This article is exactly what journalism (and journalists should be). An in-depth reporting of a situation showing examples and arguments without necessarily taking a definite stance for or against a politician or political party. The very exposure of the facts helps the reader understand the situation and how grey the world actually is - not black and white.
Yes, and it makes you wonder whether the tariffs at the time, which shocked everybody, were still too low, too narrowly targeted and of too short duration. But also failed to be part of a more coherent overall strategy.
Of course there is an overall strategy. Treasury Secretary Bessent has laid it out in detail several times, as has Trump, Howard Lutnick and Press Secretary Leavitt.
* Tariffs to generate revenue, allow American workers to compete with slave labor and the illegal alien criminal economy, and bring in investments
* downsize/close government agencies and massively reduce spending which is the root cause of inflation
* End income tax on all incomes < $150,000, on social security income, and sundry others i.e., tips, etc.
* mass deportations to enable American workers to work without that ghastly, disgusting wage pressure
* audit all agencies and reduce fraud, waste, and abuse
My take on Trump is he is going extreme on everything and everyone and that gives him the best bargaining position. Then he'll work out individual deals with each country. People should sit back and watch. Should be interesting.
I agree. My guess is Trump's tariff juggernaut is to undermine China's monopoly on cheap labor, manufacturing and its global resource grab. It seems he is levying tariffs on countries that do or could compete with China's low cost labor/manufacturing, and/or countries that have natural resources. Levy tariffs first to show he means business. Then he'll offer these smaller countries access to the American market, help them up their manufacturing ability to supply the American market with cheap non-Chinese goods. In exchange, these countries agree to not allow China to back door their products through them - or else, Tariff Time Again, and that was no fun. Next Trump needs to pass a tax cut so Americans feel secure enough to keep buying. My understanding is a lot of American manufacturers/distributors stocked up on Chinese-made parts and goods before the tariffs went into effect. That inventory will need to move. Hopefully that's where a Trump tax cut can come into play. But I'm just holding popcorn and guessing....
If the purpose of the tariffs is to level the playing field and hopefully end up with free trade for most of us, then Trump’s idea should work, in theory. How long did it take for America to become the world sucker that pays for everyone’s grift since WWII? The problem doesn’t get fixed overnight, and without some pain. No pain, no gain.
The hedge fund people who create only money will naturally be pissed, because they are losing their source to make more money, and since they do not create products, but only money, they know the grift is over. For those who produce actual goods and products, common sense tells us it will get America’s middle class back on her feet again.
Just like the pissed off socialists who want to keep spending other people’s money on crazy ideologies like transgender surgeries, and the “useful idiots” who protest for them, they don’t want to see the spigot shut off – they see it as “free” money.
Historians credit the “progressive activist” Gracchus brothers with the idea of redistributing the wealth, first with the ideas of Tiberius Gracchus, followed by his younger brother, Gaius Gracchus. They fostered the idea to redistribute the wealth to the poor, beginning in 133 B.C. (aka BCE) through the “reforms.” The reforms led to dependency of the poor on the government and contributed to the beginning of the idea to debase the money supply during the end days of the (western) Roman Republic/early days of the Empire, along with corrupt politicians living the “good life” with uncontrolled immigration and endless warfare. Sound familiar?
Creating Dependency on the Government has never worked out throughout history. So, getting America off the global welfare train should work out for We the People.
You misrepresent the Gracchi. The Gracchan reforms were mostly about the ager publicus - the public land owned by the state. Wealthy senatorial types were able to use this land agriculturally with their slaves. The Gracchan reform was to find unused or ill-used land in Italy and give it to landless men to become small landholders. There was a triple purpose here. First, it would make the lands more productive. Second, it would generate a bunch of small landholders who were the backbone of the legions in that era (a bit after the end of the Third Punic War). Third, and most importantly to the Gracchi, it would make them immensely popular and facilitate their political careers. As a result, both Gracchi were killed by mobs incited by this optimate senatorial class of people who would lose out on at least two counts.
That last point was always the rub about these schemes. Marius, Sulla, Pompey, Crassus, Caesar, Antony and Augustus all have the same goal as the Gracchi in mind, mostly involving their victorious veteran legions. Augustus was the one who put it fully into practice, which is part of why he was the first Emperor.
The doles you are conflating this with are a much later feature of Rome.
You shouldn't misrepresent classical history where people who know better will notice.
Fair enough as it was a long time in the making, and reforms usually do start with good intentions, but the result is the same lesson repeated through history that dependency on the government ends badly for everyone. Redistributing the wealth through any scheme is creating dependency.
