I ignored it as noise, which it is.

What I spoke to was >real< free trade, not the definition the folks who want to make some point are calling it today.

And in that post I also noted, and you seemed to miss it, that tariffs are acceptable in a free trade environment as long as they are used to balance against non-S&D market imbalances (regulation differences, labor differences, etc). There is no incongruity with my statement and your statement that complete removal of tariffs can have significant consequence.

My point on locomotive imports...is that in that day and age there was no possible way we could fuel the infrastructure development going on in the US without developing that capability domestically. The world at that time was too large (even between US and UK. Sure they could supply some. But the cost to move them here would automatically create a profitable market for domestic manufacture, tariffs weren't necessary. The folks using "protectionism" as causation for the build-out of the United States infrastructure and industrial engine are stretching very thin to make that case.

PS: I have people disagree with me all the time, on both sides..especially in economic endeavor. I was educated truly in the "dismal" science. Both sides are wrong...

often ;-)