Mainstream economic thinking is strongly in favor of free trade, for the sake of its economic benefits.
Free trade is favored by classical liberal thought for reasons other than its economic benefits though. Any tariff or embargo is an infringement on individual liberty to some degree, and historically, government authority to set tariffs has been controversial and definitely not unlimited. Tariffs were a often a necessity for a country that needed some way of raising revenue to provide security and defense, but using them punitively or as a means of favoring certain industries or regions was often counterproductive and politically explosive, precisely because they undermined “sociopolitical autonomy”.
Also, from a purely theoretical / economic perspective, tariffs are not actually needed (and in fact counterproductive) for maintaining industrial capacity. If a nation wants to maintain robust internal supply chains, it can simply subsidize or pay for that capacity directly in various ways that are much more (economically) efficient than charging tariffs. Tariffs are often more politically palatable or legally expedient to impose, but that doesn’t make them effective means of actually maintaining industrial capacity or sociopolitical autonomy.
If a nation wants to maintain robust internal supply chains, it can simply subsidize or pay for that capacity directly in various ways that are much more (economically) efficient than charging tariffs.
Any tariff or embargo is an infringement on individual liberty to some degree, and historically, government authority to set tariffs has been controversial and definitely not unlimited.
Yeah, this example shows that some of the things, e.g., free trade, can be framed in terms of efficiency or autonomy, perhaps depending to some extend on the actor whose viewpoint you’re adopting.
Free trade is favored by classical liberal thought for reasons other than its economic benefits though. Any tariff or embargo is an infringement on individual liberty to some degree, and historically, government authority to set tariffs has been controversial and definitely not unlimited. Tariffs were a often a necessity for a country that needed some way of raising revenue to provide security and defense, but using them punitively or as a means of favoring certain industries or regions was often counterproductive and politically explosive, precisely because they undermined “sociopolitical autonomy”.
Also, from a purely theoretical / economic perspective, tariffs are not actually needed (and in fact counterproductive) for maintaining industrial capacity. If a nation wants to maintain robust internal supply chains, it can simply subsidize or pay for that capacity directly in various ways that are much more (economically) efficient than charging tariffs. Tariffs are often more politically palatable or legally expedient to impose, but that doesn’t make them effective means of actually maintaining industrial capacity or sociopolitical autonomy.
Why are subsidies more efficient than tariffs?
Yeah, this example shows that some of the things, e.g., free trade, can be framed in terms of efficiency or autonomy, perhaps depending to some extend on the actor whose viewpoint you’re adopting.