As C.S. Lewis also said, it’s the moral busybodies who are the worst tyrants because “those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
Apr 7 -- Whatever you think of tariffs, it’s clear that now is the worst possible time for the United States to participate in a military strike on Iran.
• We can’t afford it.
• Thousands of Americans would die.
• We’d lose the war that follows.
• Nothing would be more destructive to our country.
• And yet we’re closer than ever, thanks to unrelenting pressure from neocons.
• This is suicidal.
Anyone advocating for conflict with Iran is not an ally of the United States, but an enemy.
A war with Iran, is a bad idea. Agreed. The current ace in the hole is the sinking price of oil. Brent Crude and West Texas Intermediate are at $60.00 USD a barrel. That has an impact both on Moscow and Teheran in terms of long term free cash. One wonders if President Putin who has been rather silent on US/Trump efforts to open dialog with Teheran has behind the scenes been “helpful” as in suggesting to the Kleptocracy in Iran that more jaw jaw is better than war war. Note that it is reported openly that half of the USAF B2 bomber fleet is in Diego Garcia on the hot strip. CVN battle group Truman is already in the Med, CVN battle group Carl Vinson is heading toward the Middle East from the Indo Pacific region, ergo something is up. As a young Marine Corps Infantry Officer in February of 1979 stationed at Camp LeJeune, Carter’s big mistake was not sending the Air Contingency force to reinforce the embassy when the “students” first scaled the gates and then retreated. We were ready to go and half of Golf Company 2/2 did deploy to Cyprus. Where they stood by for 60 days. It has been a brutal winter with Iran since. To include 53 Americans held hostage for 444 days. One can guess the reason that Teheran may be willing to begin discussions toward some form of détente, is the threat, perceived real or not of a massive air strike on their infrastructure, enough to paralyze the nation. That said the Iranian Republican Guard hold the card of 1500 terrorist in small cells here in the USA, that intend to carry out mass casualty attacks. Sarah Adams call sign “Super Bad” is a viable resource if one wants to have the Hell scared out them. She has carried on the work of learning and understanding who is who on the terrorism front. We can hope Tariffs carry enough weight to get Iran to the table in a serious manner without the prospect of more pallets of cash delivered in the dark of night to further fund terrorism globally. it is going to be bumpy if Tehran desires war war, rather than jaw jaw and a longer term regional solution. One can only hope a “deal” can be cut.
To clarify, the terrorists here are not necessarily Iranian at all, but Iran supports al-Qaeda and the Taliban who are currently supporting and allowing the various groups that are proxies to train in Afghanistan. Been there done that. Just as a heads up it is according to Sarah Adams the intent to create multiple mass casualty attacks in mid sized cities and target hospitals. This is not neocon BS. This is something people need to be aware of and think about. Proxies are proxies, one can guess this will discussed on Saturday in DC.
Don't know who Sarah Adams is, but again, this is ludicrous.
Neocons have been screaming about "the #1 state sponsor of terrorism" for decades now. All part of the neocon effort to drag the US into another stupid war for their hostile foreign sponsor. This "Iranian terrorism" angle is one of their main propaganda talking points, has been for decades. That and "Iran is now X weeks away from building a nuclear bomb." You'd think they'd give it up after so long. Unfortunately, their manipulation of America works.
Iran supports "terrorists" in the Levant and West Asia probably a little less than the US supports "terrorists" in the area.
America (and Israel) has provided money, weapons, and training to multiple Sunni separatist groups in areas adjacent to Iran--including Al-qaeda and ISIS. And we left billions of dollars of weapons and equipment to the Taliban.
But those battles are confined to West Asia. There has been, and absolutely is no evidence for, "Iranian proxy terrorists" in the USA.
Pure neocon war-mongering scare tactics.
It ain't any of our business. Let Iran and Israel duke it out, and settle their own millenia-old issues. Not our circus. Not our clowns, even with Chicken Little scare mongering.
You have a point to a degree, Let Israel and Iran duke it out. It may not be that simple. You might ask where the rest of the nations in the region stand on all of this, it is for sure in their sand box. Crickets….I thought so. Nothing out of the lot of them.
That said, if you are unwilling to even look up who Sarah Adams “Super Bad” is (and she is far from being any sort of NeoCon), and take some time to at least listen to what she has to say, then the Hell with it. You have your talking points, and you and I are at an impasse. So carry on.
"You might ask where the rest of the nations in the region stand on all of this, it is for sure in their sand box. Crickets….I thought so. Nothing out of the lot of them."
Where the other nations in WHAT region stand? You're repeating neocon scare-mongering about "Iranian terrorists" infiltrated into the USA, poised to strike out in mass killings.
