От Лейтенант
К Chestnut
Дата 11.11.2003 17:59:49
Рубрики Современность; Политек;

Re: Хотите аргументов?...

>Ну ладно. Америка стала наиболее развитой страной мира ещё к рубежу 20 века.

Между прочим за счет жуткого протекционизма. А несогласных с протекционизмом привели к ногтю в ходе гражданской войны.

>> Кроме того, никто не говорит, что протекционизм есть достаточное условие для рывка. Но то, что необходимое - это точно.
>
>Ну тут пошло мировоззрение, мне Вас не переубедить.

Ну отчего же ;-) Просто приведите несколько примеров стран совершивших эконосический рывок без протекционизма.

От Chestnut
К Лейтенант (11.11.2003 17:59:49)
Дата 11.11.2003 18:08:35

Re: Хотите аргументов?...

>Ну отчего же ;-) Просто приведите несколько примеров стран совершивших эконосический рывок без протекционизма.

Соединённое Королевство.

От Felis
К Chestnut (11.11.2003 18:08:35)
Дата 12.11.2003 11:15:34

Ничего себе отсутствие протекционизма!Навигационный акт-то? (-)


От VVVIva
К Chestnut (11.11.2003 18:08:35)
Дата 11.11.2003 21:55:35

Re: Хотите аргументов?...

Привет!

>Соединённое Королевство.

Не верно. В 1789?7? году были введены запретительные пошлины на руссое и шведское железо. Тоже самое в 1815. До 1840-х Британия была вполне протекционисткой, потом стала сторонником фритрейда.

Владимир

От Лейтенант
К VVVIva (11.11.2003 21:55:35)
Дата 12.11.2003 11:50:49

Re: Хотите аргументов?...

> До 1840-х Британия была вполне протекционисткой, потом стала сторонником фритрейда.

Причем фритрейд не распространялся на английский колонии ;-)

От Лейтенант
К Chestnut (11.11.2003 18:08:35)
Дата 11.11.2003 18:38:54

А как же монополия на торговлю с колониями? (-)


От Роман Храпачевский
К Chestnut (11.11.2003 18:08:35)
Дата 11.11.2003 18:36:11

А не напомните, отчего "Бостонское чаепитие" случилось ? (-)


От Chestnut
К Роман Храпачевский (11.11.2003 18:36:11)
Дата 11.11.2003 18:48:43

Re: А не...

От того, что правительство попыталось бороться с контрабандой. Но промышленный рывок Британии - это позже, отказ от остатков протекционизма - отмена "зерновых законов" в 40-е годы 19 века.

От Роман Храпачевский
К Chestnut (11.11.2003 18:48:43)
Дата 11.11.2003 20:02:37

Re: А не...

>От того, что правительство попыталось бороться с контрабандой. Но промышленный рывок Британии - это позже, отказ от остатков протекционизма - отмена "зерновых законов" в 40-е годы 19 века.

Что-то вы историю не очень знаете - вам уже кстати написали про монополию торговли с колониями, которая и была причиной отпадения 13 штатов. А что касается рывка - так он и произошел, что в период протекционизма была создана база, т.е. основной капитал страны. И кстати в именно в 40-е были учинены опиумные войны, т.е. именно внеэкономическое насилие в пользу английской "торговли", этот несмываемый позор англосаксонской цивилизации.

http://rutenica.narod.ru/

От doctor64
К Chestnut (11.11.2003 18:08:35)
Дата 11.11.2003 18:29:08

Re: Хотите аргументов?...

>Соединённое Королевство.
А то что сделали с индийскими ткачами - это как называется?

От Chestnut
К doctor64 (11.11.2003 18:29:08)
Дата 11.11.2003 18:52:40

Re: Хотите аргументов?...

>>Соединённое Королевство.
>А то что сделали с индийскими ткачами - это как называется?

Это в смысле фраза из советского учебника истории о "костях ткачей"? Так императорское правительство Индии как раз вводило тарифы ПРОТИВ английского текстиля ))) Даже грабить колонии толком не научились ))))

От VVVIva
К Chestnut (11.11.2003 18:52:40)
Дата 11.11.2003 21:56:33

Re: Хотите аргументов?...

Привет!

>Это в смысле фраза из советского учебника истории о "костях ткачей"? Так императорское правительство Индии как раз вводило тарифы ПРОТИВ английского текстиля )))

Это уже после ПМВ.

Владимир

От doctor64
К Chestnut (11.11.2003 18:52:40)
Дата 11.11.2003 18:57:01

Re: Хотите аргументов?...

>Это в смысле фраза из советского учебника истории о "костях ткачей"? Так императорское правительство Индии как раз вводило тарифы ПРОТИВ английского текстиля )))
Где про это можно прочитать?

От Chestnut
К doctor64 (11.11.2003 18:57:01)
Дата 11.11.2003 19:21:03

Re: Хотите аргументов?...

>>Это в смысле фраза из советского учебника истории о "костях ткачей"? Так императорское правительство Индии как раз вводило тарифы ПРОТИВ английского текстиля )))
>Где про это можно прочитать?

