people better, by all your accounts, than it had with tariffs. I happen to think this was a good thing. OK? Look honestly too, at the job loss resulting FROM tariffs. Steel will now cost more, and will thus be used less than otherwise desired. Steel using industries aren't just whistling dixie when they decry the job loss the Bush tariffs will bring. Who will suffer? Who will get the steel they need at any price, yet have less funds left to spend elsewhere in an otherwise more diverse job-creating fashion. There, I've outlined loss of jobs on two fronts, resulting FROM tariffs. Factor it in. It's also good, I might point out, that the world allows us some titanium. We don't have any. May you come to understand the fire you play with, when you play with tariffs. Dan B