The trade question. Fallacies of protection, or the so-called "national policy".
Bibliographic record
Abstract
These in brief are the remedies suggested for the present difficulties of the country, and set forth with much pomp and parade in a certain pamphlet entitled "Free Trade and Protection," to which it may be worth while to refer a little more in detail, as being a sort of handy compendium of the chief blunders committed by the aivocates of in- creased taxation, otherwise called protectionists.Let us review them in detail.The First Mis-Statement.The very first statement, printed in large capitals, is entirely delulusive.We are told that " Canada is exclusively a farming country."Now, it so happens that a large number of the people of Canada are engaged in fishing, in ship building, in lumbering, and in sea-faring pursuits, and in a great variety of manufacturing occupations.Strange as it may appear to the protectionist writers, the actual number of persons engaged in these occupations is almost exactly proportionate in Canada, under a revenue tariff, to those similarly employed in the United States under their most unjust and oppressive fiscal system, For example, according to the census of the two countries, Canada had 479,000 farmers against 6,000,000 in the United States ; 114,000 commercial and professional men against 1,500,000 in the UnitedStates ; 213, §00 persons engaged in industrial pursuits, against 2,500,- 000 in the United States.And if it be true as alleged, that the soil of Canada is being impoverished year by year, it is a very good reason for correcting a system of bad farming, but none at all for trebling the taxes of the people of the country.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.035 | 0.008 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".