Is Donald Trump a tariff tyrant or a contemporary Moses – leading the world to a fairer trade system, and Americans to a better dream “somewhere over the rainbow”?
A characteristically thoughtful, balanced discussion, Melanie. Your background in finance dwarfs mine, so I’ll dare to say only that I share Batya’s view of the matter: had I not been fortunate enough to get on the middle-class real estate escalator over 40 years ago, starting with a $39,000 house in Idaho, I’d have very few assets in my old age that might hold their value. As you probably recall, I was a Pat Buchanan / Donald Trump anti-globalist populist at the time we met, focused far more on cultural issues than economic ones, so from every perspective I embrace the “Liberation Day” theme. Trump is endeavoring not so much as to take us to The Promised Land as to RETURN us to the one that has been gradually, steadily stolen from the forgotten man. The “tyrant” characterization has always struck as simply wrong; if this were 17th-century England, he might have become an Oliver Cromwell, but in this American republic, he’s less of a tyrant than Abraham Lincoln proved to be in many respects.
Anyway, thanks for your open mindedness. We don’t need more “Panicans” 😆.
Thanks Chad for sharing your thoughts publicly! And nice to get the old band back together – you me and Glenn!
I wish more were like you and that the comments I’ve received privately were posted here so everyone could witness the diversity of opinion and engage in thoughtful dialogue!
Many share your humility given how complex and emotionally charged this issue is. A few people said they’re genuinely torn and don’t know what side to take, only that they want what’s best for our country and “forgotten Americans.” One friend who owns a jewelry store is frustrated because if Swiss watches become significantly cheaper in Europe, her customers will buy them there. “Rolex isn’t going to build a US factory and even if they did, who would buy them?”
Others shared concerns about how this affects their bottom line—and a few, like you, embraced the “Liberation Day” theme as a long-overdue corrective. Some were willing to absorb short-term pain if it leads to fairer outcomes. And several shared my concern about America’s global image. They want the world to look up to America, not feel bullied by us.
That’s why your comment is so valuable—it frames Trump not as a tyrant or Moses, but as a man trying to return us to something we feel we’ve lost. I may not have landed yet on exactly where I stand, but I know this: we need more open-minded conversations like this one—and fewer “Panicans” indeed 😆.
As so often happens with Trump, his seemingly outrageous demands serve two constructive purposes.
One, he focuses attention on the issue. Today, everyone knows about the horrible Venezuelan gangs, everyone knows about the ridiculous government waste, everyone knows about systemic antisemitism on college campuses, and everyone knows about the tariffs and structural barriers of other countries.
Previous administrations did not publicize such things for the precise reason that the people would have insisted they do something about those things. Trump is willing and eager to do something about those things, and he's willing to put himself on the line to garner popular support.
Two, Trump's outrageous demands frame the negotiations. By demanding the moon from the EU on the tariff fight, he has already obtained their informal agreement to a zero-for-zero tariff. That would have been considered impossible just one month ago.
Many politicians (Obama comes to mind) take a hard line in negotiations, but then undercut themselves by taking a soft line when telling the media about their position -- as if the other side doesn't read the newspapers. Trump does exactly the opposite. That makes the newspapers think he's unreasonable, but makes the other side to the negotiations think they scored a great deal when he backs down from his outrageous public demands.
Too often, Trump gets characterized as a bull in a china shop, but that's unfair to bulls. What bulls do in a china shop is mostly unintentional. What Trump does is usually quite intentional, even when -- sometimes especially when -- he makes people think he's crazy. After all, making the other side think he might be crazy was what won the Cold War for Ronald Reagan.
All that said, Trump won't be invited to join my hiking group.
But as Lincoln said of Grant, he fights. Like Grant, he even fights dirty. And not to insult the three of us, but they would both probably just roll their eyes at our clever introspections.
By the way, as an aficionado of Swiss timepieces, I've learned that only 60% of the manufacturing costs need be incurred in Switzerland for a watch to be labeled "Swiss made." And a Rolex is considered a mass-produced abomination.
Thanks again, Glenn, for continuing our dialogue! I agree with much of your assessment about how Trump has focused attention on issues that have been ignored for too long. And yes, words like tariff are now in our popular parlance. Go figure!
Also, I agree with you about Trump’s fearlessness as a fighter and about his negotiation tactics – anchoring his position beyond what is mutually acceptable so that the eventual settlement is closer to his position.
But the uncertainty his unpredictability causes is destabilizing. When people don’t know what to think or how to plan, it increases risk – business, international relations, the global economy, the stock market and perhaps worst of all, the bond market.
