Economic Protection Quotes

Great countries need to secure their border for national security purposes, for economic purposes and for rule of law purposes.

It has from the beginning been carried on with as much vigor and as great care of our trade as was consistent with our safety at home and with the circumstances we were in at the beginning of the war.

The wealth of the country, its capital, its credit, must be saved from the predatory poor as well as the predatory rich, but above all from the predatory politician.

TARIFF, n. A scale of taxes on imports, designed to protect the domestic producer against the greed of his consumer.

In almost every case, whenever a tariff or quota is imposed on imports, that tax is strongly supported by the domestic industry getting the protective shield from lower-priced foreign competition. The sugar industry supports sugar tariffs; textile mills lobby for tariffs on foreign clothing.

Every dollar of tax imposed on our exchanges in the shape of duties impairs, to that extent, our capacity to meet the severe competition to which we are exposed; and nothing but a system of high protective duties, long continued, can prevent us from meeting it successfully. It is that which we have to fear.

The American consumer is also the American worker, and if we don't do something to protect our manufacturing base here at home, it is going to be hard to buy any retail goods.

The U.K. is open for investment, but not for exploitation.

The arguments of the protectionists in favor of creating home markets by protecting duties, operating to exclude the taxed foreign commodities, if addressed to the manufacturing and bountied States, would be impregnable. For these States pay but a small proportion of the costs, and enjoy nearly all the benefits of the home markets so created

One problem with globalisation is that bad ideas seem to travel faster than good ones; first there was smearing tomato ketchup on everything; then drinking sugar-soaked cocktails ('Cosmo'-politanism) instead of our traditional whisky soda, and now this idea that we should abandon the poor to their fate in order to protect their dignity.

If we turn our back on the people of this country who need to work for a living, we shouldn't be here, to be honest, because that has to be an essential part of what we do to protect the country, from the standpoint of defense, protect workers and make sure they have jobs.

Perhaps the globalization potion is too strong for us today; it should be watered down with some measure of economic nationalism.

If the YSRCP is voted to power, agriculture sector will be given top priority. The interests of all sections of people will be protected.

For the past quarter of a century, the predominant idea, which has successfully asserted itself at the polls and shaped the course of the government, has been to preserve the home market for the home industries. The employer and the workman have alike been taught to look at the various economical measures proposed from this point of view, to regard with hostility any step favoring the intrusion of the foreign producer upon their own domain, and rather to demand increasingly rigorous measures of exclusion than to acquiesce in any loosening of the chain that binds the consumer to them.

It will be said, however, that protection tends to destroy commerce, the civilizer of mankind. Directly the reverse, however, is the fact.

I am an adherent of the ideal of democracy, although I well know the weaknesses of the democratic form of government. Social equality and economic protection of the individual appeared to me always as the important communal aims of the state. Although I am a typical loner in daily life, my consciousness of belonging to the invisible community of those who strive for truth, beauty, and justice has preserved me from feeling isolated.

Tariffs have almost never saved a domestic industry from decline and, often times, by sheltering domestic producers from competition, only reward and prolong bad business practices.

In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. There is no safe store of value.

We support U.S. jobs, especially when those jobs are facing off against foreign competition.

If prices drop, we have to protect farmers from distress; if prices rise, we should be ready to pay market rates.

If we do not counter the argument that most radical nationlists use, which is, 'To protect is to be protectionist,' if we don't counter that argument, all of our economies will suffer.

Let's not pretend we're in a global free market when it comes to agriculture. Every country protects, for good reason, its agricultural industries.

I love the people of Michigan. I'm fighting hard for them with the car industry. I'm constantly talking about the car companies moving out and going out Mexico and other places, Sean, and they know I will protect them. I will not let it happen. We're not going to lose our industries anymore.

As regards this country, in which protection has always to some extent existed, it is the best customer that England ever had, and our demands upon her grow most steadily and regularly under protection.

Most states, for all their rhetoric in favour of free trade, are adept at trying to manipulate markets to protect and advantage their own producers.