Ignorance of Modern-Day Tariffs
The recent actions surrounding tariffs as implemented President Trump, have sparked a whirlwind of rhetorical commentary from politicians and media pundits across the spectrum. Those remarks range from fervent praise to vehement criticism. However, a critical question arises: how well-informed are these political and media figures about the intricacies of economics and modern-day tariff policies?
Anyone can look at the balance of trade between the US and another country. That’s easy. But what does it mean? Trump looked at our trillion-dollar imbalance of trade and decided to do something about it. While negative trade balances exist with all but 4 countries in the world, Trump knows the biggest problem in this arena is China where the US faces major tariffs on its goods, while the US has had little or no tariffs on Chinese goods. In addition, he knows the US is dependent on China for goods for which it should be independent, including pharmaceuticals, medical and surgical equipment, electronics (including phones), lithium batteries and appliances.
He also knows the American economy and consumers represent the largest world market for all goods and services. That puts the US in a powerful bargaining position for which he wants to use to advantage while fixing our trading posture. It’s unusual to have a president who understands business and trade and is willing to run the gauntlet of political criticism and ignorance.
Tariffs, as instruments of economic policy, are complex tools designed to protect domestic industries, generate revenue, and, at times, influence international trade relations. Yet, in the hands of politicians, tariffs often become rhetorical devices rather than carefully analyzed policies. This is particularly evident when one observes the discordant statements emerging from political factions. A significant portion of this discourse appears to be rooted not in an understanding of economic principles but in the desire to appeal to specific voter bases or to leverage partisan narratives.
In many cases, politicians use tariffs as a means to project strength or to signal priorities. For some, tariffs symbolize protectionism and the safeguarding of domestic industries, while for others, they represent an overreach that could derail international trade and raise prices. The problem, however, lies in the fact that these soundbites rarely delve into the deeper economic implications or trade-offs associated with such measures.
Modern economics, particularly in the realm of international trade, is a dynamic and intricate field. Understanding the cascading effects of tariffs requires some understanding of macroeconomic principles, supply chain logistics, and global market trends. Dare I say many politicos lack a foundation in these areas. Their pronouncements often reflect a superficial grasp of the issues, with little acknowledgment of the data or empirical research necessary to evaluate the impact of tariffs comprehensively.
President Trump’s imposition of tariffs has resulted in many countries eager to negotiate new trade deals. At the same time, he has exhibited flexibility dependent on the foreign country’s response and the commitment to future investments by certain companies.
Consider, for example, the debate over whether tariffs lead to job creation or job loss, or higher or lower prices. While President Trump claims that the proper use of tariffs will bring manufacturing jobs back to domestic shores, others warn of inflationary pressures and retaliatory measures from trading partners. Both perspectives hold elements of truth, but the actual impact of tariffs depends on a myriad of factors, including the industries affected, the duration of the tariffs, and the responses of international partners.
Without a robust understanding of these variables, political rhetoric risks oversimplification, reducing the public discourse to a binary of “good” or “bad” policies. This lack of depth not only misleads voters but also undermines the formulation of effective economic trade strategies.
At the heart of the issue is the reality that many politicians are, first and foremost, political strategists. Their expertise lies in navigating the complexities of public opinion, crafting persuasive narratives, and securing electoral victories. Economic policy, however, often requires a different skill set—one grounded in analytical rigor and long-term planning.
This divide becomes particularly evident when politicians prioritize short-term political gains over sustainable economic outcomes. For instance, endorsing tariffs might resonate with constituents in regions struggling with deindustrialization, even if the broader economic consequences are less favorable. Conversely, opposing tariffs might align with free-market principles without addressing legitimate concerns about trade imbalances or unfair practices by foreign competitors.
The intersection of politics and economic policy is fraught with challenges. While tariffs and other trade measures are undeniably important tools in shaping a nation’s economic trajectory, their efficacy depends on informed and deliberate application. As the recent tariff scenario illustrates, the voices dominating the political stage often lack the expertise necessary to navigate these complexities.
Trump’s use of tariffs to increase the independence of the country for key materials and goods can easily result in some short-term pain for consumers.
Bridging the knowledge gap will not only enhance the quality of the debate but also ensure that economic policies serve the broader public interest rather than short-term political objectives.
********************
Have a great and prosperous week.
Hug somebody.
References:
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2025/04/time_to_end_tariff_alarmism.html
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/051515/pros-cons-trade-deficit.asp#:~:text=%EE%80%80A%20trade%20deficit%EE%80%81%20occurs
Analyzing the Impact of the U.S.-China Trade War on China’s Energy Transition
SPIDER Bytes
This week’s trivia question is: Weighing up to 2,000 pounds, what is the largest mammal in North America? The answer to last week’s question re who President Jefferson sent out, with a military party, to explore the areas south and west of the Louisiana Purchase: Zebulon Pike. Eventually a Brigadier General, then Lieutenant Pike took a small army unit of 20 on the 1806-07 trek to map the southern area, including Colorado and New Mexico, to make contact with the Indian tribes therein, and find the headwaters of the Red River. The Spanish still controlled much of the southern part of the area and at one point captured the group and took them to Mexico before they were released. Pike mapped much of Texas on the groups’ release from Mexico and while returning to a fort near St. Louis. The tallest mountain encountered on the trek was later named Pikes Peak (near the present Colorado Springs) in his honor.
The 151st Kentucky Derby was won by Sovereignty yesterday, besting favorite Journalism at the wire on a muddy track.
A deal for rare earth minerals was signed last week by Presidents Trump and Zelensky of Ukraine. This administration considers it a first step in stopping the war because further attacks by Putin will now be directly affecting the US.
In Dhaka, Bangladesh some 20,000 protested recommendations that women be given something closer to equal rights. Hefazat-e-Islam leaders said the reforms are contradictory to the Sharia law.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court suspended a Milwaukee Circuit Court judge who was arrested for obstruction after she helped an illegal immigrant evade arrest by I.C.E. The immigrant was in her courtroom facing three battery/domestic abuse charges for allegedly beating two people.
As of tomorrow you’ll need a ‘real’ picture ID to board a domestic flight. You can use a passport until you get one. In 13 states and D.C., you don’t need either one to vote.
Did you know a Tesla EV needs oil? It’s true. Oil is needed for the gearbox, or drive unit.
Researchers in Australia have shown a booster to a vaccine is more effective when injected into the same arm as where the vaccine was originally inoculated. It has to do with specialized immune cells called macrophages becoming ‘primed’ inside lymph nodes. These macrophages then direct the positioning of memory B cells to more effectively respond to the booster when given in the same arm. Who would have guessed?
An Idaho law enacted and implemented in March to assist the federal deportation process was enjoined last week by a federal district Judge in the state. The ACLU argued that the law attempts to supersede federal immigration enforcement by allowing local law enforcement to act as immigration agents.
Chinese exports of low-value packages ($800 or less) soared to $66 billion in 2023, up from $5.3 billion in 2018, according to a February report by the Congressional Research Service. With the U.S. market being a major destination, they will no longer be duty-free here under recently initiated tariffs on Chinese goods.
President Trump has reportedly reached a deal on tariffs on foreign-made autos and auto parts. The deal involves a commitment by manufacturers to invest in America. Meanwhile, China is reportedly ‘open’ to a dialogue with the US on trade.
