The Hays free press. [volume] (Hays, Kan.) 1908-1924, 1922-01-26
COLLECTING THE FOR
DEBT"
FOREIGN


Some people will never learn, and
It begins to look as if the editor of
the New York World is one of them.
The World is an excellent newspaper, |
but when its editor begins discussing |
economic subjects, especially Tariff
matters, it loses its dependability. We
have to keep repeating, over and over
again, very plain economic truths, but
still the World editor does not seem
10 be able to understand them.
The following editorial is taken
from the January 10th issue of the
World:
Merchandise exports from the
United States at $4,485, 100000 last
A calendar year were little more than
half what they were in the previous
calendar year. Imports at $685.
100000 were less than half what
they were in 1920. The shrinkage in
the export excess amounts to about
thirty-three per cent, but still stands
at almost billion dollars.
Such a favorable" trade balance
as that in the days before the great
war would have sufficed to meet the
interest on our foreign debt and other
invisible exterior obligRtibns and
brought in some $500, 100000 of net
gold imports. Now the United States
Is a creditor Nation. The outside
world is owing US vastly more than
we are owing the outside world. A
present merchandise export balance
of a billion dollars accordingly means
no net income whatever from the
l-1,+ II, 1,hv hT1f
a huge addition to that debt.
The organ of the American Pro
tective Tariff League is calling for the
payment of the Allied debt of $10,-
600, 100000 to the United States,
principal and interest, to the last dol
lar. But at the same time high Pro-
tective Tariff will be insisted on to
MAINTAIN a high excess of exports over
merchandise imports in which alone
Europe can pay the debt. If under
present Tariff rates the result is no
collections at all on account of the
debt but instead further loan of
billion dollars in single year to
private borrowers abroad, how rapid
are the collections hkley to be when
Joe Fordney's high and higher Tariff
Bill has been enacted?
We do not want to be short about
It, but the position of the American
Economist is not correctly stated in
the above We do not advocate
-fhigh" Tariff, do not believe I'M such
Tariff. What we do advocate and
thoroughly believe in is an adequate
Protective Tariff" as anyone who
reads this paper we'll knows. By
adequate" we mean a Tariff. which
shall place domestic products on
parity in our own markets with the
products of foreign countries We
want Tariff which will keep foreign
ers from coming into this country
with their foreign-made wares and
selling them at prices lower than it
costs TO produce them in this country.
We want Tariff which shall keep
foreigners from closing our mills and
mines and forcing our farms to grow
up to weeds because we cannot COM
pete with their underpaid, their
pauper labor. We want a Tariff which
will enable Us to keep on paying de-
cent American wages to American
workmen, so that they will not be
reduced to the starvation level of
wages paid in other lands.
In opposing an adequate Protective
Tariff the New York World stands for
the very reverse of these policies. A
Tariff which is non-Protective will
permit foreigners to drive our indus
tries into bankruptcy or else force
the standard of wages and the stand
ard of living down to those of other
nations. We do not believe that that
IS what the World wants, but its Free
Trade policies will eventually lead to
just that if carried into effect.
1t is worse than foolish to talk of
the debt of Great Britain, France or
Italy being paid directly in goods and
OF continuing the Free-Trade policy
so as t oadmit their goods on a basis
which we cannot meet in this country.
1t is sheer idiocy. If Germany had
sufficient raw materials she would
drive thousands of our industrial
plants into bankruptcy within less
than a year, under our present Free
Trade Tariff based on foreign values.
After that had been done, prices
would rise to yet higher levels, for
there would be no domestic competi-