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: Dan B. who wrote (1272)	5/17/2002 3:33:51 PM
From: craig crawford	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1643

>> I will consider the actual results of free trade, too...and they are simply great. << free trade was a disaster for britain and is proving a disaster for the united states. >> You have jumped to misrepresent history to attack my opinion when I've said free trade allowed the British people to better feed themselves << nah, i think we just misunderstood each other. when i suggested that britain couldn't feed itself after the repeal of the corn laws i wasn't saying they starved, i was saying that they had to rely on others to feed them--food imports. britain had produced 90% of their own food before the repeal of the corn laws, yet by world war one britain could only feed a quarter of the population themselves. they had to rely on imports for the other 3/4. >> You spoke of the "conservative" party which voted mainly against Tariffs, << i think you are mistaken. the conservatives voted more than 2 to 1 against repeal of the corn laws. they were in favor of tariffs. >> but a quick look at history shows that this very party was the one which had long rejected rights for individuals, while the then "liberal" party in fact worked against imperial rule and FOR individual rights << i don't dispute this either. like i have said, free trade is a classically liberal stance. "Classical liberals view economics from the standpoint of the individual; the Marxist sees things in terms of classes; the traditionalist has an organic view of society and subordinates economics to the nation." -- Robert Gilpin >> In fact Craig, the man who tried unsuccessfully(as you pointed out) to get this early "conservative" party to vote against tariffs, had a personal history of following the likes of Adam Smith's free trade ideas, ...and he(clearly supporting free trade) is called the father of the modern Conservative party. << you confused me here. i thought disraeli was considered the father of the modern conservative party. disraeli was against the repeal of the corn laws, i.e. in favor of tariffs. "The "Manchester School" was the term British politician Benjamin Disraeli used to refer to the 19th Century free trade movement in Great Britain. The movement had its roots in the Anti-Corn Law League (ACLL) of Richard Cobden and John Bright, headquartered in Newall's Buildings in Manchester, UK...Since then, the general term "Manchester School" has been used to refer to radical liberalism/libertarianism in economic policy: laissez-faire, free trade, government withdrawal from the economy, and an optimistic stress on the "harmonious" effects of free enterprise capitalism." cepa.newschool.edu "But his repeal (1846) of the corn laws brought about an angry reaction from protectionist agricultural interests, led by Lord George Bentinck and Benjamin Disraeli, and resulted in a party split" bartleby.com