So well said! You are 100% right that it has been the strangulation of manufacturing businesses by regulators and politicians who want to solve every perceived problem, no matter how small, no matter the cost and no matter the impact on business and jobs. Remember the clown show Obama and Biden administrations’ favorite response to lost jobs: “go learn and code.” Both administrations were run by people who never created a job and never built anything. What we need is a roll back of all the unnecessary job crushing laws, rules, and regulations passed since Barack Obama His Own Self was elected.
You are absolutely right. The democrats wants the laws because of the green grift it throws off and it makes their anti-human Marxist supporters happy, and too many republicans are terrified of rolling back any regulation because they’re spineless and terrified of the media and liberal backlash.
it's also worth, perhaps, asking some questions about the origins of much of their money and ideas. too many of these attacks, education, industrial policy, climate hoax, medical, mental health, identity war look too precisely calibrated to hit weak spots. if one wanted to destabilize/demoralize a geopolitical rival through 5th column "manchurian candidates" how would one improve upon much of what has happened?
where the line lines on incompetence vs malice is a very interesting question
I’d say there’s no question those questions need to be asked. There’s not a chance that those changes and their outcomes were done solely due to incompetence (as incompetent as they were). Rather, the changes were most certainly purposeful, including the outcomes. This has the anti-human, anti-American, anti-Western Civilization fingerprints of Soros, and the ultra rich elites all over it. The million or billion dollar question is can it be proven…
Looks like a great follow-up article. How many treats and beds must be handed over to government, regulators, and unions. Oh, and the lords of easy money on Wall Street for interest on operating loans, pension funds invested there. . .
Yes it is very much worth asking. One way to begin to illuminate the line between incompetence and malice is to follow the money.
Another thing worth asking is how "green" is all this "green tech" and "green policy". The answer is not very. In some cases the "green" tech is more devastating to the environment than what it strives to replace when all the costs and impacts are included. Much of what has been preached for "carbon mitigation" replaces low risk of harm with assured harm.
Seriously what would happen if politicians and policy actually solved problems? I mean, that would devastate campaigning! It is the (empty) promise of solving problems that gets them elected. Actually solving anything is counter to their primary need - to retain power!
No, Gato keeps up with this defense of offshoring our manufacturing sector. Yes, US energy policy needs reform but we have about the cheapest electricity in the developed West. Yes, we need regulatory reform, but offshoring was driven by trade policy exactly as Ross Perot told us in the 90s. There is no way to get around the fact that if the average monthly wage in Vietnam is $360/month then it is impossible for any American production worker to compete in that global race to the bottom. If every regulation in the CFRs was erased today none of those jobs would return unless the labor cost differential is addressed.
I hugely admire Gato’s contribution to our understanding of COVID and politicized science, but theoretical economics is not the only way to analyze the trade issue. The cat really needs to put down the laptop and spreadsheets away for a couple of months and go into the physical world of manufacturing. I challenge you to just try to manufacture a physical product made in the United States. I’ve done that and it’s horrifying just trying to find any equipment, components, and subcontractors remaining here. The globalization locusts took damn near every production machine down to the level of hand tools in some industries and shipped them overseas.
Electricity prices in Maryland have increased 50% in the past decade all at the same time Maryland has closed multiple power plants. This is economics 101: Reduce supply, maintain demand, and the price will increase.
An immediate consequence of higher electricity prices is to shut out Maryland as a consideration for new data centers. No new construction. No new jobs to build and support the infrastructure, computer systems and computer networks.
And so it is that Maryland, which has many competitive advantages, fails to grow its economy.
And then the Maryland politicians squeal when tariffs threatens their port. How ironic! Maryland politicians have no problem sticking tariffs on its citizens and its businesses. But it says it is unfair to tax foreigners. Does that make any sense at all?
The Maryland legislature may suck, but we didn’t lose all those small, medium, and large manufacturers last year. Our trade policy has been a decades long failed experiment that set American wages in competition with third world poverty wages with exactly the results you would expect. The same people that brought us this debacle by sending our jobs overseas for cheap manufacturing labor also brought us mass immigration to fill the remaining service sector jobs with cheap labor. Our national economic policy has been all about cheap labor and look at what happened.
And those who weren't around when we used to make things don't remember that most products did not break or otherwise become useless in 3 to 5 years like they do today. Refrigerators we built in the 1950s were still running 50 yrs later. When we lost our manufacturing base we also lost control of the quality of products. Now the inside plastic in refrigerators is breaking in 3 to 5 yrs! toaster ovens are kaput in 3 yrs, etc. The amount of Chinese trash tossed in landfills each year is ridiculous.
"There is no way to get around the fact that if the average monthly wage in Vietnam is $360/month then it is impossible for any American production worker to compete in that global race to the bottom"
Uh, the difference is capital put behind workers, isn't it? Stupidly, the United States has given away industries where our advantage in wealth made it impossible for poor countries like Vietnam to compete. Chip manufacture. Pharmaceuticals. Instead, we have decapitalized and chosen to pursue industries that do not require intensive capitalization (think software versus hardware) so that our workers only have their social and intellectual capital to compete with, while we have eroded the former by divide and conquer racial tactics and the latter by destroying educational systems to create high-paid make-work jobs for the Professional-Managerial class. All this has benefitted the class that skims the cream at the top while turning everyone below them into a lumpenproletariat.
Agreed. However capital is fungible just as much as labor, and it’s also cheaper to build a high tech pharmaceutical factory in a lower wage country. The lies we were told that exporting manufacturing would open us up to a new, affluent world of nice clean cushy jobs pushing buttons at the pill factory didn’t pan out either. You’re right about the class of people who’ve benefited from this arrangement. The investor class’s cheering cadre of PMC laptop workers are about to learn what it’s like to be made redundant when AI disappears their jobs too.
In 2006, i purchased the items to fully furnish a house in michigan (furniture, etc.). The ONLY item i purchased that was actually manufactured in the USA was a wooden rolling pin. All of our remaining household goods had been manufactured outside the USA.
We bought everything new, rather than moving our own stuff to the states. We left the job and house plus contents (owned by the employer) after 3 years, leaving all behind. I did see a picture later on which still showed the goods we bought in fine condition. I remember the usa back then imported 75% from china, europe 50%. Mind you, in search of the maximum profit, many european companies outsourced production to china in a joint venture. I am sure the usa did the same. That leaves no job for an american or european (i.e. money earned to buy goods, as opposed to money given), only profit to the manufacturer.
I'm in manufacturing. I have 2 machines (paid for once 10 years ago) that take the place of 5 humans. About 40% of my raw materials are imported (China, India, etc). The same US material is 2x - 10x more in cost. Is the material better? Maybe marginally. But the import does the job and keeps me competitive. I would buy US material all day long. But who's going to tell my competitors to do the same? Free trade isn't about jobs. It's about choice and where to best put my resources as I see fit. Gato is absolutely spot on. People trade. Not governments. They only hurt the natural order.
You assume those with the capital have any loyalty to the nation states…..what I see is an already existing global economy that the billionaire class dictates and the political theatre is just that…theatre….to keep the masses dancing to the tune of bygone left vs right paradigms and old economic models as they advance their automation and centralize their financial power and prowess in digital affairs as they seek to commodify all things, not just products and services, but nature, humans and behavioral modification. The 4th Industrial Revolution…where automation, tech and AI eliminates much of the workforce.
They, the tech oligarchs, know, in a way the populist uprising seen across the world, do not yet understand, that the ones squarely in control are no longer (not sure they ever truly were) the government officials.
Tech and supposed “progress and innovation” have only served to manifest more power and control in those creating the systems to manage us….until they no longer need us at all. The rise of the machines.
The way I see it is pretty simple….all the economy, efficiency and automation that comes with tech means fewer earning meaningful wages and that means less ability the masses will have to pay (through taxes, etc.) for their “democratic” governance.
Our politicians are already on the dole….in effect, like actors on the stage, paid to maintain the illusion that the public has a choice. When in fact, the politicians (who have been getting wealthy) encourage the public to live beyond their means and have allowed the public and industry to be beholden to philanthropaths, NGOs, corrupted and captured institutions staffed by supposed “enlightened” individuals being produced by education systems that indoctrinate rather than liberate through critical thinking and concepts or rights coupled with responsibility.
It is indeed a changed world. Or perhaps not changed so much as we are coming to the end of a trajectory which has been foretold but ignored, as if it could be addressed effectively in the future….always putting off to tomorrow what should have been done yesterday.
This has allowed for momentary increased standards of living perhaps, but the price we may ultimately pay for being unable to rein in the excesses as a means of keeping our sovereignty, individually and at the national level….potentially dystopian or utopian. Depends entirely on whose rhetoric you belief and how much faith one has in mankind.
Personally, after the past five years, I find it increasingly hard to believe that enough of the public is prepared to sacrifice, reflect, and be intentionally critical in their thought processes to change the status quo.
Meanwhile, in the shadows, the globalist agenda keeps creeping forward. What has changed since the pandemic is that it should be abundantly clear that the technocrats are no longer pretending they ask for our permission. The digital prison being erected.
We watch real life on our screens now…as if it was a nightly tv show moving towards some pre-determined conclusion….a script written. We are our own audience. Stumbling along waiting to be told what is next….and then responding with outrage or virtue signaling. And the tech guys laugh….how can they not.
In short, the public is fat and happy….unmotivated to change habits they have become addicted to even if change would set them free. And they really aren’t that happy.
I totally agree and have believed since before I was in law school that many of them are, by and large, unconstitutional as they act under improper delegations of authority. They act as if they are the lawmakers but answer to no one, frequently not even the President.
actually the "regulatory agencies" in many cases answer to the corporations whose members, lawyers or lobbyists usually run them - like the FCC, FDA, PUCs, etc.
For some yes and big corporations can afford to deal with regulations so they put up with it, knowing they have teams of lawyers, lobbyists, etc. It’s the small businesses that really are held back by those regulations. Either way, those regulations are very often unnecessary, poorly written, and force everyone to pay more for everything. I mean do we really need governmental regulations ensuring that bottled water has a nutrition label on it?
Watch Lewis Black talk about that in his great bit on milk and water (only place I can still find it is FB):
Isn't that why we voted for Trump? I guess he's just too interested in starting new foreign wars to pay much attention to what his real job is: destroy the permanent bureaucracy back home.
I agree with much (but not all) of what you say but still remain an optimist. I don’t see the world as quite so dark even though Thomas Hobbes was largely right when he said life was nasty, short, and brutish. Life has never been easy or perfect. And it never will be.
And sure, the politicians keep getting richer and yes the NGOs are by and large corrupted. And it’s true that most people don’t pay attention, leading of course, to most politicians getting reelected.
Indeed, remember what Jonathan Goldsmith, the most interesting man in the world said (yes, the guy from the beer commercials): “Life is a parade, most people are watching."
I think that’s always been true to an extent.
In the end I see three choices. Accept it, and live your life, rage against the machine and never be happy, or enjoy life and your family while working to restore America as we all (for those of a certain age for sure) remember it (which is what I think Trump is trying to do). It’s not in my genes to do anything but the latter.