The region of West Asia? Groups in that region have been at each other's throats for thousands of years. They all have issues with each other. None of their issues have anything to do with America. They all have stands on the intra-regional conflict that has been going on for those centuries. None of our business.
Just looked up Sara Adams. She was a minor DEI analyst hire at the CIA, who's clearly been chosen by neocon powers to be a media star. Her claim to fame--having "predicted" a "terrorist attack" in 2025, followed by neocon media claiming the psycho Black Muslim truck attack in New Orleans and the psycho American vet blowing himself up in a Tesla truck was proof of her prescience--is ludicrous.
Adams' schtick is pure neocon scare-mongering, attempts to shore up support for the coming war on Iran.
I’m still amazed that anyone doesn’t understand that Trump is always looking for maximum leverage. Perhaps they should have read his Art of the Deal when it was published some 40 years ago.
Suggest you read chapter 9 on his brilliant development of casinos in AC. Some of us know how that ended up.I lived in NYC during the 90s when Donald was squandering his inheritance and screwing his contractors with his bankruptcies. He even bragged about it. At that time I kinda enjoyed watching his various escapades and his cons play out…he was fun.You know, the” Apprentice “ was not real….right?
I believe you left out the Townsend Act in your history through which the British imposed a tariff on the colonies which helped fuel the American revolution.
You also left out Smoot-Hawley which helped cause the Great Depression. That American politicians have taken contradictory positions on tariffs is nothing new. Hell,it was the Republicans and Ronald Reagan who first pushed the idea of free trade. Newt Gingrich and Bill Clinton as well.Tariffs targeted at specific products and countries are nothing new…they make sense. I’m not saying Democrats haven’t played along.But.. I just don’t want the” greatest ever” deal maker to make America his 7th bankruptcy.
Exactly. Read an in depth article on that and Smoot- Hawley was 1930, I think, and most economists think it had nothing to do with the depression, especially since the dates don’t line up. Al Gore used it as a talking point in a debate and it seems that since then it’s become one of the main argument against tariffs. Wait and see- countries are lining up to make deals and already some good deals have been negotiated. The market will bounce back.
Smoot Hawley had almost zero impact on anything and the world has known that for more than fifty years. The only people who believe it had any impact study under 100% liar professors.
I always find that an interesting point. He’s a villain, never pays his bills, filed bankruptcy etc…yet, people/banks line up to do business with him. Somehow it doesn’t seem to line up.
To ensure the US has the resources to be independent in times of war, etc they need all primary industries to have a presence in the US and be scalable upward quickly. Thus steel mills are an essential industry and can be supported by tariffs, government handouts, automation or whatever means is most practical to keep them in business. I note that in Canada Dofasco Steel switched from 2 stages in steel production (ie make big billets than reheat them to roll plates and shapes) to continuous casting so the steel did not have to be reheated that takes time, space and costs money/energy to reheat. Many steel mills now employ this method. I am sure other cost saving means can be found.
Some may forget that there is good steel and bad steel. A drum maker switched from Canadian steel to Brazilian steel to save money but then found his barrels leaked which is not acceptable. There were micro tears in the the steel from Brazil. Same with chinese pipe fittings. They had solid walls in cast iron fittings but still weeped liquid. You get what you pay for.
Respectfully, and as was mentioned in the article, tariffs and their rippling effects are a very complex beast. You've merely read a cliff's notes version (and a sparse one at that) of our tariff activity for the past 30 years.
To better understand the forces at play, a rudimentary, but very effective primer on tariffs and other foundational economic principles would be "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlit. Highly recommend as it is very approachable to the lay.
My concern is that the Left and the Media actively want these tariffs to fail, for the country and the American people to suffer, if that will damage Trump. They hate him more than they love their country. This is why they're relentlessly talking down the prospects for these tariffs, talking up the idea of recession, and that kind of negative emotional rhetoric is what affects markets, which are reactionary, skittish, and risk-averse.
We learned during the Covid lockdowns that countries should diversify their manufacturing in the same way that investors should diversify their portfolios. We can't continue to offshore commodities and expertise we will need in a crisis.
When Covid hit I was living in an upper middle class suburb of New York full of doctors and lawyers and accountants who probably couldn't change a light bulb without incident. Suddenly they were dependent on the "essential" workers, a cadre they were not a part of, being over-educated, over-credentialed elites.
When your pipes freeze you don't need a tenured professor in gender studies. You need a plumber.
It’s a book, written by Klaus Schwab of the WEF that indicates (wink wink) Covid was an authoritarian test run for climate change. More or less, a one world government that would ration consumption on western civilization and pump up consumption in higher population countries by transferring wealth or cash for them to consume.
Of course wealthy investors still get double digit returns on investment- green new mandated climate stocks.
I wish I could say this book is dystopian fiction. Check out the reviews on Amazon. Its title is Covid 19, the great reset.
You go to lunch with a friend and routinely pick up the tab.
Then one day you say ‘Let’s split it.’
Do you sense they are aggrieved at the notion (or do you sense they are thankful for your past generosity)?
You go to lunch with someone who orders the most expensive entrees and wine, then heads to the bathroom as the cheque arrives.
Do you feel obliged to pay while they skate indefinitely?
You go to lunch with a foreign friend who tells you how well they are living while criticizing your ambitions and expenditures.
Does your patience wear thin?
America is simply letting these friends know that the tabs are going to be spit in future and that they intend to live better lives as well on the funds saved.
It really comes down to one question being asked to those who don't like what Trump is doing. That question is this: In your opinion, why is it ok for other countries to place high tariffs on US goods, but not the other way around? Then give them the example of Canada's 200% tariffs on dairy products (after certain volumes of non-tariffed dairy stuffs) imported from US?
It does come down to one questionn, why would anyone think gov knows how to do what they say they can do? How has that worked out? 37T in debt says no.
Over the last 30 days, the DJIA has contracted ~10%, however, over the same period, European markets are down 11% to 12% and the Hang Sen has lost 17% of its value. There is a lot more pressure on tariffed countries to ask for a meeting with Trump than there is for Trump to reciprocate. Look who's driving this bus.
The paragraph about steel hit the nail on the end. Tariffs on foreign steel will add American jobs in the steel industry which someone like Trump would highlight. But the increased cost of steel would cause mass layoffs downstream for any enterprise that uses steel, the cause and effect of these lost jobs will be less visible to the public.
This just confirms my perspective on political re-alignment. Trump has taken all of the decent liberal positions from them, has moved the conservatives to the middle on everything except immigration, is focused on the American people only, will try to do away with degrowth and burdensome regulation, and occupies a mixture approach to policy. The media frames his policies as extreme, but to who? It seems to me he's leaving the Democrats with nowhere to go.
The Bush family still swings a big bat here in Texas but this attempt to take out Ken Paxton opened a lot of eyes. Our Texas House is still a mess, for example.
And Trump is pulling back the writhing tarpaulin that covered the Swamp, along with his Cabinet picks. That four years in the wilderness did him some good, IMHO.
This mess began 32 years ago with NAFTA…Ross Perot, “a loud sucking noise”. Both parties have been free trade, anti-tariff advocates for decades. The only gadfly who consistently spoke out trying to protect US workers and factories is Bernie. Do we really think a guy who hates paying workers overtime is trying to correct this problem…which will also take decades.
This article is exactly what journalism (and journalists should be). An in-depth reporting of a situation showing examples and arguments without necessarily taking a definite stance for or against a politician or political party. The very exposure of the facts helps the reader understand the situation and how grey the world actually is - not black and white.
Thanks, Gary. You made my day!
Yes, and it makes you wonder whether the tariffs at the time, which shocked everybody, were still too low, too narrowly targeted and of too short duration. But also failed to be part of a more coherent overall strategy.
Of course there is an overall strategy. Treasury Secretary Bessent has laid it out in detail several times, as has Trump, Howard Lutnick and Press Secretary Leavitt.
* Tariffs to generate revenue, allow American workers to compete with slave labor and the illegal alien criminal economy, and bring in investments
* downsize/close government agencies and massively reduce spending which is the root cause of inflation
* End income tax on all incomes < $150,000, on social security income, and sundry others i.e., tips, etc.
* mass deportations to enable American workers to work without that ghastly, disgusting wage pressure
* audit all agencies and reduce fraud, waste, and abuse
evolving... MAGA. If we learned nothing else from DT's first term... Hold On!
The strategy is there this term.
It's that strategy that is the problem for the rest of the world.
There is no coherent strategy.
China is in a box, what say you now ?
'The very exposure of the facts helps the reader understand the situation and how grey the world actually is - not black and white.'
What is this thing called "grey"?
I think it's reality...and it exposes the Uniparty for what it is, and the partisan nonsense for what it is...bread at a circus.
Exactly. Everything's becomes so polarized, it's like the vast middle doesn't even exist anymore.
Ahem. In the geographic area from the Gulf of America to shores of the Great Lakes and East to west from sea to shining sea, we spell it gray.
I appreciate the spelling-based comment, but I was quoting someone else there.
