No tariffs means more spending on other products

To the editor:

Did I read an editorial in the Southeast Missourian correctly? In "Free trade requires fairness on both sides," the editorial states, "The reason why a free-trade administration would use tariffs as a trade weapon is simple. Free trade requires that trading partners play fair. Items sold abroad must be sold at a fair market price that represents the cost of production, marketing and shipping."

The Bush administration is not a free-trade administration. Its trade policy smells of mercantilism, protection of selected industries by government fiat.

The Southeast Missourian must also realize that it is the consumers of these products who pay the tariffs imposed. Consumers benefit from cheaper goods, allowing them to spend the savings on other products and services. When most of the textile industry moved overseas, more jobs were created here -- higher paying ones at that -- because of the extra money consumers had to spend on other goods. Initiating tariffs that lower Americans' standard of living to benefit a few is unwise and harmful for the long-term economy.

If Canada subsidizes its timber products, then it is Canada's economy that suffers through such actions, not ours. When Canada uses subsidies, it is taking money away from where it would most likely do more good in their economy.

You and Bush are starting to sound a lot like Pat Buchanan and Dick Gephardt.

Free trade is the exchange of goods and services between individuals of different nations without restrictions placed on that trade by governments.

JAMES NALL

Marble Hill, Mo.