Urs, as for politicians getting re-elected ad infinitum (and thus richer), would not term limits on members of congress make sense? It will never be an easy process, but it looks like a necessity, and soon, from my perch.
I would 100% agree that term limits are essential to restoring our freedoms but, that has to be done in conjunction with reeling in the bureaucracy because if we have new congressman and senators all the time, the bureaucrats will have no one to control them. Think about it how the blocked Trump 45 left and right. Now, with four years to plan, he and his team are dismantling the administrative state step by step but they really need to GOP legislators to do the right thing.
Your "super high wages" don't buy much interms of quality life. Most go to finance empire and leeches in the politics and banking "industries". In my place you can live a very good life with 90k/year. To have that same life quality in the US, I guesstimated I'd need 200k. And taxes and inflation is a problem here too. You're just not seeing the bigger picture. Also, it's only logical that poor people will be contented with less. As the chinese grew richer, many factories moved to southeast asia. If you start living within your means, most of your illusion of "richness" will fade away. Basically you are "rich" because you consume cheap stuff made by poor people (which fortunately become less poor thanks to that). If you had to buy everything made by high-wage americans, you people would become poor overnight. Also all those funny moneys you used to get free imports would come back home and the US currency would collapse. Weimar anyone?
Remember, it was Barry and Liz whose arrogance led them to utter with venom "You didn't make that!". Well, now they are right. The Chinese are making it!
The old democratic maxim that we should all "learn to code" has now been completely repudiated, because AI can code better, cheaper, and faster, than any human, so millions of coding jobs are now currently being obsolesced. They will have to come up with a new line that they can hurl with distain at the unwashed masses that they are rendering unemployed with their excessive regulation.
W was not only a disaster at foreign policy, he also ushered in the modern surveillance state and was fiscally irresponsible. He hit the trifecta of incompetence. The people that claim Trump is the worst president ever seem to have rather short memories.
I think I had heard of this survey, but the indication in the URL that they ranked (the presidency known as) "Biden" 14th tells you all you need to know. As you pointed out, the American Political Science Association probably thinks they are serious, but they ranked Obama 7th. Not only are they not serious, but like MSM and fact-checkers, they don't even pretend they are trying to be...... they are partisan hacks at best.
As you can imagine, I agree with you. The survey says more about them then it does about Trump. I don't even particularly like Trump, but there is no objective way that he is worse than W.
It's funny how things like Bush's wars enrich US defense contractors, and Obamacare enriches insurance companies. Unfortunately, I'm not a defense contractor or an insurance exec, and I would prefer to keep my money rather than my government choose them as winners, on my behalf.
Obama said "we're about to fundamentally change America". What on earth did people think he meant? Why did no one find that ominous? (Well, many of us did)
I don't want "free trade." I want trade that protects the US national security. I want trade that keeps critical manufacturing independent of potential adversaries. That keeps weapons manufacturing, pharmaceuticals, and energy production operational when other countries refuse to trade with us. Because at some point, they will.
and just what policy do you think gets us there as opposed to impoverishing us? you want to take all of every supply line all the way down to every basic raw material into the US and prevent us from sourcing any of if from abroad?
There's a difference between unfair trade policies and predatory trade policies.
I just think we're starting with the wrong premise.
It'd be one thing to play baseball against a team where the refs have bet against you. Quite another if they're betting against you but don't allow you to use a bat or glove.
You only need supply lines for things you cannot produce or manufacture yourself, or don't matter. Many things were offshored to make financial interests wealthy, at the expense of both our security and our working class.
I don't care about keeping cheap goods if it means it cost us good jobs for the people that shop there. That only makes Wall Street rich at the expense of Main Street.
It sounds like clueless Chris Matthews whining about lumber tariffs on Canada ... "Are we going to make our own wood?" Yes. Yes we are. Our forest products industry has been deliberately decimated, but we can bring it back. The US has forests.
And we already are a poor nation. National debt hovering around 37 trillion. That is what your policies have given us.
You identify the critical parts of the supply chain that are vulnerable and build redundancy there. For example, you don't have to fully control iron ore or coal to produce steel because there are plenty of friendly sources for both inputs. A real life example that's underway now is to re-shore some pharmaceutical manufacturing capability back into the US. The pandemic exposed how dependent the US was on foreign manufacturing for certain APIs, so the feds have been part of an effort to build domestic manufacturing capability for those in the US. FYI, individual companies do a version of this all the time with their own supply chains. This is just expanding on these concepts to a country level.
Remember 5 years ago when they locked down every business that wasn’t essential, then everything ground to a halt because damn near everything turned out to be essential? It’s a bit like that.
I suggest a book, Freedom’s Forge, by Arthur Herman. It describes US industry in WW II. It’s very well-written, easily readable, and details a number of the problems that gearing-up entailed in the ‘40s. The biggest problems then were labor unions, even during the war. We weren’t importing iron ore or coal. We just dug it up and used it. There’s still plenty where it came from.
It would take some time to rebuild a steel/aluminum industry at that scale again. Trying to do that during the opening moves of a war would be extremely tricky. For one thing, people will be in denial about that future, so will oppose the effort.
But today the biggest rate-limiter is, indeed, the regulatory state and its stranglehold on manufacturing. In time of war or national crisis, regs can be suspended by executive order. We had, and almost certainly still have abundant raw manufacturing materials. Whether we have sufficient rare earth metals to make highly advanced weaponry, which rely on chip technology, is the wild card here.
If the US ever finds itself at war and no allies whose countries can supply the various unobtainium isotopes we need, it’s going to be game over anyway.
Lazy answer. There is room for ensuring that we maintain industrial capacity in certain areas without going to extremes in every case. If China is currently the only source for a raw material, yes, interventions to diversify our supply AND develop domestic capacity are prudent.
The National Defense Stockpile (NDS), last amended in 2018, should prioritize closing these gaps in critical materials like rare earth elements (REEs), cobalt, and processed components for military systems—yet it hasn’t fully. As of 2025, its reserves remain inadequate for a no-allies scenario, covering only months of defense needs, not years. Expanding it is likely on the Pentagon’s or Congress’s to-do list, given rising tensions with China and supply chain lessons from Ukraine, but progress lags behind the urgency.
Under Biden, the National Defense Stockpile (NDS) has been underfunded, with resources diverted to green energy projects and Ukraine aid instead of securing critical materials like rare earths. Since 2021, billions have flowed to EV battery subsidies and $61 billion in Ukraine support, while the NDS limps along with just $200 million in 2022-2023 for REEs—far short of the $5-10 billion needed to buffer a no-allies crisis.
Aw, but neither do countries who have offshored critical industries like speciality chemical manufacturing which is all but nonexistent in the US. Not only do we not make these chemicals that go into pharmaceuticals and the like, we have lost the technology that made it possible to make these products in the US. We lose the technology because time kills all the chemists, plant operators and the like and they aren’t being replaced as there are no jobs in these fields anymore. So was offshoring pharmaceuticals to China a good thing? Only time will tell. But if China cuts us off and India can’t come through then a lot of seniors and sick people are instantly going to have very short life spans. I’ve seen estimates that it would take 25 years to get back to where we were 40 years ago in this one vital field alone. This, my Cat, is where economic theory breaks down.
Yet everything you mention has been used against us by our trade partners - not just our government.
How bad does the trade imbalances have to get before you have to level the playing field? It's sorta like asking a liberal how many illegal immigrants is too many.
While you state facts, i don't believe this has anything to do with tariffs, it's all negotiation chits. This all has to do with one thing, and one thing only (everything else is a potential adjacent benefit):
Putting China in a box by getting every other country to capitulate...thereby giving them only one option to capitulate. And I think that is the long game. By weakening China we gain geopolitical advantage over an adversary that is more of a threat to our sovereignty than any other nation in our past...and as a side benefit the rest of the countries. I see nothing wrong with playing the ends against the middle. It also has the potential of solidifying our hegemonic control over currency and all it's tangential benefits.
I believe this is the game and has been from day one.
I think way too much ink is being spilled on this topic, not you of course, because you're simply stating facts.
But i do think those dogmatically/reflexively opposed to tariffs are asking themselves wrong questions.
I don't see any of this as compromising my ideals as being a staunch libertarian.
"trade imbalance" is not a terribly meaningful metric. i think the whole thing is a red herring as an accounting identity, a mistaking of map for terrain.
i'm curious about this libertarian claim:
being forcibly conscripted into a trade war with china does not appeal to me. it's a taking of my rights to trade, interference in my activity, regulation in opposition to personal choice and agency. i'm curious, how to do square that with libertarianism
china are screwed no matter what. their economy is a ponzi overloaded with debt that can never be paid. we should focus on securing our IP and not letting them rob our tech blind and interfere with our elections and politics.
i don't get this "we have to move to economic policies of command and control to defeat a foe that will fall over on its own." why inflict the pain on american consumers? and by what just right?
What pain? Have you experienced any since the hyperbolic screaming from a bunch of people that couldn't pay back their student loans who are now tariff and equities experts?
There will be no pain because this will be a gnat in 1-2 months.
Why not accelerate the collapse of Chinas ponzi scheme?
have you not seen the current scramble going on around supply lines and planning? everyhting just froze. the whole of corp america has no idea how to plan. i've personally seen a half a dozen pre-emptive "we're hiking price 10 or 20%" policies from all manner of suppliers. not sure how you're missing this or the damage that comes from this level of uncertainty.
why damage the US to accomplish what will happen anyway?
Yes as a business owner I'm well aware. It is literally nothing compared to what I experienced during the plandemic.
It'd be different if this were to be protracted.
You make a compelling case, but I simply disagree with the severity of pain to be felt if this is resolved in a few months.
I don't think this administration is slipping into some mercantilism nightmare...they're just getting people to the table. I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt.
I think this is playing out just like Trump intended...including the 90 day "pause" yesterday. In fact I think the 90 day pause was the point.
What do you think would be a faster way to put China in their place? Let them self implode or start the process of everything else you mention (which are all correct)...or, effectively, getting everyone to the table at the same time?
Again I really don't think this has anything to do with the "trade imbalances", I think it is about shifting geopolitical influence. Weakening China only strengthens us.
He has cajoled the rest of the countries to do our dirty work and thereby reducing Chinas stature as a geopolitical rival.
I fail to see how that's a bad thing even if it has some short-term pain.
Or we can just keep focusing on the next "quarter" and not what America looks like when my kids are adults.
And look man, you know I'm no Trump simp. I just happen to believe he has a plan this time. Whereas before it was using tariffs just for tariff sake.
much of what you are saying seems like unitary actor theory where you imagine full nations like the US or china as the prime actor.
how do you squared this with libertarian thinking?
if trump wants to "get them to the table" and does that by taking my rights and harming me economically against my will, is that not essentially a repudiation of the idea of rights?
even if it works, is it not a sort of "ends justify the means" thinking?
you could basically make the same argument to ban speech if doing so wound up making someone better off in the end.
is that OK?
it seems to be that you're leaving the question of "by what right may a just state do this?" out of the equation.
isn't that the core question of a republic and of free people?
Yes, gato, we agree. I just don't think we're debating from a genuine starting point.