Also, while "gray" might be the more common use in the US, how do you know either I or the OP aren't British? ;)
I reckon I've been drinking the MAGA koolaid and now believe American spelling first. :)
Collard (& Rushmore) did a good job on this article, but referring to Peter Savodnik is a red flag - he’s a lefty you can’t trust.
My take on Trump is he is going extreme on everything and everyone and that gives him the best bargaining position. Then he'll work out individual deals with each country. People should sit back and watch. Should be interesting.
I agree. My guess is Trump's tariff juggernaut is to undermine China's monopoly on cheap labor, manufacturing and its global resource grab. It seems he is levying tariffs on countries that do or could compete with China's low cost labor/manufacturing, and/or countries that have natural resources. Levy tariffs first to show he means business. Then he'll offer these smaller countries access to the American market, help them up their manufacturing ability to supply the American market with cheap non-Chinese goods. In exchange, these countries agree to not allow China to back door their products through them - or else, Tariff Time Again, and that was no fun. Next Trump needs to pass a tax cut so Americans feel secure enough to keep buying. My understanding is a lot of American manufacturers/distributors stocked up on Chinese-made parts and goods before the tariffs went into effect. That inventory will need to move. Hopefully that's where a Trump tax cut can come into play. But I'm just holding popcorn and guessing....
Right. If we can get these idiot Republicans to get that tax stuff passed. Needs to happen soon.
Lord I hope so.
👍
What a difference 2 days make.
It's hilarious reading these comments today.
If the purpose of the tariffs is to level the playing field and hopefully end up with free trade for most of us, then Trump’s idea should work, in theory. How long did it take for America to become the world sucker that pays for everyone’s grift since WWII? The problem doesn’t get fixed overnight, and without some pain. No pain, no gain.
The hedge fund people who create only money will naturally be pissed, because they are losing their source to make more money, and since they do not create products, but only money, they know the grift is over. For those who produce actual goods and products, common sense tells us it will get America’s middle class back on her feet again.
Just like the pissed off socialists who want to keep spending other people’s money on crazy ideologies like transgender surgeries, and the “useful idiots” who protest for them, they don’t want to see the spigot shut off – they see it as “free” money.
Historians credit the “progressive activist” Gracchus brothers with the idea of redistributing the wealth, first with the ideas of Tiberius Gracchus, followed by his younger brother, Gaius Gracchus. They fostered the idea to redistribute the wealth to the poor, beginning in 133 B.C. (aka BCE) through the “reforms.” The reforms led to dependency of the poor on the government and contributed to the beginning of the idea to debase the money supply during the end days of the (western) Roman Republic/early days of the Empire, along with corrupt politicians living the “good life” with uncontrolled immigration and endless warfare. Sound familiar?
Creating Dependency on the Government has never worked out throughout history. So, getting America off the global welfare train should work out for We the People.
You misrepresent the Gracchi. The Gracchan reforms were mostly about the ager publicus - the public land owned by the state. Wealthy senatorial types were able to use this land agriculturally with their slaves. The Gracchan reform was to find unused or ill-used land in Italy and give it to landless men to become small landholders. There was a triple purpose here. First, it would make the lands more productive. Second, it would generate a bunch of small landholders who were the backbone of the legions in that era (a bit after the end of the Third Punic War). Third, and most importantly to the Gracchi, it would make them immensely popular and facilitate their political careers. As a result, both Gracchi were killed by mobs incited by this optimate senatorial class of people who would lose out on at least two counts.
That last point was always the rub about these schemes. Marius, Sulla, Pompey, Crassus, Caesar, Antony and Augustus all have the same goal as the Gracchi in mind, mostly involving their victorious veteran legions. Augustus was the one who put it fully into practice, which is part of why he was the first Emperor.
The doles you are conflating this with are a much later feature of Rome.
You shouldn't misrepresent classical history where people who know better will notice.
Fair enough as it was a long time in the making, and reforms usually do start with good intentions, but the result is the same lesson repeated through history that dependency on the government ends badly for everyone. Redistributing the wealth through any scheme is creating dependency.
As C.S. Lewis also said, it’s the moral busybodies who are the worst tyrants because “those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
Succinct, laconic even considering the enormous scope of subject summarized in a few words. Yes…. admirable
Tucker Carlson at his BEST:
Apr 7 -- Whatever you think of tariffs, it’s clear that now is the worst possible time for the United States to participate in a military strike on Iran.
• We can’t afford it.
• Thousands of Americans would die.
• We’d lose the war that follows.
• Nothing would be more destructive to our country.
• And yet we’re closer than ever, thanks to unrelenting pressure from neocons.
• This is suicidal.
Anyone advocating for conflict with Iran is not an ally of the United States, but an enemy.
https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1909249070931095804
I am not sure Trump plans to do a military strike on Iran. Wouldn't be like him.
Israel would probably do the strike, with America's protection.
Don't really like where that might go.
Hm. Well, hopefully not.
I read somewhere earlier today that "High-Level Talks are happening this weekend.
Trump will do Bibi’s bidding on Iran when Bibi’s decides. Make no mistake about that.
A war with Iran, is a bad idea. Agreed. The current ace in the hole is the sinking price of oil. Brent Crude and West Texas Intermediate are at $60.00 USD a barrel. That has an impact both on Moscow and Teheran in terms of long term free cash. One wonders if President Putin who has been rather silent on US/Trump efforts to open dialog with Teheran has behind the scenes been “helpful” as in suggesting to the Kleptocracy in Iran that more jaw jaw is better than war war. Note that it is reported openly that half of the USAF B2 bomber fleet is in Diego Garcia on the hot strip. CVN battle group Truman is already in the Med, CVN battle group Carl Vinson is heading toward the Middle East from the Indo Pacific region, ergo something is up. As a young Marine Corps Infantry Officer in February of 1979 stationed at Camp LeJeune, Carter’s big mistake was not sending the Air Contingency force to reinforce the embassy when the “students” first scaled the gates and then retreated. We were ready to go and half of Golf Company 2/2 did deploy to Cyprus. Where they stood by for 60 days. It has been a brutal winter with Iran since. To include 53 Americans held hostage for 444 days. One can guess the reason that Teheran may be willing to begin discussions toward some form of détente, is the threat, perceived real or not of a massive air strike on their infrastructure, enough to paralyze the nation. That said the Iranian Republican Guard hold the card of 1500 terrorist in small cells here in the USA, that intend to carry out mass casualty attacks. Sarah Adams call sign “Super Bad” is a viable resource if one wants to have the Hell scared out them. She has carried on the work of learning and understanding who is who on the terrorism front. We can hope Tariffs carry enough weight to get Iran to the table in a serious manner without the prospect of more pallets of cash delivered in the dark of night to further fund terrorism globally. it is going to be bumpy if Tehran desires war war, rather than jaw jaw and a longer term regional solution. One can only hope a “deal” can be cut.
The babbling about "Iranian terrorists" is ludicrous. "1500 terrorists in small cells...." No.
Just neocon bullshit trying to scare Americans into supporting the coming war on Iran.
There is pretty much not one incident of Iranian terrorism in the USA in the last 30 years.
Iran aggressively defends its interests, and its friends in West Asia. Attacks in the USA? Not so much.
To clarify, the terrorists here are not necessarily Iranian at all, but Iran supports al-Qaeda and the Taliban who are currently supporting and allowing the various groups that are proxies to train in Afghanistan. Been there done that. Just as a heads up it is according to Sarah Adams the intent to create multiple mass casualty attacks in mid sized cities and target hospitals. This is not neocon BS. This is something people need to be aware of and think about. Proxies are proxies, one can guess this will discussed on Saturday in DC.
Don't know who Sarah Adams is, but again, this is ludicrous.
Neocons have been screaming about "the #1 state sponsor of terrorism" for decades now. All part of the neocon effort to drag the US into another stupid war for their hostile foreign sponsor. This "Iranian terrorism" angle is one of their main propaganda talking points, has been for decades. That and "Iran is now X weeks away from building a nuclear bomb." You'd think they'd give it up after so long. Unfortunately, their manipulation of America works.
Iran supports "terrorists" in the Levant and West Asia probably a little less than the US supports "terrorists" in the area.
America (and Israel) has provided money, weapons, and training to multiple Sunni separatist groups in areas adjacent to Iran--including Al-qaeda and ISIS. And we left billions of dollars of weapons and equipment to the Taliban.
But those battles are confined to West Asia. There has been, and absolutely is no evidence for, "Iranian proxy terrorists" in the USA.
Pure neocon war-mongering scare tactics.
It ain't any of our business. Let Iran and Israel duke it out, and settle their own millenia-old issues. Not our circus. Not our clowns, even with Chicken Little scare mongering.
You have a point to a degree, Let Israel and Iran duke it out. It may not be that simple. You might ask where the rest of the nations in the region stand on all of this, it is for sure in their sand box. Crickets….I thought so. Nothing out of the lot of them.
That said, if you are unwilling to even look up who Sarah Adams “Super Bad” is (and she is far from being any sort of NeoCon), and take some time to at least listen to what she has to say, then the Hell with it. You have your talking points, and you and I are at an impasse. So carry on.
