Trump’s tariffs
Yesterday Trump announced that he plans to impose a 25% tariff on all goods from Mexico and Canada, and increase the tariff on goods from China 10%. Most of the coverage (including the article I just linked) assumes that it would raise prices here. That may indeed be a valid assumption. Most of the articles don’t emphasize the other part of the equation – which is that he says he will do it until the border countries do something to curtail the importation of fentanyl, and to stem the tide of illegal aliens crossing their respective borders.
Trump claimed:
This Tariff will remain in effect until such time as Drugs, in particular Fentanyl, and all Illegal Aliens stop this Invasion of our Country! …
I have had many talks with China about the massive amounts of drugs, in particular Fentanyl, being sent into the United States — But to no avail. Until such time as they stop, we will be charging China an additional 10% Tariff, above any additional Tariffs, on all of their many products coming into the United States of America.
So the way I see it is that this is Trump’s opening bid in a complex negotiation – let’s make a deal. Whether Trump will get what he wants from those countries, or whether this will be economically disastrous or at least difficult for US consumers, remains to be seen.
Will the costs be passed on to US buyers and cause inflation? Will companies absorb them? Will the costs be offset by other de-inflationary policies such as lowered energy costs or tax cuts? If we become more energy independent, will we not need to import much oil from Canada? And will Mexico and/or Canada and/or China blink and actually do something about fentanyl and/or about the border traffic?
The assumption by the left is that of course this will be inflationary and that Trump is a stupid dodohead Nazi whatever. But at this point I would’t underestimate Trump.
Why doesn’t Trump explain his strategy better, so that the American people can understand all the thinking behind this?
(1) Maybe he really is a stupid dodohead.
(2) Maybe he doesn’t want to tip his hand and reveal too much to the other sides in the negotiations.
(3) Maybe he will explain better later.
(4) Maybe he wants to make all his enemies and opponents predict something dire that doesn’t happen, and be wrong again.
I agree. This is an opening gambit. You don’t open negotiations the way Obama/Biden did with Iran which was “Tell us what you want and we’ll give it to you’
Your option #2 with a sprinkle of #4.
He hasn’t taken office yet, this is a move to clearly establish what he wants from them.
What Steve and Betty said.
A “stupid dodohead” doesn’t turn his several million dollar inheritance into several billion dollars.
I don’t particularly like him, and I could use a lot of derogatory terms to describe what it is that I don’t like about him…but “stupid” isn’t one of them.
Big Tariffs sounded great when I first read it. Then read something about it hurting workers in all involved countries—including here. I dunno…
Good point.
Vice crime enforcement has a long history of failure in America—reflecting on big expenses and *BIG GOVT ENFORCEMENT* plus keeping local govts busy and broke.
Trump obviously knows this so it can probably be dropped in the “complex negotiation”.
Leave the new ‘Silent’ Trump to his work… 😉
(2) and (4). It’s an opening bid.
Agree with (2) and (4). And didn’t he do the same thing last time? That is, didn’t he threaten Mexico with tariffs if Mexico didn’t agree to “remain in Mexico?”
I don’t know much about tariffs and have no idea what will happen if Trump imposes them. I just want to say that I love this phrase:
“. . . stupid dodohead Nazi whatever.”
It sums up so much Trump derangement, so brilliantly. Wonderful!
Loose lips sink ships therefore it’s wise to play close to the vest. I swear, the left doesn’t seem to understand either dealing with bullies or negotiation with bullies. Trump seems to have a good handle on both. My guess is this understanding was sharpened by dealing with the construction business in NYC.
Democrat politicians are used to being bullies. They hate it when their bluff is called.
“Why doesn’t Trump explain his strategy better, so that the American people can understand all the thinking behind this?”
• Out of curiosity, what would “better” look like?
• All of us – USA & abroad – heard/ read what the experts/ MSM/ etc. said would happen when Trump stated that he was going to deploy tariffs in his first term (see ‘The sky will fall’).
• Then all of us experienced what actually did happen, including the fact the next USA administration left the tariffs in place (see ‘The sky did not fall’).
• Strikes me that Trump clearly stated what he wishes to see happen – curtail drug smuggling/production & illegal immigration – and that many will understand & support those goals (see ‘Less is More’).
• Lastly, Trump was returned to office in part because he earned much of the public’ trust when it came to handling the economy and protecting the country, and that is part of the public’ understanding too – “explained” or not (see ‘Don’t let perfection get in the way of progress’).
It’s going to be a bumpy ride. The posturing by Mexico’s President is interesting.
Also her comments on Trump’s election in a speech to fellow Mexicans. Sounding like she is ready for a fight. This after the election before Trump announced the tariffs when he takes office. It does put the ball in Mexico’s court to demonstrate they will help control their southern border.:
This isn’t inflationary. It’s a tax. It will increase revenue to the government. How much it will raise the price of goods imported from Mexico depends on whether it’s a finished good or a component in the production of a product here.
Unless you consider all taxes inflationary which would be kind of a new definition of a tax.