It'd be different if they were just unfair trade relations vs predatory trade relations.
Again I'm ANTI-TARIFF.
However its not insane to say tgey worked for the Chinese this century, they worked for the Japanese after World War II, and they worked for the U.S. and Germany in the late 19th century. Buck then, American and German growth rates and economic vibrancy radically outstripped the growth rates and economic vibrancy of a free-trading Britain, which, after abandoning its early 19th-century tariffs, adopted the free trade nostrums of Ricardo and slipped into decline.
But one of the few instances when tariffs failed was during the Smoot-Hawley tariff episode at the beginning of the Great Depression. But there are special circumstances surrounding the imposition of the Smoot-Hawley tariffs that the free-traders hesitate to mention. When the United States raised the Smoot-Hawley tariffs, the U.S. was the world’s greatest creditor, and by raising the tariffs, we prevented others from selling us things so they could make money and pay us back. When they didn’t pay us back, it collapsed the global financial system and helped usher in the Great Depression.
I'd be curious to see what Bastiat would think if he were alive today and had lived through the last 6 decades, and came to find out we're now the world's largest holder of debt.
While the Smoot-Hawley tariffs were bad, Trump’s tariffs as a negotiating chit could be good because the relative financial position of the U.S. vis-a-vis the rest of the world is now reversed. This fact must not be overlooked when assessing the wisdom of Trump’s tariffs versus the folly of Smoot-Hawley
Trump has also promised to remove regulations as he did during his first term and I think he will come through with this. I agree with EGM, though, that the uncertainty for industry that the next admin may undo everything he does will not lead industry leaders to blindly invest.
For sure. It's a gambit, and I'm in agreement with gato on that.
But sometimes you have to be bold.
The fact is, is to do this the "right" way is more of a gambit because it'll be fought tooth and nail in our country and every other country and nothing would change in the next 4 years.
Negotiate with everyone at the same time is much better imo opinion than puddle-jumping from one country to another.
I'd rather have everyone at the table at the same time so that we are in a better position to do it the "right" way rather than hoping that the rest of the countries also want to do it the "right" way. They don't. I think the move is brilliant and obvious to the point I'm not even sure it's worth the headache of parsing the objectives/intent.
And i have to tell you any time I feel like I have to provide the disclaimer that "I'm anti-tariff" (which is the truth) before making a point it starts to smell like what happened during the plandemic.
I'm willing to be wrong because I'm willing to challenge orthodoxy.
It's like we're debating the Smoot-Hawley Act in a vacuum. I think that's a dishonest comparison for a variety of reasons...but I'd have to write a ridiculously long comment explaining that.
Also are you taking into account that this gambit COULD force every country to become more productive per unit, including the US?
You don't think this would force everyone to become more productive by means of competition?
Wouldn't that offset much of the nasty underbelly of tariff imposition? Wouldn't it offset even more if we had fair trade agreements?
Seems to me that would lower cost to the consumer across the board adverting punching ourselves in the face.
I mean the law of increasing returns is a thing.
If we increase variable "units" like labor and capital while fixed factors like cost remain stable (or even decrease), wouldn't that necessarily increase marginal productivity?
Especially so, if you are the world's largest debtor but also the largest consumer by far.
I mean there would be some oil dropped along the way...but that can be cleaned up...while a "seized" engine can not.
I don't know...I don't think there's any way out, than through. We're never going to eliminate our debt...we can only grow ourselves out of this predicament.
I'm willing to see if this resetting affords us that opportunity...because from a pragmatic standpoint, neither you or me or Rand Paul are going to get our way by tightening the buckle
A massive trade imbalance with China—like the $279 billion deficit (2023, Census Bureau)—can signal over-reliance, not just accounting. If unchecked, it risks hollowing out U.S. industries (e.g., 2 million manufacturing jobs lost, 2001-2011, EPI) and ceding strategic leverage—China controls 90% of processed rare earths and 80% of antibiotics (FDA). Cheap goods today could mean vulnerability tomorrow when they pull the plug. It’s not the number; it’s the dependency.
Agreed. That was one of the major points in the Public article. We have a death cycle where China lends us money to buy their junk to lend us our money right back to buy more of our junk. It's a disasterous relationship to have with somebody who is arguably our greatest adversary. It's abundantly clear to me that we need to break ties with China.
I would love to see North American manufacturing improve quality. China benefits from selling us junk that goes straight to landfill. I'm okay with paying more for stuff that lasts longer. There's so many markets where China has undermined the competition and now the only thing left is absolute garbage.
a number of things i have considered buying (like a new toaster oven after mine died within a few yrs), i have given up and done without because the majority of reviewers talked about whatever item being absolute junk - breaking or quitting within a day, a week, or a year if you're lucky. Whenever i mention this to younger people, they don't get it - because to them it is just the norm. Pretty pathetic.
Yeah. It might be a little different if Xi Ping didn't have a problem with 300 mil of his citizens dying in order to knock us off the "thrown".
If we do not take care of business right now, China WILL invade Taiwan and all this talk about tariffs,etc will be a footnote to the death and destruction that would come from a confrontation with China. Taiwan is a trap that Xi is setting for us. And make no mistake Taiwan is just a pawn in drawing us into conflict. They just waiting on the right time while they build up their military forces, etc.
Every move they've made has been telegraphed and I take them at their word.
He is punching them in the face right now instead of waiting to be attacked. He is removing many parts of the machine they operate in the US to undermine the US. The US has military problem that is very serious. How many weeks can we run a long war? That is why we must bring back the production of weapons, ammo, medicine, computer chips (taiwan?) and so many other parts that make us war ready.
We must begin to build factories right now. We must rebuild our energy sector right now. Russia has the GDP of Spain/Portugal, that is the least of our problems.
Agree. I made a similar comment somewhere on this board about Taiwan and Chinas telegraphed plans.
Make no mistake Taiwan would just be the opening act to force us into all out economic warfare...and quite possibiliy a kinetic confrontation.
Hard to win in a kinetic engagement when the other side would be willing to let 400 mil of their citizens die to meet their ends for global domination.
In the end we will both agree. This is a dynamic situation, and one thing both of us share is not being inhibited by the fear of being wrong. As the facts on the ground change i think our opinions will more closely align...because i have a feeling neither of us have all the facts yet.
I don't think Trump had any grand vision, other than to shake it up to create options, and to box China in. I think hes laying China bare, because at the end of the day, when you strip Chinas economy naked its a ponzi scheme. This is how he operates; he figures out shit as he goes along.
Trump doesn't get enough credit for being flexible. Although he will never admit he's wrong that doesn't mean the two are mutually exclusive.
The more options you have, the better you're able to negotiate. By taking this to the street on a grand scale he has created options with individual trade partners, but more importantly to create options for the US between all trade partners. In this way he controls the knobs and levers because everyone else will have to reveal their hand.
I do think Bessent and Lutnick are good guardrails tho.
i think Trump is mr. flexible - which has its admirable as well as down sides. plus a sense of humor. i think the worst thing he has done so far is to bow down to bibi - that early oval office meeting (where turning gaza into a seaside resort once they finish bombing it back to the stone age idea was floated) was stunning. but then i can't think of a single viable political figure who doesn't support Them no matter what they do.
This is all 100% true but leaves out a crucial fact: China is on a 200 year plan, and they are making the money printer go burrrrrrr at astounding rates. One of the reasons is to subsidize industries (rare earths is an outstanding example) and de facto monopolize them with little regard to environment and safety- essentially the polar opposite of the US where we have OVER prioritized these things as you point out. Tariffs are only one part of an equation to re-level the playing field. The administration is doing what they can to deregulate as well, but you are 100% correct that congress needs to get on board to make these changes durable so the investments can be made. No corporation will make these kind of investments without high levels of certainty least we end up with another West Valley Demonstration Project or Keystone XL where billions of investment are wiped away with the swipe of some guy's new autopen.
Well, you’re right. BO, & Quislings have made industry in the US unprofitable. But BO & the Quislings are wrong about everything. Obamacare destroyed many small businesses. We have John McCain to thank for its continued existence. Damn him. But the EPA has destroyed more. And it is all filled with graft and corruption, which frankly was the entire point. Time to drain the swamp and expel the swamp critters. Time to put an end to Progressivism and return to the principles of the Founding Fathers.
Obamacare is one of the single largest disasters that has been inflicted upon the country. A potential goldmine for DOGE.
Although largely hidden among the various forms of withholding, premiums, subsidies, etc., healthcare costs per capita and % of GDP are three to four times greater than historical levels, while life expectancies in the US lag all other "wealthy" countries. The US spends over $4 trillion annually on health care, approaching 20% of GDP
Another aspect of the legacy of Obama, the original DEI hire.
EV's are largely a "solution" looking for a problem.
they are not green, they are not resource efficient, and they are annoyingly impractical and unreliable. they're also a nightmare to insure because one nick on a batter pack and it's a total because there's no way to tell if you've done the kind of damage that can lead to thermal runaway and hard to extinguish car fires.
absent massive subsidy and mandate, hard to see how the whole thing happened
From inside the industry, the EV push had 2 major factors:
1. Regulatory. Despite arguments to the contrary, the Biden Admin's CAFE changes were a mandate. There was no path to meeting with ICE by design. This is another trend that started with BO. The footprint based system borked the industry and pushed crossovers. The Greenies, likely backed by China, lobbied hard for EV subsidies, likely knowing that BYD et al were coming soon with their cheap junk.
2. FOMO. Auto executives were terrified that Tesla was going to replace them all. They thought they were selling cassette walkmans and the iPhone just dropped. They were convinced that EVs were the future despite engineers constantly telling them the tech, especially the batteries weren't there for mass market rollout. Somehow the auto industry is led by people who don't really understand the product.
My ‘91 4wd truck with a 22r engine is still going strong and looks great. No a/c, no power steering, crank windows, 5 speed, real bumpers you can actually run into things with. It’s hardened for Armageddon.
and in a disaster, you can still roll down the windows.
also it doesn't spy on you. or have radar plus all kinds of toxic RF wireless connections inside. mine is a 97 toyota, low mileage (136k) and i don't drive much, so i figure it will last the rest of my life. was worried for awhile that the greenies in cali would try to take it away - one more reason i am glad we have trump. but it does have power windows. . .
In all the years I've been following and reading your posts, this issue is the only time I've disagreed with you. Your first chart tells the story. The CHICOMS have almost double our industrial output; per capita is irrelevant. We have lost vital strategic industries such as steel production, ship production, electronics production, pharmaceutical production and our national security is dependent on a fragile supply chain. In the meantime, the CHICOMS fund and support the drug cartels pushing their Fentanyl poison into our streets and infiltrating tens of thousands of military aged agents into our country. The CHICOMS should never been allowed into the WTO but like the Trojan Horse, they were. President Trump's actions yesterday was a masterstroke The Art of War (the Deal). He has isolated the CHICOMS from the rest of the world and if they don't come to heel, their economy will suffer. The CHICOMS must be stopped and President Trump knows that.
I’m completely with you on this. It’s one of the rare times I think El Gato’s off the mark. To me, it’s all about national defense—boxing in China strategically, not just economics.
Trump yelling about tariffs is a tool. He doesn't REALLY want tariffs to be equal, he wants to negotiate. In order to get them to the table, he threatened. He never meant it....except maybe for China because that's NOT just about tariffs. Trump wants everyone to play fair. Maybe that's a pipe dream, but it's laudable. The whole tariff thing is actually a too.
Oh....and finally, very juvenile of me, but still funny....every time you wrote BO, I read 'body odor.' Chuckles...don't know why.
Your statements have some merit but falter on key points. The US (population: ~340 million) and Germany (population: ~83 million) output gap isn’t as vast as claimed—Germany’s production is about one-third of the US’s despite a population one-fourth the size. Per capita comparisons with China oversimplify structural differences. Manufacturing hasn’t just “changed”—traditional sectors have hollowed out, despite high total output. Post-2008 stagnation is real, but recovery did occur, and blaming domestic policy alone ignores global factors like trade and automation. Free trade wouldn’t necessarily offshore all industry; US strengths in tech and productivity could retain or attract high-value manufacturing, not just services. The arguments overstate absolutes and underplay nuance.
the order in which they are done matters and this trade war seems to be burning the political capital and breaking the political alliance that showed so much promise on pushing deregulation.
it seems like a bad set of priorities for this stage of the game.
I would say there's no time to wait on either matter. Deregulation efforts will be massively kneecapped with lawfare and will limp across the finish line even with some democrat support (although I doubt he would get much support from the "working man" party, trade war or not) after several years.
The trade war has potential to come to a resolution far before that and a "win" will secure midterms for Republicans (ensuring that deregulation even has a chance)....but it needed to start now to give ample time to prove "success".
People are trying to win arguments on a debate with the wrong premise.
Trumps tariffs against China in his first term didn't work because they were unleashed in a vacuum. Whereas this time it involves every country we trade with.
Its a reset. And I'd rather see that than continuing to do the same thing we've been doing for 6 decades. Or i suppose we could just use a cute little button that mispells "reset". The tariffs are just one tool out of many in the toolbox. They're a blunt instrument that long term will wreak havoc...but in the near term force everyone to the table...to make shit happen vs. just talking about it.
We need to do both...otherwise it'll be protracted to the point of irrelevancy.
Exactly. He had to start this first and this is the most difficult and most painful in short term. He has time to work on regulatory changes and that doesn’t take nearly as much political capital. I still have reservations that somehow a wrench will be thrown into the works or his plan may not work as I don’t think the tariff issue and its effects on global and local economies is an easy thing to predict. So many variables. But I also feel like you that Trump has been right about so much and has a plan that is not the same thing we have been doing for the last 40 years. Reset is a good way to look at it.
Gato talks about unnecessarily expending political capital with these tactics, whereas I think he would be expending way more by dragging this out with bilateral negotiations that would take forever.
Trump only has 4 years. After that, God knows what neocon creep will slither back into power. He may have even less time if the Deep State decides to take him out early or steal the mid-terms. And then there is Trump's greatest enemy - one even more powerful than the DS or an assassin's bullet - himself. He shoots off his mouth too much and loses focus. He and America have one chance and one chance only to smash the Deep State, and this is it. He needs to cut out the "foreign wars are cool" crap and get back to doing what he was elected to do: destroying the domestic enemies of America.
Take solar module tariffs— they didn’t slow China down. When the U.S. imposed duties to curb cheap imports, Chinese manufacturers didn’t blink; they swiftly relocated factories to nearby Asian countries like Vietnam and Malaysia overnight, bypassing the tariffs and keeping their edge in the global market.
Except Trump's tariffs against China in his first term arguably did work; he did secure commitments for agricultural purchases from China, and the groundwork was in place for more a comprehensive agreement, which was to be phased in in stages.
The reason it's not regarded as a more resounding triumph is that Covid "happened," with China playing no small role, and that scuttled the negotiations before the remaining phases could be implemented. And then the deep state installed President Autopen into office, who promptly returned trade policy to the status quo ante.
Wait until the moderates who voted for Trump start sweating over the MSM’s lies, claiming deregulation will trash the environment—when it’s just another scare tactic from the usual suspects.
I remember when, as a practicing solo Family Physician, the government added ENDLESS OSHA, HIPPA, medical testing, managed care, etc regulations during the last 20 years. It destroyed the ability for independent docs to continue to practice personalized patient oriented care and forced docs to join hospital and large clinic businesses where the bottom line was productivity, NOT patient outcomes. The one point I believe you neglect is the VERY aggressive multi-pronged attack by Trump on excess regulations, energy costs and tax incentives. By abandoning net zero/green agenda mandates and effecting deregulation and bringing back cheap abundant energy I believe we will see expansion of the small business engine that used to power the US economy. Some fear the advent of a technocracy given DOGE activities. But given the inevitable future role of AI in everything and the understanding that at least initially that role will be primarily defined by those behind the scenes that empower that role I believe we have to hope and trust the current direction. Having AI ensure efficient use of government and taxpayer dollars is a wonderful and critical need going forward. As an aside I highly recommend a peek at Coffee and Covid, the only blog I read before NE each morning!
Correct. However, I fear that Trump is losing focus on his early highly aggressive attacks on the DS bureaucracy. This really was why people voted for him, not because he would bend over for Bibi. He needs to up the pace even more, unleashing Doge into even more cracks and crevices of the permanent bureaucracy and ignoring corrupt activist judges who try to stop him doing his constitutional duties. He also needs to put Patel and the Blondi Barbie on notice that if they don't start jailing the people who committed sedition in Trump's first term then they need to look for other work.
Agree wholeheartedly on Bibi comment, not sure what is behind that. Focus on the deep state. Coffee and Covid legal insights suggest his management of the activist legal activity was anticipated (a trap) and a Supreme Court appeal encompassing the scope of illegal activity against Trump has set up a ruling that will codify his executive power and neuter their judicial overreach. As far as jailing people, I TOTALLY share you impatience. Suspect the wheels of justice need to turn slowly to ensure convictions as well as avoiding fodder for the hysteria of the left to justify violence.
I believe too, Sparky, that Trump is luring the activist judges in to set them up for a Scotus stomping. It's something that he wouldn't fail to have planned for during his 4 years in the wilderness. The only problem with that tactic is that it relies upon a worm like Roberts suddenly developing a backbone. As for Patel and Bondi (and Gabbard), none of whom I trust, I'll agree to hang fire and give them a bit more time. Finally, whatever Trump does and in whatever time frame, the Left is going to have a meltdown. Might as well do what is right and let them blow. Then apply the letter of the law to them. Best of luck, my friend!
Well said! I tell my kids we are privileged (using that to imply personal duty) to be living in the most nodal moment in mans history in a worldwide battle over the future of human freedom. Just as Dr Malone notes concerning RFKs efforts, we need to be careful not to let the psyops of the left set us up as circular firing squads on the members of Trumps team.
I tell my kids the same, Sparky. We are deeply privileged in general in terms of wealth and opportunity, but also because we are seeing history being made every day. You are right too of course that not everything is going to be won in a few months. Fingers crossed that the cause of Good wins.
If weathermen behaved like economists, they would blame reality for deviating from their weather models.
"My computer model predicted a warm sunny day today. Reality was wrong for having a blizzard. If you got stuck in the snow, it's your own fault. You should have inspected my weather model more carefully. Look at my chart! There is no snow here! The model says so! I used math! The model is correct!"
That's essentially what the climate alarmists do. The only way to judge global temperatures with anything approaching accuracy is via satellite data. This data shows that nothing outside of natural variation is occurring with global temperatures. But that goes against climate alarmist ideology so it can't be used. Much better to stick to the completely skewed and biased land based temperature measurements that give the "correct" data.
I don't think an iPhone assembly plant here in the US would have a detrimental number of low value add jobs. Strip away the regulations and hurdles and it would likely be highly automated, requiring a fairly specialized workforce.
This, from a certain perspective is unmitigated bullshit written by a manufacturing mid-wit. The trick is what can be considered industrial production. All of the graphs and academic conclusions cannot change the truth. I'm a life-long industrial auctioneer who has dismantled our industrial might one factory at a time. The list of essential products we no longer produce domestically is alarming. Transformers, switchgear, motors, plastic resins, refinery equipment and pressure vessels, on and on. We assemble cars, but make little of the components outside of the drive train. The jobs that were lost in the rust-belt were exactly these. Wall Street and private capital have torn through our privately owned industry and whored it out on the world marketplace to the cheapest bidder. None of that carnage fits neatly in a graph.
So well said! You are 100% right that it has been the strangulation of manufacturing businesses by regulators and politicians who want to solve every perceived problem, no matter how small, no matter the cost and no matter the impact on business and jobs. Remember the clown show Obama and Biden administrations’ favorite response to lost jobs: “go learn and code.” Both administrations were run by people who never created a job and never built anything. What we need is a roll back of all the unnecessary job crushing laws, rules, and regulations passed since Barack Obama His Own Self was elected.
The politicians don’t want to “solve the problem”. They want to dress up a shakedown or a grift in “solving the problem” clothing.
Spot on...and concise to boot.
Government solves zero problems, it subsidizes them.
You are absolutely right. The democrats wants the laws because of the green grift it throws off and it makes their anti-human Marxist supporters happy, and too many republicans are terrified of rolling back any regulation because they’re spineless and terrified of the media and liberal backlash.
it's also worth, perhaps, asking some questions about the origins of much of their money and ideas. too many of these attacks, education, industrial policy, climate hoax, medical, mental health, identity war look too precisely calibrated to hit weak spots. if one wanted to destabilize/demoralize a geopolitical rival through 5th column "manchurian candidates" how would one improve upon much of what has happened?
where the line lines on incompetence vs malice is a very interesting question
I’d say there’s no question those questions need to be asked. There’s not a chance that those changes and their outcomes were done solely due to incompetence (as incompetent as they were). Rather, the changes were most certainly purposeful, including the outcomes. This has the anti-human, anti-American, anti-Western Civilization fingerprints of Soros, and the ultra rich elites all over it. The million or billion dollar question is can it be proven…
Looks like a great follow-up article. How many treats and beds must be handed over to government, regulators, and unions. Oh, and the lords of easy money on Wall Street for interest on operating loans, pension funds invested there. . .
Simple answer - all of them, eventually.
Especially the schools, and the money supply.
Yes it is very much worth asking. One way to begin to illuminate the line between incompetence and malice is to follow the money.
Another thing worth asking is how "green" is all this "green tech" and "green policy". The answer is not very. In some cases the "green" tech is more devastating to the environment than what it strives to replace when all the costs and impacts are included. Much of what has been preached for "carbon mitigation" replaces low risk of harm with assured harm.
you've identified the most fundamental problem. We have a ruling class that is parasitic.
Even Plato identified that.
It’s a common condition, yes?
Only when human beings are involved.
😂
Another way to say that is we have a ruling class that rules to the benefit of the ruling class. Which is a basic truth.
Managed Decline of the United States. Aka “Death by leeching” (as was the cause of demise for General George Washington.)
Seriously what would happen if politicians and policy actually solved problems? I mean, that would devastate campaigning! It is the (empty) promise of solving problems that gets them elected. Actually solving anything is counter to their primary need - to retain power!
No, Gato keeps up with this defense of offshoring our manufacturing sector. Yes, US energy policy needs reform but we have about the cheapest electricity in the developed West. Yes, we need regulatory reform, but offshoring was driven by trade policy exactly as Ross Perot told us in the 90s. There is no way to get around the fact that if the average monthly wage in Vietnam is $360/month then it is impossible for any American production worker to compete in that global race to the bottom. If every regulation in the CFRs was erased today none of those jobs would return unless the labor cost differential is addressed.
I hugely admire Gato’s contribution to our understanding of COVID and politicized science, but theoretical economics is not the only way to analyze the trade issue. The cat really needs to put down the laptop and spreadsheets away for a couple of months and go into the physical world of manufacturing. I challenge you to just try to manufacture a physical product made in the United States. I’ve done that and it’s horrifying just trying to find any equipment, components, and subcontractors remaining here. The globalization locusts took damn near every production machine down to the level of hand tools in some industries and shipped them overseas.
Electricity prices in Maryland have increased 50% in the past decade all at the same time Maryland has closed multiple power plants. This is economics 101: Reduce supply, maintain demand, and the price will increase.
An immediate consequence of higher electricity prices is to shut out Maryland as a consideration for new data centers. No new construction. No new jobs to build and support the infrastructure, computer systems and computer networks.
And so it is that Maryland, which has many competitive advantages, fails to grow its economy.
And then the Maryland politicians squeal when tariffs threatens their port. How ironic! Maryland politicians have no problem sticking tariffs on its citizens and its businesses. But it says it is unfair to tax foreigners. Does that make any sense at all?
The Maryland legislature may suck, but we didn’t lose all those small, medium, and large manufacturers last year. Our trade policy has been a decades long failed experiment that set American wages in competition with third world poverty wages with exactly the results you would expect. The same people that brought us this debacle by sending our jobs overseas for cheap manufacturing labor also brought us mass immigration to fill the remaining service sector jobs with cheap labor. Our national economic policy has been all about cheap labor and look at what happened.
Ross told us all in the 80s and 90s in his debate with Gore: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fi8OOAKuGQ
And those who weren't around when we used to make things don't remember that most products did not break or otherwise become useless in 3 to 5 years like they do today. Refrigerators we built in the 1950s were still running 50 yrs later. When we lost our manufacturing base we also lost control of the quality of products. Now the inside plastic in refrigerators is breaking in 3 to 5 yrs! toaster ovens are kaput in 3 yrs, etc. The amount of Chinese trash tossed in landfills each year is ridiculous.
thanks for the link! and speaking of gore, looks like another inconvenient truth.
"There is no way to get around the fact that if the average monthly wage in Vietnam is $360/month then it is impossible for any American production worker to compete in that global race to the bottom"
Uh, the difference is capital put behind workers, isn't it? Stupidly, the United States has given away industries where our advantage in wealth made it impossible for poor countries like Vietnam to compete. Chip manufacture. Pharmaceuticals. Instead, we have decapitalized and chosen to pursue industries that do not require intensive capitalization (think software versus hardware) so that our workers only have their social and intellectual capital to compete with, while we have eroded the former by divide and conquer racial tactics and the latter by destroying educational systems to create high-paid make-work jobs for the Professional-Managerial class. All this has benefitted the class that skims the cream at the top while turning everyone below them into a lumpenproletariat.
Agreed. However capital is fungible just as much as labor, and it’s also cheaper to build a high tech pharmaceutical factory in a lower wage country. The lies we were told that exporting manufacturing would open us up to a new, affluent world of nice clean cushy jobs pushing buttons at the pill factory didn’t pan out either. You’re right about the class of people who’ve benefited from this arrangement. The investor class’s cheering cadre of PMC laptop workers are about to learn what it’s like to be made redundant when AI disappears their jobs too.
In 2006, i purchased the items to fully furnish a house in michigan (furniture, etc.). The ONLY item i purchased that was actually manufactured in the USA was a wooden rolling pin. All of our remaining household goods had been manufactured outside the USA.
pretty sad. How have the things lasted?
We bought everything new, rather than moving our own stuff to the states. We left the job and house plus contents (owned by the employer) after 3 years, leaving all behind. I did see a picture later on which still showed the goods we bought in fine condition. I remember the usa back then imported 75% from china, europe 50%. Mind you, in search of the maximum profit, many european companies outsourced production to china in a joint venture. I am sure the usa did the same. That leaves no job for an american or european (i.e. money earned to buy goods, as opposed to money given), only profit to the manufacturer.
I'm in manufacturing. I have 2 machines (paid for once 10 years ago) that take the place of 5 humans. About 40% of my raw materials are imported (China, India, etc). The same US material is 2x - 10x more in cost. Is the material better? Maybe marginally. But the import does the job and keeps me competitive. I would buy US material all day long. But who's going to tell my competitors to do the same? Free trade isn't about jobs. It's about choice and where to best put my resources as I see fit. Gato is absolutely spot on. People trade. Not governments. They only hurt the natural order.
You assume those with the capital have any loyalty to the nation states…..what I see is an already existing global economy that the billionaire class dictates and the political theatre is just that…theatre….to keep the masses dancing to the tune of bygone left vs right paradigms and old economic models as they advance their automation and centralize their financial power and prowess in digital affairs as they seek to commodify all things, not just products and services, but nature, humans and behavioral modification. The 4th Industrial Revolution…where automation, tech and AI eliminates much of the workforce.
They, the tech oligarchs, know, in a way the populist uprising seen across the world, do not yet understand, that the ones squarely in control are no longer (not sure they ever truly were) the government officials.
Tech and supposed “progress and innovation” have only served to manifest more power and control in those creating the systems to manage us….until they no longer need us at all. The rise of the machines.
The way I see it is pretty simple….all the economy, efficiency and automation that comes with tech means fewer earning meaningful wages and that means less ability the masses will have to pay (through taxes, etc.) for their “democratic” governance.
Our politicians are already on the dole….in effect, like actors on the stage, paid to maintain the illusion that the public has a choice. When in fact, the politicians (who have been getting wealthy) encourage the public to live beyond their means and have allowed the public and industry to be beholden to philanthropaths, NGOs, corrupted and captured institutions staffed by supposed “enlightened” individuals being produced by education systems that indoctrinate rather than liberate through critical thinking and concepts or rights coupled with responsibility.
It is indeed a changed world. Or perhaps not changed so much as we are coming to the end of a trajectory which has been foretold but ignored, as if it could be addressed effectively in the future….always putting off to tomorrow what should have been done yesterday.
This has allowed for momentary increased standards of living perhaps, but the price we may ultimately pay for being unable to rein in the excesses as a means of keeping our sovereignty, individually and at the national level….potentially dystopian or utopian. Depends entirely on whose rhetoric you belief and how much faith one has in mankind.
Personally, after the past five years, I find it increasingly hard to believe that enough of the public is prepared to sacrifice, reflect, and be intentionally critical in their thought processes to change the status quo.
Meanwhile, in the shadows, the globalist agenda keeps creeping forward. What has changed since the pandemic is that it should be abundantly clear that the technocrats are no longer pretending they ask for our permission. The digital prison being erected.
We watch real life on our screens now…as if it was a nightly tv show moving towards some pre-determined conclusion….a script written. We are our own audience. Stumbling along waiting to be told what is next….and then responding with outrage or virtue signaling. And the tech guys laugh….how can they not.
In short, the public is fat and happy….unmotivated to change habits they have become addicted to even if change would set them free. And they really aren’t that happy.
We need to get the regulatory agencies under control or eliminated. The bureaucracy is a threat to our country
I totally agree and have believed since before I was in law school that many of them are, by and large, unconstitutional as they act under improper delegations of authority. They act as if they are the lawmakers but answer to no one, frequently not even the President.
actually the "regulatory agencies" in many cases answer to the corporations whose members, lawyers or lobbyists usually run them - like the FCC, FDA, PUCs, etc.
For some yes and big corporations can afford to deal with regulations so they put up with it, knowing they have teams of lawyers, lobbyists, etc. It’s the small businesses that really are held back by those regulations. Either way, those regulations are very often unnecessary, poorly written, and force everyone to pay more for everything. I mean do we really need governmental regulations ensuring that bottled water has a nutrition label on it?
Watch Lewis Black talk about that in his great bit on milk and water (only place I can still find it is FB):
https://www.facebook.com/OrganicRising/videos/comedian-lewis-black-on-milk-water/1178276272214790/
agreed. i can't access the link since i refuse to submit to zuck's walled garden, sorry (;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxgITv5yaPI
Damn. I would try to find it online. Look up Lewis Black on Milk and Water. One of the funniest bits ever.
Isn't that why we voted for Trump? I guess he's just too interested in starting new foreign wars to pay much attention to what his real job is: destroy the permanent bureaucracy back home.
I agree with much (but not all) of what you say but still remain an optimist. I don’t see the world as quite so dark even though Thomas Hobbes was largely right when he said life was nasty, short, and brutish. Life has never been easy or perfect. And it never will be.
And sure, the politicians keep getting richer and yes the NGOs are by and large corrupted. And it’s true that most people don’t pay attention, leading of course, to most politicians getting reelected.
Indeed, remember what Jonathan Goldsmith, the most interesting man in the world said (yes, the guy from the beer commercials): “Life is a parade, most people are watching."
I think that’s always been true to an extent.
In the end I see three choices. Accept it, and live your life, rage against the machine and never be happy, or enjoy life and your family while working to restore America as we all (for those of a certain age for sure) remember it (which is what I think Trump is trying to do). It’s not in my genes to do anything but the latter.
Urs, as for politicians getting re-elected ad infinitum (and thus richer), would not term limits on members of congress make sense? It will never be an easy process, but it looks like a necessity, and soon, from my perch.
I would 100% agree that term limits are essential to restoring our freedoms but, that has to be done in conjunction with reeling in the bureaucracy because if we have new congressman and senators all the time, the bureaucrats will have no one to control them. Think about it how the blocked Trump 45 left and right. Now, with four years to plan, he and his team are dismantling the administrative state step by step but they really need to GOP legislators to do the right thing.
Your "super high wages" don't buy much interms of quality life. Most go to finance empire and leeches in the politics and banking "industries". In my place you can live a very good life with 90k/year. To have that same life quality in the US, I guesstimated I'd need 200k. And taxes and inflation is a problem here too. You're just not seeing the bigger picture. Also, it's only logical that poor people will be contented with less. As the chinese grew richer, many factories moved to southeast asia. If you start living within your means, most of your illusion of "richness" will fade away. Basically you are "rich" because you consume cheap stuff made by poor people (which fortunately become less poor thanks to that). If you had to buy everything made by high-wage americans, you people would become poor overnight. Also all those funny moneys you used to get free imports would come back home and the US currency would collapse. Weimar anyone?
And now we are told almost all coding jobs will be done by AIs withing a year.
Remember, it was Barry and Liz whose arrogance led them to utter with venom "You didn't make that!". Well, now they are right. The Chinese are making it!
The old democratic maxim that we should all "learn to code" has now been completely repudiated, because AI can code better, cheaper, and faster, than any human, so millions of coding jobs are now currently being obsolesced. They will have to come up with a new line that they can hurl with distain at the unwashed masses that they are rendering unemployed with their excessive regulation.
💯
Obama's "new normal." Certainly the most destructive president in modern times, perhaps in all time.
And he's a racist America hater.
He singlehandedly set back race relations 50 years for political expediancy.
Loathsome creature.
I always thought Ted Nugent was right on when he called Barry a sub human mongoloid.
Not fair to mongoloids.
I think the turning point was when he said, "Trayvon could've been my son."
Yes. And went on TV to give his verdict without a pretense of due process
W was worse than Obama. Obama didn't kick off 4trillion in useless wars in the ME. I'd put Obama second.
W was not only a disaster at foreign policy, he also ushered in the modern surveillance state and was fiscally irresponsible. He hit the trifecta of incompetence. The people that claim Trump is the worst president ever seem to have rather short memories.
I have yet to hear a serious person claim that Trump is the worst.
Sadly, serious people are in short supply, just the way TPTB want it.
In addition to numerous media talking heads and political opponents, 154 supposed "presidential specialists" who are/were recent members of the American Political Science Association voted him the worst: https://www.axios.com/2024/02/19/presidents-survey-trump-ranks-last-biden-14th
Not sure if you would view any of these people to be a "serious person", but they would certainly consider themselves that.
I think I had heard of this survey, but the indication in the URL that they ranked (the presidency known as) "Biden" 14th tells you all you need to know. As you pointed out, the American Political Science Association probably thinks they are serious, but they ranked Obama 7th. Not only are they not serious, but like MSM and fact-checkers, they don't even pretend they are trying to be...... they are partisan hacks at best.
As you can imagine, I agree with you. The survey says more about them then it does about Trump. I don't even particularly like Trump, but there is no objective way that he is worse than W.
I wonder which NGO funds them?
It's funny how things like Bush's wars enrich US defense contractors, and Obamacare enriches insurance companies. Unfortunately, I'm not a defense contractor or an insurance exec, and I would prefer to keep my money rather than my government choose them as winners, on my behalf.
Obama said "we're about to fundamentally change America". What on earth did people think he meant? Why did no one find that ominous? (Well, many of us did)
I don't want "free trade." I want trade that protects the US national security. I want trade that keeps critical manufacturing independent of potential adversaries. That keeps weapons manufacturing, pharmaceuticals, and energy production operational when other countries refuse to trade with us. Because at some point, they will.
and just what policy do you think gets us there as opposed to impoverishing us? you want to take all of every supply line all the way down to every basic raw material into the US and prevent us from sourcing any of if from abroad?
do you have any idea how poor that would make us?
poor nations do not fare well in wars.
There's a difference between unfair trade policies and predatory trade policies.
I just think we're starting with the wrong premise.
It'd be one thing to play baseball against a team where the refs have bet against you. Quite another if they're betting against you but don't allow you to use a bat or glove.
It seemed he mentioned national security industries specifically...not every single supply line or every basic raw material...
but how can you run such an industry without full control of supply lines?
you have a plant to make tanks. so you must also have steel. therefore coke. therefore...
iterate this 1000 times with every component.
of what use to national security is a factory whose inputs can be choked off?
it's not as simple a problem as many seem to suppose.
You only need supply lines for things you cannot produce or manufacture yourself, or don't matter. Many things were offshored to make financial interests wealthy, at the expense of both our security and our working class.
I don't care about keeping cheap goods if it means it cost us good jobs for the people that shop there. That only makes Wall Street rich at the expense of Main Street.
It sounds like clueless Chris Matthews whining about lumber tariffs on Canada ... "Are we going to make our own wood?" Yes. Yes we are. Our forest products industry has been deliberately decimated, but we can bring it back. The US has forests.
And we already are a poor nation. National debt hovering around 37 trillion. That is what your policies have given us.
You identify the critical parts of the supply chain that are vulnerable and build redundancy there. For example, you don't have to fully control iron ore or coal to produce steel because there are plenty of friendly sources for both inputs. A real life example that's underway now is to re-shore some pharmaceutical manufacturing capability back into the US. The pandemic exposed how dependent the US was on foreign manufacturing for certain APIs, so the feds have been part of an effort to build domestic manufacturing capability for those in the US. FYI, individual companies do a version of this all the time with their own supply chains. This is just expanding on these concepts to a country level.
Remember 5 years ago when they locked down every business that wasn’t essential, then everything ground to a halt because damn near everything turned out to be essential? It’s a bit like that.
Exactly. And the right was howling like goats, myself included.
I don't see the relevance of that analogy. Why do you think the lockdown example applies here?
I suggest a book, Freedom’s Forge, by Arthur Herman. It describes US industry in WW II. It’s very well-written, easily readable, and details a number of the problems that gearing-up entailed in the ‘40s. The biggest problems then were labor unions, even during the war. We weren’t importing iron ore or coal. We just dug it up and used it. There’s still plenty where it came from.
It would take some time to rebuild a steel/aluminum industry at that scale again. Trying to do that during the opening moves of a war would be extremely tricky. For one thing, people will be in denial about that future, so will oppose the effort.
But today the biggest rate-limiter is, indeed, the regulatory state and its stranglehold on manufacturing. In time of war or national crisis, regs can be suspended by executive order. We had, and almost certainly still have abundant raw manufacturing materials. Whether we have sufficient rare earth metals to make highly advanced weaponry, which rely on chip technology, is the wild card here.
If the US ever finds itself at war and no allies whose countries can supply the various unobtainium isotopes we need, it’s going to be game over anyway.
Lazy answer. There is room for ensuring that we maintain industrial capacity in certain areas without going to extremes in every case. If China is currently the only source for a raw material, yes, interventions to diversify our supply AND develop domestic capacity are prudent.
The National Defense Stockpile (NDS), last amended in 2018, should prioritize closing these gaps in critical materials like rare earth elements (REEs), cobalt, and processed components for military systems—yet it hasn’t fully. As of 2025, its reserves remain inadequate for a no-allies scenario, covering only months of defense needs, not years. Expanding it is likely on the Pentagon’s or Congress’s to-do list, given rising tensions with China and supply chain lessons from Ukraine, but progress lags behind the urgency.
Under Biden, the National Defense Stockpile (NDS) has been underfunded, with resources diverted to green energy projects and Ukraine aid instead of securing critical materials like rare earths. Since 2021, billions have flowed to EV battery subsidies and $61 billion in Ukraine support, while the NDS limps along with just $200 million in 2022-2023 for REEs—far short of the $5-10 billion needed to buffer a no-allies crisis.
Aw, but neither do countries who have offshored critical industries like speciality chemical manufacturing which is all but nonexistent in the US. Not only do we not make these chemicals that go into pharmaceuticals and the like, we have lost the technology that made it possible to make these products in the US. We lose the technology because time kills all the chemists, plant operators and the like and they aren’t being replaced as there are no jobs in these fields anymore. So was offshoring pharmaceuticals to China a good thing? Only time will tell. But if China cuts us off and India can’t come through then a lot of seniors and sick people are instantly going to have very short life spans. I’ve seen estimates that it would take 25 years to get back to where we were 40 years ago in this one vital field alone. This, my Cat, is where economic theory breaks down.
*'I, Pencil' has entered the chat*
https://youtu.be/67tHtpac5ws?si=H2W-droPHW6VMoiC
Yet everything you mention has been used against us by our trade partners - not just our government.
How bad does the trade imbalances have to get before you have to level the playing field? It's sorta like asking a liberal how many illegal immigrants is too many.
While you state facts, i don't believe this has anything to do with tariffs, it's all negotiation chits. This all has to do with one thing, and one thing only (everything else is a potential adjacent benefit):
Putting China in a box by getting every other country to capitulate...thereby giving them only one option to capitulate. And I think that is the long game. By weakening China we gain geopolitical advantage over an adversary that is more of a threat to our sovereignty than any other nation in our past...and as a side benefit the rest of the countries. I see nothing wrong with playing the ends against the middle. It also has the potential of solidifying our hegemonic control over currency and all it's tangential benefits.
I believe this is the game and has been from day one.
I think way too much ink is being spilled on this topic, not you of course, because you're simply stating facts.
But i do think those dogmatically/reflexively opposed to tariffs are asking themselves wrong questions.
I don't see any of this as compromising my ideals as being a staunch libertarian.
"trade imbalance" is not a terribly meaningful metric. i think the whole thing is a red herring as an accounting identity, a mistaking of map for terrain.
i'm curious about this libertarian claim:
being forcibly conscripted into a trade war with china does not appeal to me. it's a taking of my rights to trade, interference in my activity, regulation in opposition to personal choice and agency. i'm curious, how to do square that with libertarianism
china are screwed no matter what. their economy is a ponzi overloaded with debt that can never be paid. we should focus on securing our IP and not letting them rob our tech blind and interfere with our elections and politics.
i don't get this "we have to move to economic policies of command and control to defeat a foe that will fall over on its own." why inflict the pain on american consumers? and by what just right?
What pain? Have you experienced any since the hyperbolic screaming from a bunch of people that couldn't pay back their student loans who are now tariff and equities experts?
There will be no pain because this will be a gnat in 1-2 months.
Why not accelerate the collapse of Chinas ponzi scheme?
have you not seen the current scramble going on around supply lines and planning? everyhting just froze. the whole of corp america has no idea how to plan. i've personally seen a half a dozen pre-emptive "we're hiking price 10 or 20%" policies from all manner of suppliers. not sure how you're missing this or the damage that comes from this level of uncertainty.
why damage the US to accomplish what will happen anyway?
Yes as a business owner I'm well aware. It is literally nothing compared to what I experienced during the plandemic.
It'd be different if this were to be protracted.
You make a compelling case, but I simply disagree with the severity of pain to be felt if this is resolved in a few months.
I don't think this administration is slipping into some mercantilism nightmare...they're just getting people to the table. I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt.
I think this is playing out just like Trump intended...including the 90 day "pause" yesterday. In fact I think the 90 day pause was the point.
What do you think would be a faster way to put China in their place? Let them self implode or start the process of everything else you mention (which are all correct)...or, effectively, getting everyone to the table at the same time?
Again I really don't think this has anything to do with the "trade imbalances", I think it is about shifting geopolitical influence. Weakening China only strengthens us.
He has cajoled the rest of the countries to do our dirty work and thereby reducing Chinas stature as a geopolitical rival.
I fail to see how that's a bad thing even if it has some short-term pain.
Or we can just keep focusing on the next "quarter" and not what America looks like when my kids are adults.
And look man, you know I'm no Trump simp. I just happen to believe he has a plan this time. Whereas before it was using tariffs just for tariff sake.
so, honest question:
much of what you are saying seems like unitary actor theory where you imagine full nations like the US or china as the prime actor.
how do you squared this with libertarian thinking?
if trump wants to "get them to the table" and does that by taking my rights and harming me economically against my will, is that not essentially a repudiation of the idea of rights?
even if it works, is it not a sort of "ends justify the means" thinking?
you could basically make the same argument to ban speech if doing so wound up making someone better off in the end.
is that OK?
it seems to be that you're leaving the question of "by what right may a just state do this?" out of the equation.
isn't that the core question of a republic and of free people?
Yes, gato, we agree. I just don't think we're debating from a genuine starting point.
It'd be different if they were just unfair trade relations vs predatory trade relations.
Again I'm ANTI-TARIFF.
However its not insane to say tgey worked for the Chinese this century, they worked for the Japanese after World War II, and they worked for the U.S. and Germany in the late 19th century. Buck then, American and German growth rates and economic vibrancy radically outstripped the growth rates and economic vibrancy of a free-trading Britain, which, after abandoning its early 19th-century tariffs, adopted the free trade nostrums of Ricardo and slipped into decline.
But one of the few instances when tariffs failed was during the Smoot-Hawley tariff episode at the beginning of the Great Depression. But there are special circumstances surrounding the imposition of the Smoot-Hawley tariffs that the free-traders hesitate to mention. When the United States raised the Smoot-Hawley tariffs, the U.S. was the world’s greatest creditor, and by raising the tariffs, we prevented others from selling us things so they could make money and pay us back. When they didn’t pay us back, it collapsed the global financial system and helped usher in the Great Depression.
I'd be curious to see what Bastiat would think if he were alive today and had lived through the last 6 decades, and came to find out we're now the world's largest holder of debt.
While the Smoot-Hawley tariffs were bad, Trump’s tariffs as a negotiating chit could be good because the relative financial position of the U.S. vis-a-vis the rest of the world is now reversed. This fact must not be overlooked when assessing the wisdom of Trump’s tariffs versus the folly of Smoot-Hawley
Trump has also promised to remove regulations as he did during his first term and I think he will come through with this. I agree with EGM, though, that the uncertainty for industry that the next admin may undo everything he does will not lead industry leaders to blindly invest.
For sure. It's a gambit, and I'm in agreement with gato on that.
But sometimes you have to be bold.
The fact is, is to do this the "right" way is more of a gambit because it'll be fought tooth and nail in our country and every other country and nothing would change in the next 4 years.
Negotiate with everyone at the same time is much better imo opinion than puddle-jumping from one country to another.
I'd rather have everyone at the table at the same time so that we are in a better position to do it the "right" way rather than hoping that the rest of the countries also want to do it the "right" way. They don't. I think the move is brilliant and obvious to the point I'm not even sure it's worth the headache of parsing the objectives/intent.
Just seems so obvious to me.
And i have to tell you any time I feel like I have to provide the disclaimer that "I'm anti-tariff" (which is the truth) before making a point it starts to smell like what happened during the plandemic.
I'm willing to be wrong because I'm willing to challenge orthodoxy.
It's like we're debating the Smoot-Hawley Act in a vacuum. I think that's a dishonest comparison for a variety of reasons...but I'd have to write a ridiculously long comment explaining that.
Challenging orthodoxy is what libertarians do - as do informed risk-takers. Agree with your many comments, Ryan.
really. no point in letting your longterm label define what is best to do NOW.
Agree
Also are you taking into account that this gambit COULD force every country to become more productive per unit, including the US?
You don't think this would force everyone to become more productive by means of competition?
Wouldn't that offset much of the nasty underbelly of tariff imposition? Wouldn't it offset even more if we had fair trade agreements?
Seems to me that would lower cost to the consumer across the board adverting punching ourselves in the face.
I mean the law of increasing returns is a thing.
If we increase variable "units" like labor and capital while fixed factors like cost remain stable (or even decrease), wouldn't that necessarily increase marginal productivity?
Especially so, if you are the world's largest debtor but also the largest consumer by far.
I mean there would be some oil dropped along the way...but that can be cleaned up...while a "seized" engine can not.
I don't know...I don't think there's any way out, than through. We're never going to eliminate our debt...we can only grow ourselves out of this predicament.
I'm willing to see if this resetting affords us that opportunity...because from a pragmatic standpoint, neither you or me or Rand Paul are going to get our way by tightening the buckle
Trade Imbalance is a feature of Reserve Currency. Shellenberger did a really good piece on Public breaking it down yesterday.
A massive trade imbalance with China—like the $279 billion deficit (2023, Census Bureau)—can signal over-reliance, not just accounting. If unchecked, it risks hollowing out U.S. industries (e.g., 2 million manufacturing jobs lost, 2001-2011, EPI) and ceding strategic leverage—China controls 90% of processed rare earths and 80% of antibiotics (FDA). Cheap goods today could mean vulnerability tomorrow when they pull the plug. It’s not the number; it’s the dependency.
Agreed. That was one of the major points in the Public article. We have a death cycle where China lends us money to buy their junk to lend us our money right back to buy more of our junk. It's a disasterous relationship to have with somebody who is arguably our greatest adversary. It's abundantly clear to me that we need to break ties with China.
https://open.substack.com/pub/public/p/tariff-chaos-is-the-messy-birth-of?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=ki7lk
especially because so much of it IS junk ;)
I would love to see North American manufacturing improve quality. China benefits from selling us junk that goes straight to landfill. I'm okay with paying more for stuff that lasts longer. There's so many markets where China has undermined the competition and now the only thing left is absolute garbage.
me too!!!
a number of things i have considered buying (like a new toaster oven after mine died within a few yrs), i have given up and done without because the majority of reviewers talked about whatever item being absolute junk - breaking or quitting within a day, a week, or a year if you're lucky. Whenever i mention this to younger people, they don't get it - because to them it is just the norm. Pretty pathetic.
Completely agree, Ryan.
Yeah. It might be a little different if Xi Ping didn't have a problem with 300 mil of his citizens dying in order to knock us off the "thrown".
If we do not take care of business right now, China WILL invade Taiwan and all this talk about tariffs,etc will be a footnote to the death and destruction that would come from a confrontation with China. Taiwan is a trap that Xi is setting for us. And make no mistake Taiwan is just a pawn in drawing us into conflict. They just waiting on the right time while they build up their military forces, etc.
Every move they've made has been telegraphed and I take them at their word.
He is punching them in the face right now instead of waiting to be attacked. He is removing many parts of the machine they operate in the US to undermine the US. The US has military problem that is very serious. How many weeks can we run a long war? That is why we must bring back the production of weapons, ammo, medicine, computer chips (taiwan?) and so many other parts that make us war ready.
We must begin to build factories right now. We must rebuild our energy sector right now. Russia has the GDP of Spain/Portugal, that is the least of our problems.
Agree. I made a similar comment somewhere on this board about Taiwan and Chinas telegraphed plans.
Make no mistake Taiwan would just be the opening act to force us into all out economic warfare...and quite possibiliy a kinetic confrontation.
Hard to win in a kinetic engagement when the other side would be willing to let 400 mil of their citizens die to meet their ends for global domination.
he is not "simply stating the facts" but i understand you wish to maintain relations.
In the end we will both agree. This is a dynamic situation, and one thing both of us share is not being inhibited by the fear of being wrong. As the facts on the ground change i think our opinions will more closely align...because i have a feeling neither of us have all the facts yet.
I don't think Trump had any grand vision, other than to shake it up to create options, and to box China in. I think hes laying China bare, because at the end of the day, when you strip Chinas economy naked its a ponzi scheme. This is how he operates; he figures out shit as he goes along.
Trump doesn't get enough credit for being flexible. Although he will never admit he's wrong that doesn't mean the two are mutually exclusive.
The more options you have, the better you're able to negotiate. By taking this to the street on a grand scale he has created options with individual trade partners, but more importantly to create options for the US between all trade partners. In this way he controls the knobs and levers because everyone else will have to reveal their hand.
I do think Bessent and Lutnick are good guardrails tho.
i think Trump is mr. flexible - which has its admirable as well as down sides. plus a sense of humor. i think the worst thing he has done so far is to bow down to bibi - that early oval office meeting (where turning gaza into a seaside resort once they finish bombing it back to the stone age idea was floated) was stunning. but then i can't think of a single viable political figure who doesn't support Them no matter what they do.
This is all 100% true but leaves out a crucial fact: China is on a 200 year plan, and they are making the money printer go burrrrrrr at astounding rates. One of the reasons is to subsidize industries (rare earths is an outstanding example) and de facto monopolize them with little regard to environment and safety- essentially the polar opposite of the US where we have OVER prioritized these things as you point out. Tariffs are only one part of an equation to re-level the playing field. The administration is doing what they can to deregulate as well, but you are 100% correct that congress needs to get on board to make these changes durable so the investments can be made. No corporation will make these kind of investments without high levels of certainty least we end up with another West Valley Demonstration Project or Keystone XL where billions of investment are wiped away with the swipe of some guy's new autopen.
Well, you’re right. BO, & Quislings have made industry in the US unprofitable. But BO & the Quislings are wrong about everything. Obamacare destroyed many small businesses. We have John McCain to thank for its continued existence. Damn him. But the EPA has destroyed more. And it is all filled with graft and corruption, which frankly was the entire point. Time to drain the swamp and expel the swamp critters. Time to put an end to Progressivism and return to the principles of the Founding Fathers.
Obamacare is one of the single largest disasters that has been inflicted upon the country. A potential goldmine for DOGE.
Although largely hidden among the various forms of withholding, premiums, subsidies, etc., healthcare costs per capita and % of GDP are three to four times greater than historical levels, while life expectancies in the US lag all other "wealthy" countries. The US spends over $4 trillion annually on health care, approaching 20% of GDP
Another aspect of the legacy of Obama, the original DEI hire.
Correct. Only a small percentage of “regulation” is what it says on the box. Most of it is to create opportunity for corruption.
Old school toyota pickup trucks never die. Cyber trucks explode, and irradiate you with dirty electricity. Which one is more sustainable?
EV's are largely a "solution" looking for a problem.
they are not green, they are not resource efficient, and they are annoyingly impractical and unreliable. they're also a nightmare to insure because one nick on a batter pack and it's a total because there's no way to tell if you've done the kind of damage that can lead to thermal runaway and hard to extinguish car fires.
absent massive subsidy and mandate, hard to see how the whole thing happened
From inside the industry, the EV push had 2 major factors:
1. Regulatory. Despite arguments to the contrary, the Biden Admin's CAFE changes were a mandate. There was no path to meeting with ICE by design. This is another trend that started with BO. The footprint based system borked the industry and pushed crossovers. The Greenies, likely backed by China, lobbied hard for EV subsidies, likely knowing that BYD et al were coming soon with their cheap junk.
2. FOMO. Auto executives were terrified that Tesla was going to replace them all. They thought they were selling cassette walkmans and the iPhone just dropped. They were convinced that EVs were the future despite engineers constantly telling them the tech, especially the batteries weren't there for mass market rollout. Somehow the auto industry is led by people who don't really understand the product.
The future of EV.
HYDROGEN AND SOLID STATE BATTERIES.
My ‘91 4wd truck with a 22r engine is still going strong and looks great. No a/c, no power steering, crank windows, 5 speed, real bumpers you can actually run into things with. It’s hardened for Armageddon.
i still have my 2002 bmw e-46 m3.
it's still a great car and the engine has never once been apart. a good straight 6 is a helluva thing.
(it's also one of the best convertible cockpits i've ever been in from an air flow and visibility standpoint)
Motor is bullet proof. Bosch electronics that’s another story.
and in a disaster, you can still roll down the windows.
also it doesn't spy on you. or have radar plus all kinds of toxic RF wireless connections inside. mine is a 97 toyota, low mileage (136k) and i don't drive much, so i figure it will last the rest of my life. was worried for awhile that the greenies in cali would try to take it away - one more reason i am glad we have trump. but it does have power windows. . .
Lol
In all the years I've been following and reading your posts, this issue is the only time I've disagreed with you. Your first chart tells the story. The CHICOMS have almost double our industrial output; per capita is irrelevant. We have lost vital strategic industries such as steel production, ship production, electronics production, pharmaceutical production and our national security is dependent on a fragile supply chain. In the meantime, the CHICOMS fund and support the drug cartels pushing their Fentanyl poison into our streets and infiltrating tens of thousands of military aged agents into our country. The CHICOMS should never been allowed into the WTO but like the Trojan Horse, they were. President Trump's actions yesterday was a masterstroke The Art of War (the Deal). He has isolated the CHICOMS from the rest of the world and if they don't come to heel, their economy will suffer. The CHICOMS must be stopped and President Trump knows that.
I’m completely with you on this. It’s one of the rare times I think El Gato’s off the mark. To me, it’s all about national defense—boxing in China strategically, not just economics.
I think what EVERYONE is getting wrong is this.
Trump yelling about tariffs is a tool. He doesn't REALLY want tariffs to be equal, he wants to negotiate. In order to get them to the table, he threatened. He never meant it....except maybe for China because that's NOT just about tariffs. Trump wants everyone to play fair. Maybe that's a pipe dream, but it's laudable. The whole tariff thing is actually a too.
Oh....and finally, very juvenile of me, but still funny....every time you wrote BO, I read 'body odor.' Chuckles...don't know why.
But Joe said he was a "clean" black man, remember?
He REALLY likes making deals!
Your statements have some merit but falter on key points. The US (population: ~340 million) and Germany (population: ~83 million) output gap isn’t as vast as claimed—Germany’s production is about one-third of the US’s despite a population one-fourth the size. Per capita comparisons with China oversimplify structural differences. Manufacturing hasn’t just “changed”—traditional sectors have hollowed out, despite high total output. Post-2008 stagnation is real, but recovery did occur, and blaming domestic policy alone ignores global factors like trade and automation. Free trade wouldn’t necessarily offshore all industry; US strengths in tech and productivity could retain or attract high-value manufacturing, not just services. The arguments overstate absolutes and underplay nuance.
100% agree
Barack Obama was quite the force for destruction. It's almost like he was a DSA Marxist operative of domestic terrorists like Bill Ayers.
We still don't even REALLY know who he was. Why can't we see his educational records?
Is it not possible to negotiate trade deals AND focus on deregulation of industry?
There's far too much hyperventilating going on...
the order in which they are done matters and this trade war seems to be burning the political capital and breaking the political alliance that showed so much promise on pushing deregulation.
it seems like a bad set of priorities for this stage of the game.
I would say there's no time to wait on either matter. Deregulation efforts will be massively kneecapped with lawfare and will limp across the finish line even with some democrat support (although I doubt he would get much support from the "working man" party, trade war or not) after several years.
The trade war has potential to come to a resolution far before that and a "win" will secure midterms for Republicans (ensuring that deregulation even has a chance)....but it needed to start now to give ample time to prove "success".
It's a great time to be alive.
jumping out of a plane before you pack a parachute is unlikely to be a wise set of activities to parallel path.
What if the plane’s engulfed in flames and there’s no time to strap on the parachute—then what?
THIS. I could not agree more.
People are trying to win arguments on a debate with the wrong premise.
Trumps tariffs against China in his first term didn't work because they were unleashed in a vacuum. Whereas this time it involves every country we trade with.
Its a reset. And I'd rather see that than continuing to do the same thing we've been doing for 6 decades. Or i suppose we could just use a cute little button that mispells "reset". The tariffs are just one tool out of many in the toolbox. They're a blunt instrument that long term will wreak havoc...but in the near term force everyone to the table...to make shit happen vs. just talking about it.
We need to do both...otherwise it'll be protracted to the point of irrelevancy.
Exactly. He had to start this first and this is the most difficult and most painful in short term. He has time to work on regulatory changes and that doesn’t take nearly as much political capital. I still have reservations that somehow a wrench will be thrown into the works or his plan may not work as I don’t think the tariff issue and its effects on global and local economies is an easy thing to predict. So many variables. But I also feel like you that Trump has been right about so much and has a plan that is not the same thing we have been doing for the last 40 years. Reset is a good way to look at it.
Agree. I just see no other feasible choice.
Gato talks about unnecessarily expending political capital with these tactics, whereas I think he would be expending way more by dragging this out with bilateral negotiations that would take forever.
Trump only has 4 years. After that, God knows what neocon creep will slither back into power. He may have even less time if the Deep State decides to take him out early or steal the mid-terms. And then there is Trump's greatest enemy - one even more powerful than the DS or an assassin's bullet - himself. He shoots off his mouth too much and loses focus. He and America have one chance and one chance only to smash the Deep State, and this is it. He needs to cut out the "foreign wars are cool" crap and get back to doing what he was elected to do: destroying the domestic enemies of America.
Take solar module tariffs— they didn’t slow China down. When the U.S. imposed duties to curb cheap imports, Chinese manufacturers didn’t blink; they swiftly relocated factories to nearby Asian countries like Vietnam and Malaysia overnight, bypassing the tariffs and keeping their edge in the global market.
Yes. But the every dollar "saved" on imposing tariffs on China to save one job cost us roughly half a million dollars. So it was misguided back then.
I agree with you but I also think we have to face facts. Which you are doing by pointing out the other side of the coin.
But i don't think that's what Trump is doing this time.
Except Trump's tariffs against China in his first term arguably did work; he did secure commitments for agricultural purchases from China, and the groundwork was in place for more a comprehensive agreement, which was to be phased in in stages.
The reason it's not regarded as a more resounding triumph is that Covid "happened," with China playing no small role, and that scuttled the negotiations before the remaining phases could be implemented. And then the deep state installed President Autopen into office, who promptly returned trade policy to the status quo ante.
Sadly, Deregulation War is not as attention grabbing as Trade War.
Wait until the moderates who voted for Trump start sweating over the MSM’s lies, claiming deregulation will trash the environment—when it’s just another scare tactic from the usual suspects.
Yes, I see the train a comin'...
I remember when, as a practicing solo Family Physician, the government added ENDLESS OSHA, HIPPA, medical testing, managed care, etc regulations during the last 20 years. It destroyed the ability for independent docs to continue to practice personalized patient oriented care and forced docs to join hospital and large clinic businesses where the bottom line was productivity, NOT patient outcomes. The one point I believe you neglect is the VERY aggressive multi-pronged attack by Trump on excess regulations, energy costs and tax incentives. By abandoning net zero/green agenda mandates and effecting deregulation and bringing back cheap abundant energy I believe we will see expansion of the small business engine that used to power the US economy. Some fear the advent of a technocracy given DOGE activities. But given the inevitable future role of AI in everything and the understanding that at least initially that role will be primarily defined by those behind the scenes that empower that role I believe we have to hope and trust the current direction. Having AI ensure efficient use of government and taxpayer dollars is a wonderful and critical need going forward. As an aside I highly recommend a peek at Coffee and Covid, the only blog I read before NE each morning!
Correct. However, I fear that Trump is losing focus on his early highly aggressive attacks on the DS bureaucracy. This really was why people voted for him, not because he would bend over for Bibi. He needs to up the pace even more, unleashing Doge into even more cracks and crevices of the permanent bureaucracy and ignoring corrupt activist judges who try to stop him doing his constitutional duties. He also needs to put Patel and the Blondi Barbie on notice that if they don't start jailing the people who committed sedition in Trump's first term then they need to look for other work.
Agree wholeheartedly on Bibi comment, not sure what is behind that. Focus on the deep state. Coffee and Covid legal insights suggest his management of the activist legal activity was anticipated (a trap) and a Supreme Court appeal encompassing the scope of illegal activity against Trump has set up a ruling that will codify his executive power and neuter their judicial overreach. As far as jailing people, I TOTALLY share you impatience. Suspect the wheels of justice need to turn slowly to ensure convictions as well as avoiding fodder for the hysteria of the left to justify violence.
I believe too, Sparky, that Trump is luring the activist judges in to set them up for a Scotus stomping. It's something that he wouldn't fail to have planned for during his 4 years in the wilderness. The only problem with that tactic is that it relies upon a worm like Roberts suddenly developing a backbone. As for Patel and Bondi (and Gabbard), none of whom I trust, I'll agree to hang fire and give them a bit more time. Finally, whatever Trump does and in whatever time frame, the Left is going to have a meltdown. Might as well do what is right and let them blow. Then apply the letter of the law to them. Best of luck, my friend!
Well said! I tell my kids we are privileged (using that to imply personal duty) to be living in the most nodal moment in mans history in a worldwide battle over the future of human freedom. Just as Dr Malone notes concerning RFKs efforts, we need to be careful not to let the psyops of the left set us up as circular firing squads on the members of Trumps team.
I tell my kids the same, Sparky. We are deeply privileged in general in terms of wealth and opportunity, but also because we are seeing history being made every day. You are right too of course that not everything is going to be won in a few months. Fingers crossed that the cause of Good wins.
If weathermen behaved like economists, they would blame reality for deviating from their weather models.
"My computer model predicted a warm sunny day today. Reality was wrong for having a blizzard. If you got stuck in the snow, it's your own fault. You should have inspected my weather model more carefully. Look at my chart! There is no snow here! The model says so! I used math! The model is correct!"
That's essentially what the climate alarmists do. The only way to judge global temperatures with anything approaching accuracy is via satellite data. This data shows that nothing outside of natural variation is occurring with global temperatures. But that goes against climate alarmist ideology so it can't be used. Much better to stick to the completely skewed and biased land based temperature measurements that give the "correct" data.
I don't think an iPhone assembly plant here in the US would have a detrimental number of low value add jobs. Strip away the regulations and hurdles and it would likely be highly automated, requiring a fairly specialized workforce.
This, from a certain perspective is unmitigated bullshit written by a manufacturing mid-wit. The trick is what can be considered industrial production. All of the graphs and academic conclusions cannot change the truth. I'm a life-long industrial auctioneer who has dismantled our industrial might one factory at a time. The list of essential products we no longer produce domestically is alarming. Transformers, switchgear, motors, plastic resins, refinery equipment and pressure vessels, on and on. We assemble cars, but make little of the components outside of the drive train. The jobs that were lost in the rust-belt were exactly these. Wall Street and private capital have torn through our privately owned industry and whored it out on the world marketplace to the cheapest bidder. None of that carnage fits neatly in a graph.
Dismal science, indeed!