"You might ask where the rest of the nations in the region stand on all of this, it is for sure in their sand box. Crickets….I thought so. Nothing out of the lot of them."
Where the other nations in WHAT region stand? You're repeating neocon scare-mongering about "Iranian terrorists" infiltrated into the USA, poised to strike out in mass killings.
The region of West Asia? Groups in that region have been at each other's throats for thousands of years. They all have issues with each other. None of their issues have anything to do with America. They all have stands on the intra-regional conflict that has been going on for those centuries. None of our business.
Just looked up Sara Adams. She was a minor DEI analyst hire at the CIA, who's clearly been chosen by neocon powers to be a media star. Her claim to fame--having "predicted" a "terrorist attack" in 2025, followed by neocon media claiming the psycho Black Muslim truck attack in New Orleans and the psycho American vet blowing himself up in a Tesla truck was proof of her prescience--is ludicrous.
Adams' schtick is pure neocon scare-mongering, attempts to shore up support for the coming war on Iran.
I’m still amazed that anyone doesn’t understand that Trump is always looking for maximum leverage. Perhaps they should have read his Art of the Deal when it was published some 40 years ago.
Suggest you read chapter 9 on his brilliant development of casinos in AC. Some of us know how that ended up.I lived in NYC during the 90s when Donald was squandering his inheritance and screwing his contractors with his bankruptcies. He even bragged about it. At that time I kinda enjoyed watching his various escapades and his cons play out…he was fun.You know, the” Apprentice “ was not real….right?
I believe you left out the Townsend Act in your history through which the British imposed a tariff on the colonies which helped fuel the American revolution.
You also left out Smoot-Hawley which helped cause the Great Depression. That American politicians have taken contradictory positions on tariffs is nothing new. Hell,it was the Republicans and Ronald Reagan who first pushed the idea of free trade. Newt Gingrich and Bill Clinton as well.Tariffs targeted at specific products and countries are nothing new…they make sense. I’m not saying Democrats haven’t played along.But.. I just don’t want the” greatest ever” deal maker to make America his 7th bankruptcy.
Didn't the Great Depression happen before the Smoot-Hawley Act?
Yes. Years before. The us had less than 6% gdp from foreign trade. Even 100% tariff would have had around 2% gdp impact.
It’s similar to Russian collusion hoax or Southern strategy - straight raw sewage
No
You’re wrong.
Exactly. Read an in depth article on that and Smoot- Hawley was 1930, I think, and most economists think it had nothing to do with the depression, especially since the dates don’t line up. Al Gore used it as a talking point in a debate and it seems that since then it’s become one of the main argument against tariffs. Wait and see- countries are lining up to make deals and already some good deals have been negotiated. The market will bounce back.
Smoot Hawley had almost zero impact on anything and the world has known that for more than fifty years. The only people who believe it had any impact study under 100% liar professors.
Life long NYer here. Some of your history is a bit off. Plus if you haven’t noticed, we’re already bankrupt.
I always find that an interesting point. He’s a villain, never pays his bills, filed bankruptcy etc…yet, people/banks line up to do business with him. Somehow it doesn’t seem to line up.
To ensure the US has the resources to be independent in times of war, etc they need all primary industries to have a presence in the US and be scalable upward quickly. Thus steel mills are an essential industry and can be supported by tariffs, government handouts, automation or whatever means is most practical to keep them in business. I note that in Canada Dofasco Steel switched from 2 stages in steel production (ie make big billets than reheat them to roll plates and shapes) to continuous casting so the steel did not have to be reheated that takes time, space and costs money/energy to reheat. Many steel mills now employ this method. I am sure other cost saving means can be found.
Some may forget that there is good steel and bad steel. A drum maker switched from Canadian steel to Brazilian steel to save money but then found his barrels leaked which is not acceptable. There were micro tears in the the steel from Brazil. Same with chinese pipe fittings. They had solid walls in cast iron fittings but still weeped liquid. You get what you pay for.
Has anyone noticed all the shredded tires littering the roads. Made in China.
Chinese bridges collapse all the time. Glad you mentioned quality of steel.
https://www.businessinsider.com/china-bridge-collapses-2012-8?op=1#june-15-2007-a-section-of-jiujiang-bridge-collapsed-after-it-was-hit-by-a-boat-in-south-chinas-guangdong-province-1
Same thing happened to Francis Scott Key bridge in Baltimore last year.
Thank you, Matt. Enough material to read here to truly understand this important policy.
Respectfully, and as was mentioned in the article, tariffs and their rippling effects are a very complex beast. You've merely read a cliff's notes version (and a sparse one at that) of our tariff activity for the past 30 years.
