Comment: After, therefore because

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: I Lived In Japan From 1959-1965; (see in situ)

After, therefore because

After, therefore because of?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc

Please explain how making the citizens of a war-torn country pay MORE for the things they need leads to improved economizing of their resources, including the resource of human labor.

I'll explain the OPPOSITE of that stance: People in a war-torn country need to utilize their time and resources as efficiently as possible if they want to rebuild their country as fast as possible. Any opportunity to save time, labor, and resources will help speed recovery. Help from others, as well as access to resources that can't be had on a small island, such as Japan, GREATLY contributes to this.

Let's do a little thought experiment: We are in a desert country. The gov't of our country decides to lay a heavy tariff on foreign fresh water that is imported, you know, to protect the local water industry. After all, I bviously costs a lot more to get water out of the desert than, say, the great lakes. The local water industry couldn't possibly competitive with places that have an abundance of fresh water. How does the tariff aid in satisfying people's desire for clean, fresh water?

I explained how it doesn't, and will lead to the people having LESS water than they need/want. Anyone want to try and explain how it DOES give the people the water they need? This is what it takes to prove that tariffs, even "correctly implemented" ones, are a benefit.

Does that thought experiment make it easier to understand/accept that tariffs can NEVER be good for ANYONE?

"I do not add 'within the limits of the law,' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual."