Mar, 2016. As Donald Trump’s election campaign begins to pick up steam, Trump asks his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, to do some economic policy research on China. So Kushner does what any serious, meritocratically selected special adviser would do: he browsed a few book covers on Amazon, found one with an edgy title (“
👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾 Brexit was stupid because people voted yes for an impossible and nonsensical delusion where no-one knew the actual outcome. This is even stupider because he told them what he wanted to do, experts explained why it would hurt ordinary people, he had shown his priorities the first time around and they STILL voted for it and are now pretending there was no way to know this would happen… 🙄
Some people WANT to believe that the world they grew up in (at least their flawed memories of their limited perceptions of that time) is still around. It's a desire for simplicity, back when things weren't so complicated and grey and crowded and diverse. And while I do blame them, I can understand the feeling. As I get older, I find myself thinking that life WAS better in the 90s, back before 9/11, 3+ recessions, and social media. I know that's simplistic to the point of solipsism, but the feeling remains. With no optimism for the future, hiding in an imagined past sounds better and better.
“ Some people WANT to believe that the world they grew up in (at least their flawed memories of their limited perceptions of that time) is still around.”
Exactly. This mistake was the root cause of both Brexit and Trump.
Trump is the physical epitomy of representation of America, the modern day Babylon. For of Babylon it is written, "On the outside it was a golden sceptor, but inside it was filled with filth and abomination."
Actually Trump managed to bankrupt three casinos in Atlantic City: the Trump Taj Mahal, the Trump Plaza and the Trump Castle. He has done damage at the municipal level wherever he has established a business.
Haha, I have, so far, never managed to overstate Trump’s incompetence. Every time I learn something about his stupidity, it ends up being worse than I thought.
The important thing (to him, though), is that he walked away every time. For Trump, it's not about winning; as long as his opponents (which he defines as "anyone not sucking up to me") lose more, he claims victory.
Americans wanted cheap imports and got them when they decided to not look for the union label/made in USA. If tariffs were eliminated would anything be different today? People living on the financial edge will still want, even need, the lowest possible price. Tariffs just mean there will be no low prices at all.
I am not an economist so if there actually is some long-term benefit to what he is doing there are two important questions that I see. (1) can people afford/survive the wait? (2) Trump is temporary, and any potential gain will come after his presidency. Will the next administration put an end to what he is doing before that could happen, even long-term gain is possible? There is also a chance that manufacturers will decide that he is temporary, and the next administration will end his tariffs and not go to the expense of moving factories bac. No gain, plenty of pain.
Wise kings of old had court jesters. Someone with a sharp wit who could not just challenge the king's advisors but ridicule them. Trump does not have a jester or choose advisors who are not loyal yes men. That is not just unwise, it is dangerous.
Tariffs make sense if you have local industries to protect. We don't anymore. (Even things assembled in the USA are fabricated elsewhere.) Trump is just used to being the Big Man, the guy everyone HAS to deal with, so he can push them around to get whatever he can squeeze. In a multi-polar world, this is lunacy. But narcissists don't get where they are by thinking about others.
Exactly. Tariffs are actually an excellent way to protect local manufacturing or to encourage certain business practices when done in an intelligent, targeted way. But intelligent and targeted are not was that cone to ind when I think of Trump.
Tariffs aren’t new. But the *way* Trump is using them is relatively new.
When they’re used intelligently and in a targeted way, tariffs can be a great way of protecting local industries and competitive advantages. Many countries use them in that way today.
But arbitrarily and needlessly slapping tariffs on almost every country on Earth (not Russia, obviously) is economic mutually assured destruction. Except, given China’s trade dominance, it’s extremely likely Trump hurts America more than he does China in the long term.
I hope that you don't think I was endorsing what he is doing.
Trillions of words have been written about how bad Trump is so there is no need for me to add to the drone. His tariffs raise prices and are crushing my retirement savings.
My point was that any possible benefit of returning factories is not likely to happen until he is no longer in office, if at all on a scale that matters, and I doubt that his predecessor will continue them and not try to restore relationships with other countries. Small shops can be established fairly quickly but for big things, factories, moving equipment (loosing local capacity) and training are required. That takes time to take place and bring up to speed. I've taken part in that.
Short term pain and a low likelihood of long-term gain. I'm not a fan.
“I hope that you don't think I was endorsing what he is doing.”
