News
After Court Restores Research Funding, Trump Still Has Paths to Target Harvard
News
‘Honestly, I’m Fine with It’: Eliot Residents Settle In to the Inn as Renovations Begin
News
He Represented Paul Toner. Now, He’s the Fundraising Frontrunner in Cambridge’s Municipal Elections.
News
Harvard College Laundry Prices Increase by 25 Cents
News
DOJ Sues Boston and Mayor Michelle Wu ’07 Over Sanctuary City Policy
To the Editors of the CRIMSON:
I would like to clarify your report of my comments at the Adams House seminar on international trade Tuesday to make my position clear.
The point that I made in my very brief informal remarks was that I had to recognize the great uncertainties as to what the next war would be like. Therefore I suggested that I could not dismiss out of hand all arguments based on "defense" industry claims.
I mentioned the possibility of a conventional war in Europe as an example of the kind of unlikely, but not impossible, contingency which had to be considered. However, I concluded that the problematical role of tariff protection in the event of certain unlikely wars would in almost all cases be outbalanced by the tangible benefits of expanding American trade with the Common Market.
Most of the industries which have used the defense argument have done it without any justification at all. As an advocate of free trade, I did not intend to give the impression, nor, I believe, could one infer from my remarks, that I thought that their arguments should be taken seriously. Morton H. Halperin.
Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.