America is a nation ruled by laws, not men, and Trump’s singular approach to announcing sweeping policies on the fly, without consulting allies – congressional or foreign nations – undermines his ability to achieve his ultimate strategy, in this case to isolate China and end their unfair trade practices. It also raises concerns about the kind of unilateral policymaking that frustrated many under Biden, such as with his unconstitutional student loan forgiveness and open borders approach.
Trade negotiations and deals are complex and take time and have long-term ramifications for our economy and global standing. Having pissed off our allies and preferred trading partners, we’re now asking them to help us triangulate a common foe? Mexico, Canada and the EU are not China. Wouldn't it have been better to make that distinction from the start to enlist their support for this high stakes with China?
The bond market is another pressing concern. With the growing debt, the interest now exceeds our military budget—a historically alarming signal of national decline. Liberation Day shocked the markets and they haven’t recovered. As a result, markets are demanding a higher risk premium (higher yields) to buy U.S. bonds, forcing the government to issue more bonds to service the rising costs. This creates a vicious cycle of rising debt and uncertainty, which can only be addressed by injecting clarity and confidence into the market, not confusion and risk aversion.
I want Trump to succeed in isolating China and securing trade concessions globally. But it better happen fast, for the reasons I’ve articulated. I just think we would have been better off if Trump had been a bull in China’s china shop, not the china shop of our allies.
Reagan may have been perceived as “crazy” enough to use nuclear weapons, but he was also a coalition builder, bringing western Europe along to deploy the Cruise and Pershing missiles targeting the Soviet Union. Reagan is an example of why I can’t help but believe that we’d be more successful if we stuck with tried-and-true coalition building to secure strategic industries and stop China’s predatory trade practices, alongside strategic economic/regulatory reforms to unleash the power of our market and increase American competitiveness.
Don't you kind of wish we lived in less “interesting” times, as the old Chinese curse goes?
I don't have much fear about pissing off our allies. They act out of self-love, not love for America. "Tried and true coalition building" left EU tariffs and other trade barriers in place for 70 years, while pissing them off brought them down in less than a month.
As for the stock market, it's down about 5% from the pre-tariff level. That's not even a "correction," much less a bear market. This is hardly 1929 when the market dropped 35% in two days. Trump, or at least his team, seem to know when to back off.
(BTW, I'm amused by Trumpsters who have turned against him because their 401k went down. "This isn't what I voted for" is their mantra. I conclude that the EU is not the only one that indulges their self-love.)
A characteristically thoughtful, balanced discussion, Melanie. Your background in finance dwarfs mine, so I’ll dare to say only that I share Batya’s view of the matter: had I not been fortunate enough to get on the middle-class real estate escalator over 40 years ago, starting with a $39,000 house in Idaho, I’d have very few assets in my old age that might hold their value. As you probably recall, I was a Pat Buchanan / Donald Trump anti-globalist populist at the time we met, focused far more on cultural issues than economic ones, so from every perspective I embrace the “Liberation Day” theme. Trump is endeavoring not so much as to take us to The Promised Land as to RETURN us to the one that has been gradually, steadily stolen from the forgotten man. The “tyrant” characterization has always struck as simply wrong; if this were 17th-century England, he might have become an Oliver Cromwell, but in this American republic, he’s less of a tyrant than Abraham Lincoln proved to be in many respects.
Anyway, thanks for your open mindedness. We don’t need more “Panicans” 😆.
Thanks Chad for sharing your thoughts publicly! And nice to get the old band back together – you me and Glenn!
I wish more were like you and that the comments I’ve received privately were posted here so everyone could witness the diversity of opinion and engage in thoughtful dialogue!
Many share your humility given how complex and emotionally charged this issue is. A few people said they’re genuinely torn and don’t know what side to take, only that they want what’s best for our country and “forgotten Americans.” One friend who owns a jewelry store is frustrated because if Swiss watches become significantly cheaper in Europe, her customers will buy them there. “Rolex isn’t going to build a US factory and even if they did, who would buy them?”
Others shared concerns about how this affects their bottom line—and a few, like you, embraced the “Liberation Day” theme as a long-overdue corrective. Some were willing to absorb short-term pain if it leads to fairer outcomes. And several shared my concern about America’s global image. They want the world to look up to America, not feel bullied by us.
That’s why your comment is so valuable—it frames Trump not as a tyrant or Moses, but as a man trying to return us to something we feel we’ve lost. I may not have landed yet on exactly where I stand, but I know this: we need more open-minded conversations like this one—and fewer “Panicans” indeed 😆.
Thank you again for your thoughtful engagement.
As so often happens with Trump, his seemingly outrageous demands serve two constructive purposes.