To better understand the forces at play, a rudimentary, but very effective primer on tariffs and other foundational economic principles would be "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlit. Highly recommend as it is very approachable to the lay.
My concern is that the Left and the Media actively want these tariffs to fail, for the country and the American people to suffer, if that will damage Trump. They hate him more than they love their country. This is why they're relentlessly talking down the prospects for these tariffs, talking up the idea of recession, and that kind of negative emotional rhetoric is what affects markets, which are reactionary, skittish, and risk-averse.
We learned during the Covid lockdowns that countries should diversify their manufacturing in the same way that investors should diversify their portfolios. We can't continue to offshore commodities and expertise we will need in a crisis.
When Covid hit I was living in an upper middle class suburb of New York full of doctors and lawyers and accountants who probably couldn't change a light bulb without incident. Suddenly they were dependent on the "essential" workers, a cadre they were not a part of, being over-educated, over-credentialed elites.
When your pipes freeze you don't need a tenured professor in gender studies. You need a plumber.
Let's build and fix things again.
That's why MAGA ignores "experts"
"I don’t like my investment portfolio taking a beating. I don’t like the destruction wrought by the cult of the Globalists a lot more".
I don’t like that little book (on sale Amazon), ‘Covid 19, the great reset’.
Sorry
You lost me.
Don't understand comment.
It’s a book, written by Klaus Schwab of the WEF that indicates (wink wink) Covid was an authoritarian test run for climate change. More or less, a one world government that would ration consumption on western civilization and pump up consumption in higher population countries by transferring wealth or cash for them to consume.
Of course wealthy investors still get double digit returns on investment- green new mandated climate stocks.
I wish I could say this book is dystopian fiction. Check out the reviews on Amazon. Its title is Covid 19, the great reset.
You go to lunch with a friend and routinely pick up the tab.
Then one day you say ‘Let’s split it.’
Do you sense they are aggrieved at the notion (or do you sense they are thankful for your past generosity)?
You go to lunch with someone who orders the most expensive entrees and wine, then heads to the bathroom as the cheque arrives.
Do you feel obliged to pay while they skate indefinitely?
You go to lunch with a foreign friend who tells you how well they are living while criticizing your ambitions and expenditures.
Does your patience wear thin?
America is simply letting these friends know that the tabs are going to be spit in future and that they intend to live better lives as well on the funds saved.
It really comes down to one question being asked to those who don't like what Trump is doing. That question is this: In your opinion, why is it ok for other countries to place high tariffs on US goods, but not the other way around? Then give them the example of Canada's 200% tariffs on dairy products (after certain volumes of non-tariffed dairy stuffs) imported from US?
It does come down to one questionn, why would anyone think gov knows how to do what they say they can do? How has that worked out? 37T in debt says no.
Over the last 30 days, the DJIA has contracted ~10%, however, over the same period, European markets are down 11% to 12% and the Hang Sen has lost 17% of its value. There is a lot more pressure on tariffed countries to ask for a meeting with Trump than there is for Trump to reciprocate. Look who's driving this bus.
The paragraph about steel hit the nail on the end. Tariffs on foreign steel will add American jobs in the steel industry which someone like Trump would highlight. But the increased cost of steel would cause mass layoffs downstream for any enterprise that uses steel, the cause and effect of these lost jobs will be less visible to the public.
This just confirms my perspective on political re-alignment. Trump has taken all of the decent liberal positions from them, has moved the conservatives to the middle on everything except immigration, is focused on the American people only, will try to do away with degrowth and burdensome regulation, and occupies a mixture approach to policy. The media frames his policies as extreme, but to who? It seems to me he's leaving the Democrats with nowhere to go.
Taibbi-grade reporting, Sir. Well Done.
And, BTW, Mr. Cornyn will likely be primaried by our favorite, Mr. Paxton. Time to clean up Texas, including the RINO infestation.
Them Bush's got some deep roots.
Thank God Trump made fools out of them.
The Bush family still swings a big bat here in Texas but this attempt to take out Ken Paxton opened a lot of eyes. Our Texas House is still a mess, for example.
And Trump is pulling back the writhing tarpaulin that covered the Swamp, along with his Cabinet picks. That four years in the wilderness did him some good, IMHO.
This mess began 32 years ago with NAFTA…Ross Perot, “a loud sucking noise”. Both parties have been free trade, anti-tariff advocates for decades. The only gadfly who consistently spoke out trying to protect US workers and factories is Bernie. Do we really think a guy who hates paying workers overtime is trying to correct this problem…which will also take decades.