- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Smoot-Hawley Tariffs Demonstrates the Horrible Impact of Tariffs and BATs
Posted on 3/19/17 at 11:27 am
Posted on 3/19/17 at 11:27 am
LINK
Will Trump be Another Hubert Hoover?
More commentary
Hoover's Folly--will Trump do the same?
quote:
The Commercial and Financial Chronicle dated June 21, 1930 led off with the major events of the week –”the signing by the President of the Smoot-Hawley tariff bill” and “a renewed violent collapse of the stock market.” Without ever quite linking the two events, the Chronicle did observe that “if the foreigner cannot sell his goods to us he cannot obtain the wherewithal to buy our goods.” Other sections noted that international stocks were particularly hard hit, that 35 nations had vigorously protested the tariff and threatened retaliation, and that Canada and other nations had already hiked their own tariffs “in view of the likelihood of such legislation in the United States.”
It may be hard to realize how international trade could have so much impact on the domestic economy. For years, in explaining income movements in the Thirties, attention has instead been focused on federal spending and deficits. Yet on the face of it, trade was far more important: exports fell from $7 billion in 1929 to $2.5 billion in 1932; federal spending was only $2.6 billion in 1929 and $3.2 billion in 1932. In 1929, exports accounted for nearly seven percent of our national production, and a much larger share of the production of goods (as opposed to services). Trade also accounted for 15 to 17 percent of farm income in 1926-29, and farm exports were slashed to a third of their 1929 level by 1933.
Even these numbers, however, understate the significance of trade. Critical portions of the U.S. production process can be crippled by a high tax on imported materials. Other key industries are heavily dependent on exports. Disruptions in trade patterns then ripple throughout the economy. A tariff on linseed oil hurt the U.S. paint industry, a tariff on tungsten hurt steel, a tariff on casein hurt paper, a tariff on mica hurt electrical equipment, and so on. Over eight hundred things used in making automobiles were taxed by Smoot-Hawley. There were five hundred U.S. plants employing sixty thousand people to make cheap clothing out of imported wool rags; the tariff on wool rags rose by 140 per cent.
Foreign countries were flattened by higher U.S. tariffs on things like olive oil (Italy), sugar and cigars (Cuba), silk (Japan), wheat and butter (Canada). The impoverishment of foreign producers reduced their purchases of, say, U.S. cotton, thus bankrupting both farmers and the farmers’ banks.
It should be obvious that an effective limit on imports also reduces exports. Without the dollars obtained by selling here, foreign countries could not afford to buy our goods (or to repay their debts). From 1929 to 1932, U.S. imports from Germany fell by $181 million; U.S. exports to Germany fell by $277 million. Americans also had little use for foreign currency, since foreign goods were subject to prohibitive tariffs, so the dollar was artificially costly in terms of other currencies. That too depressed our exports, which turned out to be particularly devastating to farmers-the group that was supposed to benefit from the tariffs.
There had already been some damage done (particularly to farm exports) by the tariff legislation of 1921 and 1922. As Princeton historian Arthur Link points out, however, “its only important changes were increased protection for aluminum, chemical products, and agricultural commodities.” Smoot-Hawley broadened the list to include 3,218 items (including sauerkraut), and 887 tariffs were sharply increased, on everything from Brazil nuts to strychnine. Clocks had faced a tariff of 45 percent; Smoot-Hawley raised that to 55 percent, plus up to $4.50 apiece. Tariffs on corn, butter, and unimproved wools were roughly doubled. A shrinking list of tariff-free goods no longer included “junk,” though leeches and skeletons were still exempt.
A crucial consideration is that many tariffs were a specific amount of money per unit rather than a percentage of the price. As prices of many traded goods fell by half (or more) from 1929 to 1933, the effective rate of tariff doubled. If imported felt hats sold for $5, including a tariff of $2.50, a fall in price to $2.50 would confiscate the entire revenue from selling in the U.S. market. Without the dollars from selling in the U.S. market, the foreign hat manufacturer couldn’t buy anything here.
Will Trump be Another Hubert Hoover?
quote:
But trade is also vital to American jobs. A Heritage Foundation study finds that “international trade has boosted annual U.S. income by at least 10 percentage points of GDP relative to what it would have been without global trade, which translates into an aggregate gain of at least $1.7 trillion in 2013, or an average gain of more than $13,600 per U.S. household per year.” Free trade is also the greatest antidote to poverty and deprivation in the world’s history. Over the past three decades, according to the World Bank and other sources, the spread of free trade has lowered abject, dollar-a-day poverty by nearly 1 billion people.
Read more at: https://www.nationalreview.com/article/423141/donald-trump-21st-century-protectionist-herbert-hoover-stephen-moore-larry-kudlow
More commentary
Hoover's Folly--will Trump do the same?
quote:
In 1930, Herbert Hoover signed the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act into law. As the world entered the early phases of the Great Depression, the measure was intended to protect American jobs and farmers. Ignoring warnings from global trade partners, the new law placed tariffs on goods imported into the U.S. which resulted in retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods exported to other countries. By 1934, U.S. imports and exports were reduced by more than 50% and many Great Depression scholars have blamed the tariffs for playing a substantial role in amplifying the scope and duration of the Great Depression. The United States paid a steep price for trying to protect its workforce through short-sighted political expedience.