One, he focuses attention on the issue. Today, everyone knows about the horrible Venezuelan gangs, everyone knows about the ridiculous government waste, everyone knows about systemic antisemitism on college campuses, and everyone knows about the tariffs and structural barriers of other countries.
Previous administrations did not publicize such things for the precise reason that the people would have insisted they do something about those things. Trump is willing and eager to do something about those things, and he's willing to put himself on the line to garner popular support.
Two, Trump's outrageous demands frame the negotiations. By demanding the moon from the EU on the tariff fight, he has already obtained their informal agreement to a zero-for-zero tariff. That would have been considered impossible just one month ago.
Many politicians (Obama comes to mind) take a hard line in negotiations, but then undercut themselves by taking a soft line when telling the media about their position -- as if the other side doesn't read the newspapers. Trump does exactly the opposite. That makes the newspapers think he's unreasonable, but makes the other side to the negotiations think they scored a great deal when he backs down from his outrageous public demands.
Too often, Trump gets characterized as a bull in a china shop, but that's unfair to bulls. What bulls do in a china shop is mostly unintentional. What Trump does is usually quite intentional, even when -- sometimes especially when -- he makes people think he's crazy. After all, making the other side think he might be crazy was what won the Cold War for Ronald Reagan.
All that said, Trump won't be invited to join my hiking group.
But as Lincoln said of Grant, he fights. Like Grant, he even fights dirty. And not to insult the three of us, but they would both probably just roll their eyes at our clever introspections.
By the way, as an aficionado of Swiss timepieces, I've learned that only 60% of the manufacturing costs need be incurred in Switzerland for a watch to be labeled "Swiss made." And a Rolex is considered a mass-produced abomination.
Thanks again, Glenn, for continuing our dialogue! I agree with much of your assessment about how Trump has focused attention on issues that have been ignored for too long. And yes, words like tariff are now in our popular parlance. Go figure!
Also, I agree with you about Trump’s fearlessness as a fighter and about his negotiation tactics – anchoring his position beyond what is mutually acceptable so that the eventual settlement is closer to his position.
But the uncertainty his unpredictability causes is destabilizing. When people don’t know what to think or how to plan, it increases risk – business, international relations, the global economy, the stock market and perhaps worst of all, the bond market.
America is a nation ruled by laws, not men, and Trump’s singular approach to announcing sweeping policies on the fly, without consulting allies – congressional or foreign nations – undermines his ability to achieve his ultimate strategy, in this case to isolate China and end their unfair trade practices. It also raises concerns about the kind of unilateral policymaking that frustrated many under Biden, such as with his unconstitutional student loan forgiveness and open borders approach.
Trade negotiations and deals are complex and take time and have long-term ramifications for our economy and global standing. Having pissed off our allies and preferred trading partners, we’re now asking them to help us triangulate a common foe? Mexico, Canada and the EU are not China. Wouldn't it have been better to make that distinction from the start to enlist their support for this high stakes with China?
The bond market is another pressing concern. With the growing debt, the interest now exceeds our military budget—a historically alarming signal of national decline. Liberation Day shocked the markets and they haven’t recovered. As a result, markets are demanding a higher risk premium (higher yields) to buy U.S. bonds, forcing the government to issue more bonds to service the rising costs. This creates a vicious cycle of rising debt and uncertainty, which can only be addressed by injecting clarity and confidence into the market, not confusion and risk aversion.
I want Trump to succeed in isolating China and securing trade concessions globally. But it better happen fast, for the reasons I’ve articulated. I just think we would have been better off if Trump had been a bull in China’s china shop, not the china shop of our allies.
Reagan may have been perceived as “crazy” enough to use nuclear weapons, but he was also a coalition builder, bringing western Europe along to deploy the Cruise and Pershing missiles targeting the Soviet Union. Reagan is an example of why I can’t help but believe that we’d be more successful if we stuck with tried-and-true coalition building to secure strategic industries and stop China’s predatory trade practices, alongside strategic economic/regulatory reforms to unleash the power of our market and increase American competitiveness.
Don't you kind of wish we lived in less “interesting” times, as the old Chinese curse goes?
I don't have much fear about pissing off our allies. They act out of self-love, not love for America. "Tried and true coalition building" left EU tariffs and other trade barriers in place for 70 years, while pissing them off brought them down in less than a month.
As for the stock market, it's down about 5% from the pre-tariff level. That's not even a "correction," much less a bear market. This is hardly 1929 when the market dropped 35% in two days. Trump, or at least his team, seem to know when to back off.
(BTW, I'm amused by Trumpsters who have turned against him because their 401k went down. "This isn't what I voted for" is their mantra. I conclude that the EU is not the only one that indulges their self-love.)