5 ms·

It's a combination of a lot of factors. Access to a rich market is one thing but protecting your own markets against much stronger competition is another. Sout

• pydry 4y ago
  >protecting your own marketing against much stronger competition is another. That's the whole point. Most countries that do this are locked out of rich markets. They're said to be competing "unfairly". They know mercantilism works they just can't practice it without being slapped with countervailing tariffs. It was US policy both to allow and encourage mercantilism for South Korea because that meant it could function as a military bulwark against the communist nations surrounding it.
  • zozbot234 4y ago
    They're not locked out, they just might have to pay retaliatory tariffs. The whole issue is countries that institute such mercantile tariffs in the first place tend to be exactly the ones where elites do not believe in export-driven growth, and pursue failing top-down schemes that increase their own petty influence within those same countries.
    • pydry 4y ago
      >they just might have to pay retaliatory tariffs. That was, again, the whole point. A nascent Hyundai + retaliatory tarriffs => no Hyundai => South Korea remains 3rd world
      • zozbot234 4y ago
        > A nascent Hyundai + retaliatory tarriffs => no Hyundai Says who? Plenty of countries successfully pursued industrialization in the 19th and early 20th century, back when tariffs were the norm.