Yes! This is correct, tariffs must be part of a broader paradigm set, in fact, they always will be whether you want them to or not as they will always effect and be effected by the elements of the broader policy space; and the sets design, execution and intents can have immense impact on the results.
I wrote this to someone the other day on the same theme: The USA's Old Republic used tariffs as a part of a broader policy and complementary tool set within a politically, economically, governmentally, and scientifically decentralized system. The policy paradigm was designed to generate a diffused and redundant economy for purposes extending far beyond immediate job creation. They helped generate diversified and redundant scientific and engineering ecosystems, variegated academic ecosystems, and deep, layered supporting industries that made other forms of development (such as various types of construction) far easier and more capable. And all those things would in turn be complementary and inter supporting (sometimes in amazing innovation ways no one had thought of!) This, in turn, generated other soft but and important things like widespread and diversified arts and cultural growth
But the USA's Old Republic did not rely solely on external trade protectionism to achieve these outcomes. It also maintained internal inter-regional trade frictions, albeit to a lesser extent, and, critically, it had substantial interregional capital flow inhibitors. And its unfortunately not well known now, but for the first 200 years of its existence, the USA maintained internal capital control mechanisms that, while preserving a deep national capital market, making it so that access to capital and decision-making about its deployment were geographically, sectorally, and societally diffused. This structure prevented financial and industrial centralization, allowing local and regional economies to develop according to their own conditions and with a limited but still substantial local economic, cultural, and scientific agency instead if just being dictated by national or global financial power centers.
All of these policies functioned as part of a coherent set, reinforcing one another within a decentralized political system. This system’s governmental-policy decision making architecture was dominated by two decentralized and publicly accessible mass-member parties that represented a broad spectrum of interests and made it so that economic decision-making was not captured by a single elite group. Because the system was decentralized, it could effectively manage the balance between protectionism, internal friction, and capital diffusion, making it so that industry and finance did not become overly concentrated in any single region or sector, while generating a deliberately redundant, heterogenous, pluralistic, and vibrant economy that was the best the world has ever known!
Yes! This is correct, tariffs must be part of a broader paradigm set, in fact, they always will be whether you want them to or not as they will always effect and be effected by the elements of the broader policy space; and the sets design, execution and intents can have immense impact on the results.
I wrote this to someone the other day on the same theme: The USA's Old Republic used tariffs as a part of a broader policy and complementary tool set within a politically, economically, governmentally, and scientifically decentralized system. The policy paradigm was designed to generate a diffused and redundant economy for purposes extending far beyond immediate job creation. They helped generate diversified and redundant scientific and engineering ecosystems, variegated academic ecosystems, and deep, layered supporting industries that made other forms of development (such as various types of construction) far easier and more capable. And all those things would in turn be complementary and inter supporting (sometimes in amazing innovation ways no one had thought of!) This, in turn, generated other soft but and important things like widespread and diversified arts and cultural growth
But the USA's Old Republic did not rely solely on external trade protectionism to achieve these outcomes. It also maintained internal inter-regional trade frictions, albeit to a lesser extent, and, critically, it had substantial interregional capital flow inhibitors. And its unfortunately not well known now, but for the first 200 years of its existence, the USA maintained internal capital control mechanisms that, while preserving a deep national capital market, making it so that access to capital and decision-making about its deployment were geographically, sectorally, and societally diffused. This structure prevented financial and industrial centralization, allowing local and regional economies to develop according to their own conditions and with a limited but still substantial local economic, cultural, and scientific agency instead if just being dictated by national or global financial power centers.
All of these policies functioned as part of a coherent set, reinforcing one another within a decentralized political system. This system’s governmental-policy decision making architecture was dominated by two decentralized and publicly accessible mass-member parties that represented a broad spectrum of interests and made it so that economic decision-making was not captured by a single elite group. Because the system was decentralized, it could effectively manage the balance between protectionism, internal friction, and capital diffusion, making it so that industry and finance did not become overly concentrated in any single region or sector, while generating a deliberately redundant, heterogenous, pluralistic, and vibrant economy that was the best the world has ever known!
You nailed it: "Absent domestic competition or targeted industrial policies, the cost of tariffs will simply be passed onto the American consumer."
