Aside from economists directly employed by the WH and adjacent agencies, are there any, let alone many economists who think these tariffs work? I try to read widely but in economics, I struggle to find people I can stand reading who seem informed to the realities of the modern world and so mostly I'm reading a strongly anti tariff biassed view e.g. Paul Krugman (who btw, strong bias here aside, writes beautifully)
I'm getting a very strong impression from overseas inputs that nobody thinks "sender pays" and nobody much thinks this benefits americans working, trading, or the economy overall. It seems entirely counter-productive. I am not reading of a massive return to factory manufacturing in the US, the chip and IT sector moves are not high employment, and are mostly done under force, or as local assembly to get round the law.
It is possible there is a strong deflationary element, supression of spend by price pressure, something in the price elasticity/inelasticity space. And it is possible that has other benefits, but I don't see them.
What I do see outside of the US (I live outside of the US) is a lot of discussion of market diversification, and agreeing that avoiding the pain of trade with the US is probably in everyones interests in the short/medium term, given it comes with price/tax certainties. My economy sends things to the US market which the US market wants badly enough, many of them do not get a tariff.
It is difficult to take the economists directly involved with the WH seriously. They seem to lack credibility to everyone else, or have serious issues around their projection of belief into the world. The drive to fuck around with the federal bank, and to override treaty bound agreements on trade does them no credit. Why would any nation invest at such risk, to supply a US market, if there are sustainable reliable trade partners elsewhere?
When China disrupted trade with my home economy, we diverted business and decided the risk of 50%+ dependency on Chinese markets was stupid. The chinese trade has come back but we're pretty happy to be selling to a more diversified pool of places now. US trade is less than 10% of our overall trade, the impact on us of a 10 or 20 percent tariff is not great but it hardly destroys our economy. I think its much the same for Europe now the mental shockwave has moved through.
Computer0•1h ago
You've clearly put a lot of thought into this, but yes it is my opinion that you are correct in your analysis that these will not improve American lives. Tariffs can be a powerful economic tool when wielded in a directed, focused, and intentional manner, unlike how they are handled here.
I would put less faith that these evil sacks of lard will ever do anything to help us. We need to help ourselves.
ggm•1h ago
I'm getting a very strong impression from overseas inputs that nobody thinks "sender pays" and nobody much thinks this benefits americans working, trading, or the economy overall. It seems entirely counter-productive. I am not reading of a massive return to factory manufacturing in the US, the chip and IT sector moves are not high employment, and are mostly done under force, or as local assembly to get round the law.
It is possible there is a strong deflationary element, supression of spend by price pressure, something in the price elasticity/inelasticity space. And it is possible that has other benefits, but I don't see them.
What I do see outside of the US (I live outside of the US) is a lot of discussion of market diversification, and agreeing that avoiding the pain of trade with the US is probably in everyones interests in the short/medium term, given it comes with price/tax certainties. My economy sends things to the US market which the US market wants badly enough, many of them do not get a tariff.
It is difficult to take the economists directly involved with the WH seriously. They seem to lack credibility to everyone else, or have serious issues around their projection of belief into the world. The drive to fuck around with the federal bank, and to override treaty bound agreements on trade does them no credit. Why would any nation invest at such risk, to supply a US market, if there are sustainable reliable trade partners elsewhere?
When China disrupted trade with my home economy, we diverted business and decided the risk of 50%+ dependency on Chinese markets was stupid. The chinese trade has come back but we're pretty happy to be selling to a more diversified pool of places now. US trade is less than 10% of our overall trade, the impact on us of a 10 or 20 percent tariff is not great but it hardly destroys our economy. I think its much the same for Europe now the mental shockwave has moved through.
Computer0•1h ago
I would put less faith that these evil sacks of lard will ever do anything to help us. We need to help ourselves.