A Quote by Dudley North

Nor in truth, can Forreign Trade subsist without the Home Trade, both being connected together. — © Dudley North
Nor in truth, can Forreign Trade subsist without the Home Trade, both being connected together.
My fellow economists and academics fail to understand the economics of trade in the real world. Traditional models of academia respect free trade without considering whether it is fair trade.
We're at the start of the process of talking about a trade deal. We're both very clear that we want a trade deal. It will be in the interests of the UK from my point of view, that's what I'm going to be taking in, into the trade discussions that take place in due course. Obviously [Donald Trump] will have the interests of the US. I believe we can come to an agreement that is in the interests of both.
Trade wars arent started by countries appealing to respected, independent trade authorities. Rather, trade wars begin when one country decides to violate international trade rules to undercut another countrys industries.
I support free trade. Donald Trump supports free trade.Trade means jobs. Jobs in the United States, jobs in my home state of Indiana are supported by international exports.
Trade wars aren't started by countries appealing to respected, independent trade authorities. Rather, trade wars begin when one country decides to violate international trade rules to undercut another country's industries.
The far more likely Trump scenario is this: Chinese leaders realize they no longer have a weak leader in the White House; China ceases its unfair trade practices. America's massive trade deficit with China comes peacefully and prosperously back into balance, and both the U.S. and Chinese economies benefit from trade.
The biggest trade that Germany and Britain had was with each other, in the prewar period; I think I'm right in that. Two highly industrialized nations had the most trade with each other, and it wasn't tariff policies alone that made trade relations better for both of them.
Free-trade enthusiasts fret that regional trade arrangements divert more trade than they create.
Three year sof unconditional MFN have not lead to any subtantial improvement in human rights, trade and nuclear proliferation practice of the Chinese government. In addition to the trade barriers, China has marred our trade relationship wit prison labor or export and other unfair trade practices.
Yes to trade, but trade that ensures that these other countries that trade with us aren't engaging in child labor.
For most people, love is a response to need fulfillment. Everyone has needs. You need this, another needs that. You both see in each other a chance for need fulfillment. So you agree-tacitly-to a trade. I'll trade you what I've got if you'll give me what you've got. It's a transaction. But you don't tell the truth about it. You don't say, "I trade you very much." You say, "I love you very much," and then the disappointment begins.
We want trade agreements that aid development and increase prosperity, growth and productivity at home and in our trade partner countries.
People tend to think about trade as if it's competition between companies - if Apple wins, Google loses. But that's false. Trade makes nations better off in general. Now, I want to be clear. I'm not saying that everything about trade is good and beneficial. Trade also has costs.
We know that trade, NAFTA, the free and open trade between Canada and the U.S. creates millions of good jobs on both sides of the border.
I want a trade that is not trickle-down trade, but trade that recognizes we're in a global economy.
For a small country like Norway, it's important for our ability to trade and to invest across borders that we have fair trade and that we have multilateral trade systems, also.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!