Fallout Cookbook

atoga

atoga

It Wandered In From the Wastes
The Payne–Aldrich Tariff Act of 1909 (ch. 6, 36 Stat. 11), named for Representative S

It was the first change in tariff laws since the Dingley Act of 1897.[2] President William Howard Taft called Congress into a special session in 1909 shortly after his inauguration to discuss the issue. Thus, the House of Representatives immediately passed a tariff bill sponsored by Payne, calling for reduced tariffs. However, the United States Senate speedily substituted a bill written by Aldrich, calling for fewer reductions and more increases in tariffs.[2] An additional provision of the bill provided for the creation of a tariff board to study the problem of tariff modification in full and to collect information on the subject for the use of Congress and the President in future tariff considerations. Another provision allowed for free trade with the Philippines, then under American control. Congress passed the bill officially on April 9, 1909.[3] Taft promptly appointed members to serve on the tariff board.
 
Last edited:
A gradual easing of British-American territorial and economic disputes commenced shortly after the passage of the Dallas tariff.[46]
The Rush–Bagot Treaty of 1817 demilitarized the Great Lakes regions and the following year the Treaty of 1818 drew the forty-ninth parallel from the Lake of the Woods west to the Rocky Mountains. With this, Great Britain tacitly acknowledged the legitimacy of US claims to the vast Louisiana territory.[47]
Another potentially volatile international development – General Andrew Jackson’s military incursion into Spanish Florida and his summary execution of two British citizens – failed to incite British retaliation, diplomatically or militarily[48][49] The Adams–Onís Treaty of 1819 transferred all of Florida into US hands, ending Spain’s machinations to enlist Great Britain in recovering Louisiana from the United States. By 1820, US–British diplomatic relations had significantly improved.[50]
British mercantilism and trade monopolies also weakened during this period.[51] Great Britain recognized that its prosperity was inextricably connected to the industrial growth and territorial expansion of America.[52] British–American trade wars had virtually vanished by 1820[53] and with it the argument that protectionist tariffs were necessary to sustain war industries.[54]
In the three years following the passage of the Dallas tariff, the issues that prompted appeals for protection – trade wars, geostrategic disputes and the federal deficit – had largely been resolved.[55]
 
Last edited:
Two years ago, before the release of Tactics, Interplay came out with a Fallout cookout contest. I came out second runner up for a lasered Brahmin receipe.
So there are officials reciepes still around Interplay.

You also want to be careful with copyright. Find my reciepe and you can have it, however i'm not sure that by accepting the prize i release all rights to that reciepe to Interplay. Having to pay a fine for copyright is really a bitch.

Good luck

edit note : found it http://www.interplay.com/falloutbos/contest.html
 
The tariff of 1816 supplied comfortable federal surpluses from 1817 to 1819; even with the scheduled reduction in duty rates for 1819, the tariff was expected to provide sufficient revenue.[56]
The Panic of 1819 caused an alarming, but temporary drop in the projected federal revenue for 1820. Manufacturers and other protectionists, as well as agrarian anti-protectionists, agreed that the existing tariff of 1816 would perform adequately during the economic recovery. Secretary Dallas warned that any increase in customs on cotton, wool and iron during the economic crisis would actually depress revenues further.[57]
Protectionists were eager to distance themselves from the revenue issue – if revenues were adequate, they could hardly argue for an increase in duties. Manufacturers sought a new argument to support higher tariffs – economic distress due to the downturn. In reality, the Panic had benefited manufacturing by causing a drop in the price of raw materials; even as the retail sales of the cotton goods plummeted, so did the wholesale cost of raw cotton - textile producers could still turn a profit. The primary producers in the agricultural South, however, saw the value of their goods decline and sell at a loss.[58]
By 1820, the support for higher tariffs was less an argument for government revenue, than an effort by Western and Northern interests to establish protection as a principal of economic national well-being. Unlike the tariff in 1816, the tariff legislation in 1820 included higher duties and a long list of new items,[59] and the duties were to be permanent. No longer a mere expedient, this tariff reflected the new loose constructionist principles of the National Republicans, deviating from the strict constructionist requirements of the Democratic-Republican wing of the party. This the Southern agrarians could not abide, when no external threat to the nation at large remained.[60]
Historian Norris W. Preyer summarized the shift in Southern opinion this way:
By 1820 the South realized that the earlier arguments and appeals of protectionism were no longer valid. In 1816 it was not a desire for manufacturing, but a combination of prosperity, patriotism, and promises that had swayed Southerners. None of these factors now existed to influence them. One consideration, however, which had always been a strong influence on the thinking of Southerners still remained – the need to defend their economic interests. Now, with no other views to challenge or obscure this desire, the South turned almost unanimously against the tariff bill of 1820. The brief Southern experiment in supporting protection had come to an end, and from then on that section would consistently oppose all protective tariffs.[61]
 
Last edited:
The Tariff of 1824 (Sectional Tariff of 1824, ch. 4, 4 Stat. 2, enacted 1824-05-22), was a protective tariff in the United States designed to protect American industry from cheaper British commodities, especially iron products, wool and cotton textiles, and agricultural goods. The second protective tariff of the 19th century, the Tariff of 1824 was the first in which the sectional interests of the North and the South truly came into conflict. The Tariff of 1816 eight years before had passed into law upon a wave of nationalism that followed the War of 1812. But by 1824, this nationalism was transforming into strong sectionalism. Henry Clay advocated his three-point "American System", a philosophy that was responsible for the Tariff of 1816, the Second Bank of the United States, and a number of internal improvements. John C. Calhoun embodied the Southern position, having once favored Clay's tariffs and roads, but by 1824 opposed to both. He saw the protective tariff as a device that benefited the North at the expense of the South, which relied on foreign manufactured goods and open foreign markets for its cotton. And a program of turnpikes built at federal expense, which Clay advocated, would burden the South with taxes without bringing it substantial benefits. Nonetheless, Northern and Western representatives, whose constituencies produced largely for the domestic market and were thus mostly immune to the effects of a protective tariff, joined together to pass the tariff through Congress, beginning the tradition of antagonism between the Southern States and the Northern States that would ultimately help produce the American Civil War.[1] The successor to the Tariff of 1824, the so-called "Tariff of Abominations" of 1828, was perhaps the most infamous of the protective tariffs for the controversy it incited known as the Nullification Crisis. [2]
 
Last edited:
You want a post-apocalyptic cookbook? Look in the nearest bookstore, I believe Emeril Lagasse just published one.

"BAM! Iguana-on-a-stick!"
 
I have a wicked hot buffalo wing recipe, can't think of a name though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top