No, not at all. I was just acknowledging that tariffs, in and of themselves, aren’t a bad thing. Trump’s handling of them has been so terrible that I think they’ve got a bad rap, but as you say, they aren’t exactly new and can be good.
As for factories moving back to the U.S. I think that ship has mostly sailed. Manufacturing in China is so much cheaper thanks to their effective slave labour, that any businesses that do come back will likely be mostly automated.
We wanted cheaper products, we turned a blind eye to the Chinese working conditions that made those prices possible, and we know we would never accept them for ourselves, meaning it’s basically impossible to compete.
China’s takeover of manufacturing is complete. Maybe I’m missing something, but I don’t see any possibility of going back. The only country that might compete is India, and maybe African countries in a few years. But America has better get used to its trade deficit.
The one plan I do think Trump has is that he's treating this like the high-pressure business deals that he's done over the years. In his zero-sum mind, he has something (the US economy) that everyone wants (trade), but he isn't getting enough out of it (his complete misunderstanding of how trade works). So it's time to play hardball. Unfortunately, the world economy is more Calvinball. And we aren't the only players. And we handed most of our stuff to China cause we'd rather work office jobs and buy cheap stuff. (Seriously, the fact that tariffs are making cheap junk expensive? Way to crit-fail on bread and circuses there, Don.)
Yep, absolutely. I think this is exactly it. I’m not necessarily saying Trump doesn’t have a plan, just that his plan is stupid and based on staggering ignorance about the way the world works.
I'm going to tell you something that's truly going to blow your mind David. Are you ready? My writing output is not defined by your personal preferences. And especially not by your paper-thin skin when it comes to criticism of your favourite orange idiot.
I still have plenty to say on the topics of sex and race. If you'd rather hide under a blanket every time you see the word "Trump" in a title, that's fine. But that's not ALL I have to say. And never has been.
Trump is the president of the United States. His incompetence is creating upheaval across the world, and this is a place where we talk about the things happening, whether it's the inanity of certain racial policies or the insanity of certain aspects of gender ideology or the insanity of a narcissistic moron wreaking havoc across the world.
If you don't like it when I treat the topics you DO like with the sane scrutiny as the topics you don't, if you'd rather wrap yourself in a cocoon where nobody ever criticises Trump, that's up to you. But that's not a problem I can help you with I'm afraid.
I'm going to say something that will blow YOUR surprisingly cliched, paper-thin skinned mind. Are you ready? I spend most of my social media day arguing with Cult45.
Your 4 paragraph rant built on the assumption that the world is only divided into two 100% agree/disagree camps belies everything you say you are when it comes to discussion with your readers.
I'm just pointing out that you're not very good at it. I could tune into Lawrence McDonald or an AOC tweet and get better critique. I just subscribed because I though you were smarter than this hysteria. But I guess I found out differently when I dared to push back a little on a Gaza column.
Also, just because I like to check I’m not imagining things, I went back and revisited our conversation on Gaza. Can you tell me where the “hysteria” is? Is it possible you’re reacting to a faulty memory of how that conversation actually went?
I don’t have any idea where you got the idea that I think the world is divided into 100% agree/disagree camps. But I don’t. And actually, I think I live up to my values on discussion pretty well.
But I don’t tolerate rudeness very well. And don’t feel much obligation to try.
If you disagree with something I’ve said, that’s fine. Tell me what it is, argue in good faith, and I’m very happy to engage politely.
But leave snarky, rude comments under every article that criticises Trump (note that I decided to simply ignore it at first), and yes, you’ll discover that my politeness is a choice, and I’m actually quite capable of giving as good as I get.
Every? Again, thin skinned. My main pushback was on Gaza, and I was not the rude one.
Bubba, if I had the outrage you assume, I would have left more than a 2 sentence reply. I'm not outraged, I'm bored. This is not a column that invites discussion, it's a pretty closed end rant that's not terribly readable or interesting. And your assumption about my love of Trump can only come from the prison of 2 ideas, because it's NOTHING I've ever said.
If I subscribed to a golf channel and they spent a large part of their offerings on celebrity pro-ams, I would have a similar reaction to paying to watch baseball players golf.
I hate his tariff policy. They've cost me plenty. Tariffs impose taxes on a domestic population to protect politically favored, inefficient industries with a bad business model. Trade deficits are not even something real economists care about. If you want to write something that doesn't sound like everyone else's freak out, check out the insanity of the US tariffs on Madagascar.