This post was edited on 3/19/17 at 11:27 am
Posted on 3/19/17 at 12:44 pm to I B Freeman
Massive tariffs during a worldwide depression will tend to have negative impacts.
Posted on 3/19/17 at 12:47 pm to udtiger
quote:
Massive tariffs during a worldwide depression will tend to have negative impacts.
Many consider them to be the cause of the continued depression.
Posted on 3/19/17 at 12:49 pm to udtiger
quote:
Massive tariffs during a worldwide depression will tend to have negative impacts.
you don't say?
Posted on 3/19/17 at 1:02 pm to I B Freeman
S/H was not the ONLY reason for the GD.
There was a HUGE bubble in the stock market. Stocks were hugely over valued.
Farmers were producing huge amounts of grain and other agri-products with no where to sell them.
There was huge 'asset' bubbles in the roaring 1920s.
There was a HUGE bubble in the stock market. Stocks were hugely over valued.
Farmers were producing huge amounts of grain and other agri-products with no where to sell them.
There was huge 'asset' bubbles in the roaring 1920s.
Posted on 3/19/17 at 1:02 pm to udtiger
If it's not during a depression, additional taxes are OK by you?
Posted on 3/19/17 at 1:04 pm to I B Freeman
Good point. In addition to retaliatory tariffs can't people realize that US consumers suffer from imposing tariffs?
Posted on 3/19/17 at 1:20 pm to cwill
quote:
If it's not during a depression, additional taxes are OK by you?
My point was that S/H was the shitshow it is known for because of the economic conditions in which it was passed.
If the world economy is blowing and going, it would not have that degree of negative impact. Would it slow economic growth? To a degree, certainly.
Posted on 3/19/17 at 1:48 pm to I B Freeman
It's amazing to me how defenders of free trade uber alles have an understanding of trade history that begins in 1929.
Posted on 3/19/17 at 1:49 pm to I B Freeman
Always thought it was the Hawley-Smoot tariff...
Posted on 3/19/17 at 1:51 pm to I B Freeman
> saying tariffs are a terrible idea when you're a major exporter
> applying that to an argument when you're a major importer trying to build up domestic industry
Muh false equivalence
> applying that to an argument when you're a major importer trying to build up domestic industry
Muh false equivalence
Posted on 3/19/17 at 1:59 pm to I B Freeman
Trump follows the Hoover model. Exactly why Trumpnomics is destined to fail
Posted on 3/19/17 at 2:07 pm to udtiger
quote:
My point was that S/H was the shitshow it is known for because of the economic conditions in which it was passed.
If the world economy is blowing and going, it would not have that degree of negative impact. Would it slow economic growth? To a degree, certainly.
I was just wondering what argument you were going to tee up when the new taxes (tariffs) are passed?
Posted on 3/19/17 at 2:20 pm to I B Freeman
Trump's 45% tariff on chinese goods. So much fail.
He should just refuse all chinese goods until yuan is priced 4x current value against dollar. That puts focus and onus where it belongs.
He should just refuse all chinese goods until yuan is priced 4x current value against dollar. That puts focus and onus where it belongs.
Posted on 3/19/17 at 2:34 pm to cokebottleag
Stock market crashes late Oct 1929.
Economies all over the world, including the US, start contracting.
S/H was passed and signed into law June 1930, 8 months AFTER the Wall Street crash.
S/H was a bill that languished in the US House for months PRIOR to Oct 1929.
So was S/H finally passed in reaction to the Wall Street Crash of 1929?
Economies all over the world, including the US, start contracting.
S/H was passed and signed into law June 1930, 8 months AFTER the Wall Street crash.
S/H was a bill that languished in the US House for months PRIOR to Oct 1929.
So was S/H finally passed in reaction to the Wall Street Crash of 1929?
Posted on 3/19/17 at 4:12 pm to Reubaltaich
I don't even know what the point of your question is.
SH was passed, sure. But up until the 1920s, we had much higher tariffs. For more than a hundred years.
Did we die?
SH was passed, sure. But up until the 1920s, we had much higher tariffs. For more than a hundred years.
Did we die?
Posted on 3/19/17 at 4:31 pm to I B Freeman
So tariffs are working out for all those other countries? But wont for us?
Hell, China has entire ghost cities, because they have so much change left over, they don't know what to do with it.
And their tariffs? Up to 25% on some American products
Hell, China has entire ghost cities, because they have so much change left over, they don't know what to do with it.
And their tariffs? Up to 25% on some American products
Posted on 3/19/17 at 5:11 pm to cokebottleag
quote:
Did we die?
No, we embraced free trade.
Posted on 3/19/17 at 5:11 pm to League Champs
quote:
So tariffs are working out for all those other countries? But wont for us?
Hell, China has entire ghost cities, because they have so much change left over, they don't know what to do with it.
And their tariffs? Up to 25% on some American products
You want to live in China?
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News