Thank you for this insightful piece!
Yes! This is correct, tariffs must be part of a broader paradigm set, in fact, they always will be whether you want them to or not as they will always effect and be effected by the elements of the broader policy space; and the sets design, execution and intents can have immense impact on the results.
I wrote this to someone the other day on the same theme: The USA's Old Republic used tariffs as a part of a broader policy and complementary tool set within a politically, economically, governmentally, and scientifically decentralized system. The policy paradigm was designed to generate a diffused and redundant economy for purposes extending far beyond immediate job creation. They helped generate diversified and redundant scientific and engineering ecosystems, variegated academic ecosystems, and deep, layered supporting industries that made other forms of development (such as various types of construction) far easier and more capable. And all those things would in turn be complementary and inter supporting (sometimes in amazing innovation ways no one had thought of!) This, in turn, generated other soft but and important things like widespread and diversified arts and cultural growth
But the USA's Old Republic did not rely solely on external trade protectionism to achieve these outcomes. It also maintained internal inter-regional trade frictions, albeit to a lesser extent, and, critically, it had substantial interregional capital flow inhibitors. And its unfortunately not well known now, but for the first 200 years of its existence, the USA maintained internal capital control mechanisms that, while preserving a deep national capital market, making it so that access to capital and decision-making about its deployment were geographically, sectorally, and societally diffused. This structure prevented financial and industrial centralization, allowing local and regional economies to develop according to their own conditions and with a limited but still substantial local economic, cultural, and scientific agency instead if just being dictated by national or global financial power centers.
All of these policies functioned as part of a coherent set, reinforcing one another within a decentralized political system. This system’s governmental-policy decision making architecture was dominated by two decentralized and publicly accessible mass-member parties that represented a broad spectrum of interests and made it so that economic decision-making was not captured by a single elite group. Because the system was decentralized, it could effectively manage the balance between protectionism, internal friction, and capital diffusion, making it so that industry and finance did not become overly concentrated in any single region or sector, while generating a deliberately redundant, heterogenous, pluralistic, and vibrant economy that was the best the world has ever known!
Yes! This is correct, tariffs must be part of a broader paradigm set, in fact, they always will be whether you want them to or not as they will always effect and be effected by the elements of the broader policy space; and the sets design, execution and intents can have immense impact on the results.
I wrote this to someone the other day on the same theme: The USA's Old Republic used tariffs as a part of a broader policy and complementary tool set within a politically, economically, governmentally, and scientifically decentralized system. The policy paradigm was designed to generate a diffused and redundant economy for purposes extending far beyond immediate job creation. They helped generate diversified and redundant scientific and engineering ecosystems, variegated academic ecosystems, and deep, layered supporting industries that made other forms of development (such as various types of construction) far easier and more capable. And all those things would in turn be complementary and inter supporting (sometimes in amazing innovation ways no one had thought of!) This, in turn, generated other soft but and important things like widespread and diversified arts and cultural growth
But the USA's Old Republic did not rely solely on external trade protectionism to achieve these outcomes. It also maintained internal inter-regional trade frictions, albeit to a lesser extent, and, critically, it had substantial interregional capital flow inhibitors. And its unfortunately not well known now, but for the first 200 years of its existence, the USA maintained internal capital control mechanisms that, while preserving a deep national capital market, making it so that access to capital and decision-making about its deployment were geographically, sectorally, and societally diffused. This structure prevented financial and industrial centralization, allowing local and regional economies to develop according to their own conditions and with a limited but still substantial local economic, cultural, and scientific agency instead if just being dictated by national or global financial power centers.
All of these policies functioned as part of a coherent set, reinforcing one another within a decentralized political system. This system’s governmental-policy decision making architecture was dominated by two decentralized and publicly accessible mass-member parties that represented a broad spectrum of interests and made it so that economic decision-making was not captured by a single elite group. Because the system was decentralized, it could effectively manage the balance between protectionism, internal friction, and capital diffusion, making it so that industry and finance did not become overly concentrated in any single region or sector, while generating a deliberately redundant, heterogenous, pluralistic, and vibrant economy that was the best the world has ever known!