“ Every? Again, thin skinned. My main pushback was on Gaza, and I was not the rude one.”
I’ve linked that conversation above. Could you point to where I was rude?
Nowhere in the description of this website does it say it’s a race and trans issues only Substack. In fact, politics is right there in the list of topics I cover. And it’s hard not to notice that your snarky comments only started appearing under Trump articles. You can show your bias with more than just declarative statements.
I didn’t say you were outraged, I said you were rude. Which you were. I ignored that rudeness last time, I thought I’d address it this time before it became a trend, you’re welcome to stop being rude any time you want. You’ll never find a conversation here where I open with rudeness or swearing or demands, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect that in return.
Lastly, your closing paragraph here is truly baffling. You’re literally commenting on an article where I specifically call out the insanity of US tariffs on Madagascar. Am I missing something??
🤣🤣🤣Holy crap, okay man. So you're dismissing an article you're now claiming you didn't even read, and that contains exactly the kind of analysis you say you wanted, as "boring" and "shit you can get anywhere."
In fact, given that I haven't seen anybody else talking about Madagascar specifically, I strongly suspect you heard about the insanity of the Madagascar tariffs from me, and then forgot where you heard it.
What, exactly, am I supposed to do with this? You're admitting the source of your issue isn't the article itself (again, the content of the article is what you're claiming to want), so what am I supposed to attribute your reaction to except the fact that I'm criticising Trump? I'm all ears for alternative explanations.
That said, now that I've gone back and read the whole thing, there actually are some nuggets buried in the slag of unnecessary hyperbole. If you'd let them speak for themselves without all the cliched Orange Rich Man Bad And Oh Did I Mention He's Rich stuff, I would have gotten to them. It is MUCH better, however, than Lawrence O'Donnell.
If only we'd started here, eh? Would have saved us both some time and energy. Although, as I said below, I'm curious where you think I was hyperbolic.
Trump's wealth is obviously relevant when we're talking about his impact on the economy. That's not hyperbole, nor did I exaggerate it. [Edit: In fact, having gone back and had another look, I barely even mentioned his wealth at all!! There's literally just one mild allusion to it. Seriously! What exactly are you reacting to?!! Because it sure seems like your problem is criticism of "the orange man"😅]
I just used it to demonstrate a defining characteristic of Trump and the flaw in much of his decision making, namely that he doesn't think about how his actions will affect ordinary people, aka ~90% of Americans, and this is a real problem for a president.
Add in his narcissism and his genuinely mind-blowing ignorance and I think it's the kind of thing that's worth talking/writing about.
The GDP of Madagascar is 15.8 billion. The GDP of Fort Myers-Cape Coral in Florida is 50 billion. In 2023 the per capita income of people in Madagascar was $506 a year. That is, people there earn $1.38 cents a day. It is one of the poorest countries on earth.
We have a trade deficit with them so we are imposing a tariff. That is odious. We cannot have a trade equilibrium with them and this has nothing to do with their imposition of tariffs on us. They could impose a 100% tariff on us and that will mean nothing to us.
Madagascar's main exports are vanilla, cloves, nickel, and textiles, with vanilla being a particularly significant global export, especially to France. So, they will always sell to us more than we can ever sell to them simply because people in Madagascar cannot afford virtually anything we have to sell! The trade deficit with them is not due to Madagascar imposing trade barriers on us. As it is almost always the case, the reasons why there are trade imbalances are multiple and they are not due to “cheating.”
In fact, the trade deficit with Madagascar is very good for us because we get vanilla, cloves, cobalt, titanium, nickel, and textiles from them.
Nope, I saw it on National Review, AND a friend of mine posted a rather long analysis of it. I got about halfway through yours when my eyes glazed over at the hyperbole. Maybe I said something similar once before. I really don't remember.
Oh, okay, fair enough. The fact that Madagascar's alleged tariff rate was so high immediately drew my eye. I guess it was the same for others. That still doesn't address the silliness of attacking an article you haven't read. Or your motivations for attacking it that have nothing to do with Trump criticism.
And please, feel free to point out the hyperbole that made you're eyes "glaze over," I'm pretty sure everything in the article is well referenced fact.
👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾 Brexit was stupid because people voted yes for an impossible and nonsensical delusion where no-one knew the actual outcome. This is even stupider because he told them what he wanted to do, experts explained why it would hurt ordinary people, he had shown his priorities the first time around and they STILL voted for it and are now pretending there was no way to know this would happen… 🙄
Some people WANT to believe that the world they grew up in (at least their flawed memories of their limited perceptions of that time) is still around. It's a desire for simplicity, back when things weren't so complicated and grey and crowded and diverse. And while I do blame them, I can understand the feeling. As I get older, I find myself thinking that life WAS better in the 90s, back before 9/11, 3+ recessions, and social media. I know that's simplistic to the point of solipsism, but the feeling remains. With no optimism for the future, hiding in an imagined past sounds better and better.
“ Some people WANT to believe that the world they grew up in (at least their flawed memories of their limited perceptions of that time) is still around.”
Exactly. This mistake was the root cause of both Brexit and Trump.
Trump is the physical epitomy of representation of America, the modern day Babylon. For of Babylon it is written, "On the outside it was a golden sceptor, but inside it was filled with filth and abomination."
A nation of hucksters that idolizes Gordon Gekko voted for a huckster who cosplays him.
Actually Trump managed to bankrupt three casinos in Atlantic City: the Trump Taj Mahal, the Trump Plaza and the Trump Castle. He has done damage at the municipal level wherever he has established a business.
Haha, I have, so far, never managed to overstate Trump’s incompetence. Every time I learn something about his stupidity, it ends up being worse than I thought.
The important thing (to him, though), is that he walked away every time. For Trump, it's not about winning; as long as his opponents (which he defines as "anyone not sucking up to me") lose more, he claims victory.
Tariffs have a long history in America https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_tariffs_in_the_United_States so what Trump is doing is not exactly new. It was about protecting manufacturing, Trump's current claim.
Americans wanted cheap imports and got them when they decided to not look for the union label/made in USA. If tariffs were eliminated would anything be different today? People living on the financial edge will still want, even need, the lowest possible price. Tariffs just mean there will be no low prices at all.
I am not an economist so if there actually is some long-term benefit to what he is doing there are two important questions that I see. (1) can people afford/survive the wait? (2) Trump is temporary, and any potential gain will come after his presidency. Will the next administration put an end to what he is doing before that could happen, even long-term gain is possible? There is also a chance that manufacturers will decide that he is temporary, and the next administration will end his tariffs and not go to the expense of moving factories bac. No gain, plenty of pain.
Wise kings of old had court jesters. Someone with a sharp wit who could not just challenge the king's advisors but ridicule them. Trump does not have a jester or choose advisors who are not loyal yes men. That is not just unwise, it is dangerous.
Tariffs make sense if you have local industries to protect. We don't anymore. (Even things assembled in the USA are fabricated elsewhere.) Trump is just used to being the Big Man, the guy everyone HAS to deal with, so he can push them around to get whatever he can squeeze. In a multi-polar world, this is lunacy. But narcissists don't get where they are by thinking about others.
Exactly. Tariffs are actually an excellent way to protect local manufacturing or to encourage certain business practices when done in an intelligent, targeted way. But intelligent and targeted are not was that cone to ind when I think of Trump.
Tariffs aren’t new. But the *way* Trump is using them is relatively new.
When they’re used intelligently and in a targeted way, tariffs can be a great way of protecting local industries and competitive advantages. Many countries use them in that way today.
But arbitrarily and needlessly slapping tariffs on almost every country on Earth (not Russia, obviously) is economic mutually assured destruction. Except, given China’s trade dominance, it’s extremely likely Trump hurts America more than he does China in the long term.
I hope that you don't think I was endorsing what he is doing.
Trillions of words have been written about how bad Trump is so there is no need for me to add to the drone. His tariffs raise prices and are crushing my retirement savings.
My point was that any possible benefit of returning factories is not likely to happen until he is no longer in office, if at all on a scale that matters, and I doubt that his predecessor will continue them and not try to restore relationships with other countries. Small shops can be established fairly quickly but for big things, factories, moving equipment (loosing local capacity) and training are required. That takes time to take place and bring up to speed. I've taken part in that.
Short term pain and a low likelihood of long-term gain. I'm not a fan.
“I hope that you don't think I was endorsing what he is doing.”
No, not at all. I was just acknowledging that tariffs, in and of themselves, aren’t a bad thing. Trump’s handling of them has been so terrible that I think they’ve got a bad rap, but as you say, they aren’t exactly new and can be good.
As for factories moving back to the U.S. I think that ship has mostly sailed. Manufacturing in China is so much cheaper thanks to their effective slave labour, that any businesses that do come back will likely be mostly automated.