Ну вот из Британники, по аглицки

Economically, this was an era of increased commercial agricultural production, rapidly expanding trade, early industrial development, and severe famine. The total cost of the mutiny of 1857–59, approximately £40 million and equivalent to a normal year's revenue, was charged to India and paid off from increased revenue resources in four years. The major source of government income throughout this period remained the land revenue, which, as a percentage of the agricultural yield of India's soil, continued to be “an annual gamble in monsoon rains.” Usually, however, it provided about half of British India's gross annual revenue, or roughly the money needed to support the army. The second most lucrative source of revenue at this time was the government's continued monopoly over the flourishing illicit opium trade to China; the third was the tax on salt, also jealously guarded by the crown as its official monopoly preserve. An individual income tax was introduced for five years to pay off the war deficit, but urban personal income was not added as a regular source of Indian revenue until 1886. Despite continued British adherence to the doctrine of laissez-faire during this period, a 10 percent customs duty was levied in 1860 to help clear the war debt, though it was reduced to 7 percent in 1864 and to 5 percent in 1875. The above-mentioned cotton import duty, abolished in 1879 by Viceroy Lytton, was not reimposed on British imports of piece goods and yarn until 1894, when the value of silver fell so precipitously on the world market that the government of India was forced to take action, even against Lancashire, by adding enough rupees to its revenue to make ends meet. Bombay's textile industry had by then developed more than 80 power mills, and the Indian industrialist Jamsetji N. Tata's (1839–1904) huge Empress Mill was in full operation at Nagpur, competing directly with Lancashire for the vast Indian market. Britain's millowners again demonstrated their power in Calcutta by forcing the government of India to impose an “equalizing” 5 percent excise tax on all cloth manufactured in India, thereby convincing many Indian millowners and capitalists that their best interests would be served by contributing financial support to the Indian National Congress.

Britain's major contribution to India's economic development throughout the era of crown rule was the railroad net that spread so swiftly across the subcontinent after 1858, when there were barely 200 miles of track in all of India. By 1869 more than 5,000 miles of steel track had been completed by British railroad companies, and by 1900 there were 25,000 miles of rail laid. By the start of World War I the total reached 35,000 miles, almost the full growth of British India's rail net. Initially, the railroads proved a mixed blessing for most Indians, since by linking India's agricultural, village-based heartland to the British imperial port cities of Bombay, Madras, and Calcutta, they served both to accelerate the pace of raw-material extraction from India and to speed up the transition from subsistence food to commercial agricultural production. Middlemen hired by port-city Agency Houses rode the trains inland and induced village headmen to convert large tracts of grain-yielding land to commercial crops. Large sums of silver were offered in payment for raw materials when the British demand was high, as was the case throughout the American Civil War, but when the Civil War ended, restoring raw cotton from the southern United States to Lancashire mills, the Indian market collapsed. Millions of peasants weaned from grain production now found themselves riding the boom-and-bust tiger of a world-market economy. They were unable to convert their commercial agricultural surplus back into food during depression years, and from 1865 through 1900 India experienced a series of protracted famines, which in 1896 was complicated by the introduction of the bubonic plague (spread from Bombay, where infected rats were brought from China). As a result, though the population of the subcontinent increased dramatically from about 200 million in 1872 (the year of the first census) to more than 300 million in 1920, the population actually declined by several millions between 1895 and 1905.

The spread of railroads also accelerated the destruction of India's indigenous handicraft industries, for trains filled with cheap competitive manufactured goods shipped from England now rushed to inland towns for distribution to villages, underselling the rougher products of Indian craftsmen. Entire handicraft villages thus lost their traditional markets of neighbouring agricultural villagers, and craftsmen were forced to abandon their looms and spinning wheels and return to the soil for their livelihood. By the end of the 19th century a larger percentage of India's population (approximately 90 percent) depended directly on agriculture for support than at the century's start, and the pressure of population upon arable land increased throughout this period. Railroads also provided the military with swift and relatively assured access to all parts of the country in the event of emergency and were eventually used to transport grain for famine relief as well.

The rich coalfields of Bihar and Orissa began to be mined during this period to help power the imported British locomotives, and coal production jumped from 500,000 tons in 1868 to over 6,000,000 tons in 1900 and more than 20,000,000 tons by 1920. Coal was used for iron smelting in India as early as 1875, but the Tata Iron and Steel Company, which received no government aid, did not start production until 1911, when, in Bihar, it launched India's steel industry. Tata grew rapidly after World War I and by World War II had become the largest single steel complex in the British Commonwealth. The jute textile industry, Bengal's counterpart to Bombay's cotton industry, developed in the wake of the Crimean War (1853–56), which, by cutting off Russia's supply of raw hemp to the jute mills of Scotland, stimulated the export of raw jute from Calcutta to Dundee. In 1863 there were only two jute mills in Bengal, but by 1882 there were 20, employing more than 20,000 workers.

The most important plantation industries of this era were tea, indigo, and coffee. British tea plantations were started in North India's Assam Hills in the 1850s and in South India's Nilgiri Hills some 20 years later. By 1871 there were over 300 tea plantations, covering more than 30,000 cultivated acres (12,000 hectares) and producing over 6,000,000 pounds of tea. By 1900 India's tea crop was large enough to export 137,000,000 pounds to Britain, displacing the tea of China in London. The flourishing indigo industry of Bengal and Bihar was threatened with extinction during the “Blue Mutiny” (violent riots by cultivators in 1859–60), but India continued to export indigo to European markets until the end of the 19th century, when synthetic dyes made that natural product obsolete. Coffee plantations flourished in South India from 1860 to 1879, after which disease blighted the crop and sent Indian coffee into a decade of decline.



Copyright © 1994-2002 Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc.

От VVVIva
К Chestnut (11.11.2003 19:21:03)
Дата 11.11.2003 22:00:53

Re: Хотите аргументов?...

Привет!

10% на хлопковые такни, в Британии тоже время 20%. Интересно как на счет возможности поставки не британских товаров в Индию и тариф на них? В начале 20 века Индия имела пассивное сальдо с Британией и активное с прочими странами Европы.

Владимир