Cleveland-Cliffs CEO Louranco Goncalves’ call to “unfairly traded steel” shows, on the contrary, many reasons why free trade is an essential feature of a free society. Goncalves said he would add tariffs to steel products to primary (semi-finished) steel tariffs (“Trump leaps towards national security and justifies the next wave of tariffs,” Wall Street Journal, August 28, 2020)
Cerartinty said that the US domestic market is not covered by unfairly traded steel embedded in derivative products.
He means that the tariffs on major steel will not suffer from scholars’ goods containing steel.
It should be noted that, in the roar of the 60s, it is popular among the control facilities of the undeveloped countries supported by Western intellectuals, imposing a long tariff on foreign manufactured goods to support domistic manufacturing. It is only a few decades later when such industrial policies were done to foolish errands that poor people in the underdeveloped countries could jump on the free trade bandwagon and climb to escape poverty.
The fundamental economic reason why the “unfairly traded steel” or the fundamental ideal of merchantalists and industrial policy is to take away the central economic planner who owns what he does not own, that is, the time, place, cost and preference information determined by the demand and demand of the free market. Friedrich Hayek described it in the 1930s and 1940s (see Hayek’s American Economic Review article, “Using Knowledge in Society.”). The central planner is unable to even know the many complex effects of his resources and representation obstacles, especially in a complex economy. Therefore, government intervention creates government intervention for the greatest political obstacles. The US government provides a rather interesting illustration only because it recognizes impossible steel that should be essential for steel products as well.
Another important Lethon from protectionism was confirmed 1000 times more vigorously. This is how the profits of the spectrum seeking rent will be made to exploit the public, or some of them, each time the state provides them with the means to do so. Tariff requirements on products containing steel are already flooding the government.
Although expressions like “fairly exchanged steel” have no meaning, they come from reflection on value judgments that must be exploitative (or illiteracy, truth-telling, clown), public policy. Evaluating public policy recommendations requires justification of moral and political philosophy. If fairness is not defined by the heat of individual freedom – if fairness is not free, then the speaker’s pursuit of self-interest is likely to be impossible for others. “Fair Trade Steel” is something that Mr. Goncalves thinks is fair to the interests of Cleveland Cliffs shareholders, in addition to his own interests. It is rare for an individual to consider a fair subject that harms his own interests and to unfair the hymn or government subsidies or protections for his organization. “Free” is much easier to define than “fair.” Freedom does not require the whole world to “fair” the standard of bybody.
Although American steel companies have been protected many times since the 19th century, they believe that fairness requires American consumers to be forced to pay more for steel products. How fair is it to mimic the Chinese farmers in the heyday of Mao Zedong’s great leap, and build a small blast in his backyard? (See featured images in this post.)
The interests of steel industry buyers, steel products consumers, and consumers of goods or services produced by fewer resources (workers, engineers, managers, machines, buildings, electricity, land, etc.) were forced to dive. steel? There are three ways to reconcile or reconcile the interests of individuals living in society: habits (tribes), commands (forced economic planners or dictators), or markets (free and voluntary cooperation). An easy-to-access book about this is John Hicks, the theory of economic history (see my review of regulations).
Both historical experience and economic theory teach that a settlement, meaning efficient settlement of individual interests (meaning maximizing formal opportunities for all individuals), can be achieved in the free market, but not by the central planner and his lobbyist and psychofan courts.
Therefore, we are led to discover that “unfairly traded steel” is meaningful only in a society where authoritarian or collectivist political regimes are impossible for all of the arbitrary concept of fairness. The alternative is the mutual and reciprocal of individuals, in which the demonstration is free trade, internal and external, between individuals or private organizations. (James Buchanan’s little book Why I’m not a conservative either, provides a reflection on reciprocity. I reviewed it in regulation.)
*************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************
Chairman Mao Zedong visits a homemade blast furnace in 1958
Credit: PC-195A-S-013 (chineeposters.net, private collection)