We wanted cheaper products, we turned a blind eye to the Chinese working conditions that made those prices possible, and we know we would never accept them for ourselves, meaning it’s basically impossible to compete.
China’s takeover of manufacturing is complete. Maybe I’m missing something, but I don’t see any possibility of going back. The only country that might compete is India, and maybe African countries in a few years. But America has better get used to its trade deficit.
Interesting... https://youtu.be/RxlopbcfXpQ?si=tzVSW_1G1Ix9-1Pe
Haha, I saw this. I’m writing something about it.
The one plan I do think Trump has is that he's treating this like the high-pressure business deals that he's done over the years. In his zero-sum mind, he has something (the US economy) that everyone wants (trade), but he isn't getting enough out of it (his complete misunderstanding of how trade works). So it's time to play hardball. Unfortunately, the world economy is more Calvinball. And we aren't the only players. And we handed most of our stuff to China cause we'd rather work office jobs and buy cheap stuff. (Seriously, the fact that tariffs are making cheap junk expensive? Way to crit-fail on bread and circuses there, Don.)
Yep, absolutely. I think this is exactly it. I’m not necessarily saying Trump doesn’t have a plan, just that his plan is stupid and based on staggering ignorance about the way the world works.
I subscribed because of your brilliant takes on race and sex. This shit I can get anywhere, and from people who actually know the subject matter.
I'm going to tell you something that's truly going to blow your mind David. Are you ready? My writing output is not defined by your personal preferences. And especially not by your paper-thin skin when it comes to criticism of your favourite orange idiot.
I still have plenty to say on the topics of sex and race. If you'd rather hide under a blanket every time you see the word "Trump" in a title, that's fine. But that's not ALL I have to say. And never has been.
Trump is the president of the United States. His incompetence is creating upheaval across the world, and this is a place where we talk about the things happening, whether it's the inanity of certain racial policies or the insanity of certain aspects of gender ideology or the insanity of a narcissistic moron wreaking havoc across the world.
If you don't like it when I treat the topics you DO like with the sane scrutiny as the topics you don't, if you'd rather wrap yourself in a cocoon where nobody ever criticises Trump, that's up to you. But that's not a problem I can help you with I'm afraid.
I'm going to say something that will blow YOUR surprisingly cliched, paper-thin skinned mind. Are you ready? I spend most of my social media day arguing with Cult45.
Your 4 paragraph rant built on the assumption that the world is only divided into two 100% agree/disagree camps belies everything you say you are when it comes to discussion with your readers.
I'm just pointing out that you're not very good at it. I could tune into Lawrence McDonald or an AOC tweet and get better critique. I just subscribed because I though you were smarter than this hysteria. But I guess I found out differently when I dared to push back a little on a Gaza column.
Also, just because I like to check I’m not imagining things, I went back and revisited our conversation on Gaza. Can you tell me where the “hysteria” is? Is it possible you’re reacting to a faulty memory of how that conversation actually went?
https://commentary.steveqj.com/p/dont-worry-i-suspected-you-would/comment/47857108
I don’t have any idea where you got the idea that I think the world is divided into 100% agree/disagree camps. But I don’t. And actually, I think I live up to my values on discussion pretty well.
But I don’t tolerate rudeness very well. And don’t feel much obligation to try.
If you disagree with something I’ve said, that’s fine. Tell me what it is, argue in good faith, and I’m very happy to engage politely.
But leave snarky, rude comments under every article that criticises Trump (note that I decided to simply ignore it at first), and yes, you’ll discover that my politeness is a choice, and I’m actually quite capable of giving as good as I get.
Every? Again, thin skinned. My main pushback was on Gaza, and I was not the rude one.
Bubba, if I had the outrage you assume, I would have left more than a 2 sentence reply. I'm not outraged, I'm bored. This is not a column that invites discussion, it's a pretty closed end rant that's not terribly readable or interesting. And your assumption about my love of Trump can only come from the prison of 2 ideas, because it's NOTHING I've ever said.
If I subscribed to a golf channel and they spent a large part of their offerings on celebrity pro-ams, I would have a similar reaction to paying to watch baseball players golf.
I hate his tariff policy. They've cost me plenty. Tariffs impose taxes on a domestic population to protect politically favored, inefficient industries with a bad business model. Trade deficits are not even something real economists care about. If you want to write something that doesn't sound like everyone else's freak out, check out the insanity of the US tariffs on Madagascar.
