pull down to refresh
136 sats \ 1 reply \ @Signal312 7 Apr \ on: Are tariffs about resetting global trade or getting the US 10yr yield down? AskSN
This isn't my writing, rather it's from Tom Woods today, one of my favorite podcasters. I pasted the whole thing below. He's promoting a libertarian oriented debate on the tariffs (see the end).
Here's my favorite extract:
I just recorded the debate on the Trump tariffs that will run on the Tom Woods Show on Wednesday. You will find it interesting.
The pro side was represented by John Carney, my friend of 30 years, who heads up financial and business news for Breitbart. Before that, he was with the Wall Street Journal, a corporate attorney before that, and in 1995-96 he was research director for the Buchanan for president campaign.
The con side was represented by Gene Epstein, director of the Soho Forum and formerly economics and book review editor at Barron's, former senior economist at the New York Stock Exchange, and many other things.
Now here's something I dashed out on X today:
Even now I'm being told: "Watch this 23-minute video. It will explain Trump's tariff strategy."
I get that we all want to believe there's a grand strategy at work. I want the guy to succeed.
But he says he can't tolerate any trade deficit at all. Even Pat Buchanan never said that.
If that's what he's holding out for, we are in for not the "reindustrialization of America" but a prolonged, self-inflicted impoverishment that will punish rich and poor alike.
If he abandons this impossible (and undesirable) "no trade deficits with any country" scheme and declares victory, people will say: Woods, you were wrong! It worked out fine!
But it will have worked out fine in spite of the original rationale.
Everyone supporting the policy pits it as smart, savvy MAGA people who care about the working class against soulless globalists who sold out America.
I have nothing but contempt for the globalists whom MAGA rightly despises.
But not everyone who opposes the policy belongs to that camp, and the reason I oppose the policy is that it will hurt the working class.
"Look, we saved 100,000 jobs in steel!" We'll start hearing claims like that. But when we lose 800,000 jobs in industries that use steel as an input (because prices WILL go up domestically; that's the point of a tariff), nobody will understand where they went.
What are the drawbacks of the tariff policy? You'll know you're dealing with a serious opponent if he has the honesty to admit that some exist. These are taxes, after all, and sales taxes don't enrich people.
If instead you're told, "It only hurts the stock market, and that's not the economy," then you are speaking to an Elizabeth Warren clone and not a serious person.
Back to the point: if you're going to tell me that Trump's goal is zero tariffs, you are neglecting that (a) he obviously likes tariffs and has repeatedly made that clear; and (b) this is absolutely not what he is saying. He has told several countries the opposite.
John disputes much of this. He says: there is a plan, and it is reasonable.
Second, he concedes that it's not reasonable for Trump to demand no trade deficits with any country whatsoever. But he insists this is a case of Trump making a huge ask and later making a deal.
Third, he says Trump is genuinely trying to reduce trade barriers, including non-tariff barriers. John appears on TV quite often with Larry Kudlow, Trump's friend, and Kudlow absolutely insists that this is Trump's position.
Fourth, John makes the case that the numbers given for each country, which are not actually tariff rates but reflections of the U.S. trade deficit with those countries, are, despite the scoffing of the pundit class, in fact a reasonable proxy for tariff and non-tariff trade barriers erected by each country.
We're all doing our best to piece together what's going on here, and I feel sure that this debate will help clarify things for you. Expect it on Wednesday, and in the meantime be sure to subscribe to the Tom Woods Show (it's available on every platform, but here's Spotify just as an example):
https://open.spotify.com/show/4RziZyRebkVYcRuGJlkJHN
Tom Woods
I am not sure completely balanced trade works with the US dollar system. US exports dollars, other nations export goods for those dollars. It was a good deal for the US for decades. I don't think that is the case anymore. Maybe trade should settle in a neutral reserve asset like gold or bitcoin. Bitcoin is a better option but it will be argued that it is too volatile to settle global trade. But if it was to settle global trade every nation would need to have a bitcoin reserve and it likely would be 10x the size and not as volatile.
reply