Videoda söylenenler

I've already referred to the misleading terminology of protection. But when people talk about a favorable balance of trade, what is that term taken to mean? It's taken to mean that we export more than we import. But from the point of view of our well-being, that's an unf avorable balance. That means we're sending out more goods and getting fewer in. Each of you in your private household would know better than that. You don't regard it as a favorable balance when you have to send out more goods to get less coming in. It's favorable when you can get more by sending out less. This tendency to concentrate on the productive side of our lives and to neglect the side of consumption is reinforced by the fact that even for the productive side of our lives, the visible effects of tariffs are good, the invisible effects of tariffs are bad. Even on the productive side. I have already referred to the steel case. It's perfectly clear that if you restrict the imports of steel, there are some workers in the steel industry who will have jobs they otherwise would not have. The beneficial effects for them of a tariff is perfectly clear. But if we import less steel, foreigners earn fewer dollars. They have fewer dollars to spend in this country. There are people around the country who will not have jobs, not have productive jobs, because exports do not develop. Here, I should not have to spell this out in great detail here in Kansas. This is a great agricultural state. Agriculture is one of our main, agricultural products are one of our main exports. The harmful effects of steel imports are to reduce jobs in agriculture. But that's invisible. The people who might have been producing goods to sell abroad don't know they might have had that job. So, out of sight, out of mind. And as a result, on both the side of consumption and the side of producers, you have a concentrated special interest versus the diff used general interest.