“ Every? Again, thin skinned. My main pushback was on Gaza, and I was not the rude one.”
I’ve linked that conversation above. Could you point to where I was rude?
Nowhere in the description of this website does it say it’s a race and trans issues only Substack. In fact, politics is right there in the list of topics I cover. And it’s hard not to notice that your snarky comments only started appearing under Trump articles. You can show your bias with more than just declarative statements.
I didn’t say you were outraged, I said you were rude. Which you were. I ignored that rudeness last time, I thought I’d address it this time before it became a trend, you’re welcome to stop being rude any time you want. You’ll never find a conversation here where I open with rudeness or swearing or demands, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect that in return.
Lastly, your closing paragraph here is truly baffling. You’re literally commenting on an article where I specifically call out the insanity of US tariffs on Madagascar. Am I missing something??
Oops, I guess I was just so bored I didn't get that far. But I'd sure like links to my multiple Trump defenses.
🤣🤣🤣Holy crap, okay man. So you're dismissing an article you're now claiming you didn't even read, and that contains exactly the kind of analysis you say you wanted, as "boring" and "shit you can get anywhere."
In fact, given that I haven't seen anybody else talking about Madagascar specifically, I strongly suspect you heard about the insanity of the Madagascar tariffs from me, and then forgot where you heard it.
What, exactly, am I supposed to do with this? You're admitting the source of your issue isn't the article itself (again, the content of the article is what you're claiming to want), so what am I supposed to attribute your reaction to except the fact that I'm criticising Trump? I'm all ears for alternative explanations.
That said, now that I've gone back and read the whole thing, there actually are some nuggets buried in the slag of unnecessary hyperbole. If you'd let them speak for themselves without all the cliched Orange Rich Man Bad And Oh Did I Mention He's Rich stuff, I would have gotten to them. It is MUCH better, however, than Lawrence O'Donnell.
If only we'd started here, eh? Would have saved us both some time and energy. Although, as I said below, I'm curious where you think I was hyperbolic.
Trump's wealth is obviously relevant when we're talking about his impact on the economy. That's not hyperbole, nor did I exaggerate it. [Edit: In fact, having gone back and had another look, I barely even mentioned his wealth at all!! There's literally just one mild allusion to it. Seriously! What exactly are you reacting to?!! Because it sure seems like your problem is criticism of "the orange man"😅]
I just used it to demonstrate a defining characteristic of Trump and the flaw in much of his decision making, namely that he doesn't think about how his actions will affect ordinary people, aka ~90% of Americans, and this is a real problem for a president.
Add in his narcissism and his genuinely mind-blowing ignorance and I think it's the kind of thing that's worth talking/writing about.
Ismael Hernandez
The GDP of Madagascar is 15.8 billion. The GDP of Fort Myers-Cape Coral in Florida is 50 billion. In 2023 the per capita income of people in Madagascar was $506 a year. That is, people there earn $1.38 cents a day. It is one of the poorest countries on earth.
We have a trade deficit with them so we are imposing a tariff. That is odious. We cannot have a trade equilibrium with them and this has nothing to do with their imposition of tariffs on us. They could impose a 100% tariff on us and that will mean nothing to us.
Madagascar's main exports are vanilla, cloves, nickel, and textiles, with vanilla being a particularly significant global export, especially to France. So, they will always sell to us more than we can ever sell to them simply because people in Madagascar cannot afford virtually anything we have to sell! The trade deficit with them is not due to Madagascar imposing trade barriers on us. As it is almost always the case, the reasons why there are trade imbalances are multiple and they are not due to “cheating.”
In fact, the trade deficit with Madagascar is very good for us because we get vanilla, cloves, cobalt, titanium, nickel, and textiles from them.
Nope, I saw it on National Review, AND a friend of mine posted a rather long analysis of it. I got about halfway through yours when my eyes glazed over at the hyperbole. Maybe I said something similar once before. I really don't remember.
Oh, okay, fair enough. The fact that Madagascar's alleged tariff rate was so high immediately drew my eye. I guess it was the same for others. That still doesn't address the silliness of attacking an article you haven't read. Or your motivations for attacking it that have nothing to do with Trump criticism.
And please, feel free to point out the hyperbole that made you're eyes "glaze over," I'm pretty sure everything in the article is well referenced fact.