Are these the same economists that said our economy would be in the tank by now? We were hearing a lot of that earlier this year. You see the "experts" predicted it and were wrong.
Oh they were using Trumps 100%+ tariffs I hear explained. Well, now that we aren't their predictions havent changed.
Do you have a source for that?
We would need to see what these same economists have said recently.
I know what you and others have claimed about TACO. But he actually hasnt. What he's done is what he has ALWAYS intended to do. Negotiate. And as long as countries are showing signs he's willing to work with them.
And as long as they flatter his ego - and don't threaten him.
Like Brazil - daring to enact the rule of law against another President that attempted to steal an election for the right.
When exactly did the Congress hand over authority to the President to use tariffs however he wished, especially to punish other nations that the President had personal opprobrium with?
Yeah leftists are disgusted with him and have been since 2016. No surprise there.
Colour me leftist and continually disgusted.
Colour most of the world that way as well.
Colour post-WW2 allies mostly that way as well.
There are more than 7 countries that have agreed to trade agreements including tariffs. Look it up.
No - you look it up - I have linked to the 7.
I'm not willing to side with anyone right now. Because Economists do not know what's going to happen because it hasn't been settled yet. They've already failed in their prognostications because things changed. I'm not willing to side with Trump either because there are too many unknowns.
I could be wrong, but you appear to be avoiding clear thinking about basic economic theory to do with tariffs by throwing in the smoke-screen of "I don't know what the SPECIFIC DETAILS of every tariff will be!"
The specifics are not necessary. The general rule was established centuries ago by Adam Smith, and is still relevant today. Where would you disagree with the following?
Adam Smith opposed tariffs
Adam Smith
opposed tariffs. He believed that free trade was the most powerful driver of economic growth. He believed that tariffs, particularly those intended to protect domestic industries, ultimately harm both the economy and consumers by limiting competition and increasing prices. Adam Smith opposed tariffs on the following five grounds:
1. Tariffs undermine free markets and natural liberty
Adam Smith believed that a free market was an extension of natural liberty. Specifically, he described free markets as “an obvious and simple system of natural liberty.” He did not favor the landowner, the factory owner, or the worker, but rather all of society. He was opposed to any and all self-defeating economic forces, especially those preventing the full operation of the free market and undermining the
wealth of nations.
2. Tariffs inhibit consumer choice and raise consumer costs
By allowing foreign goods to enter the market, Adam Smith believed that consumers gain access to a wider variety of goods at lower prices, leading to an elevated degree of consumer welfare and wellbeing. Tariffs reduce both
consumer advantages.
3. Tariffs undermine a competitive environment
Free trade, Adam Smith believed, also
creates a competitive environment that incentivizes businesses to innovate and improve efficiency, further driving economic growth. Tariffs have the opposite effect.
4. Tariffs distort prices
Adam Smith argued that
tariffs distort market prices, stifle innovation, and reduce the productivity of an economy, ultimately leading to lower overall prosperity.
5. Tariffs, retaliation and trade wars
Adam Smith recognized that
retaliatory tariffs could sometimes force other countries to lower their own tariffs but also warned that such actions could easily escalate into trade wars, harming everyone.
Specifically on this issue – and I make no apologies for quoting his thoughts in full – Adam Smith stated:
“There may be good policy in retaliations of this kind, when there is a probability that they will procure the repeal of the high duties or prohibitions complained of. The recovery of a great foreign market will generally more than compensate the transitory inconveniency of paying dearer during a short time for some sorts of goods. To judge whether such retaliations are likely to produce such an effect, does not, perhaps, belong so much to the science of a legislator, whose deliberations ought to be governed by general principles which are always the same, as to the skill of that insidious and crafty animal, vulgarly called a statesman or politician, whose councils are directed by the momentary fluctuations of affairs. When there is no probability that any such repeal can be procured, it seems a bad method of compensating the injury done to certain classes of our people, to do another injury ourselves, not only to those classes, but to almost all the other classes of them.”
Conclusion
In my view, the fundamental function of the United States economy until recently and for most of its history exemplifies the application – perhaps compared to any other country in the world – of the teachings of Adam Smith. That is, in all likelihood, the reason for its astonishing economic success.
We all need to remember that, beyond anything, Adam Smith was a philosopher and acute student of human nature.
He recognized that, to a greater or lesser extent, we are all motivated by self-interest. Personally. Professionally. Financially.
Let’s assume that tariff supporters are motivated by the best intentions. But ultimately, intentions don’t matter – especially if they can lead to seriously stalled growth, and even that might be an understatement.
According to recent commentary from
Blackrock – the U.S. based investment management company – “We expect tariffs to lower growth and boost inflation globally. Our Fundamental Fixed Income team, for example, has lowered its 2025 GDP growth expectation to 0% and raised its core inflation expectation to 3.8%.”
There was a recent discussion between
CNN’s Fareed Zakaria, Bridgwater Associates founder
Ray Dalio, and the Editor-in-Chief of The Economist, Zanny Minton Beddoes.
During that discussion Ms. Minton Beddoes referred to recent tariff policies as a huge “self-inflicted wound” on the U.S. economy.
Based on the evidence of Adam Smith’s stated views on tariffs, expressed 300 years ago and still widely admired and emulated today, it’s hard to disagree with that judgment.
Adam Smith (1723 – 1790) is widely considered to be the father of modern economics. His thinking played a pivotal role in popularizing the concept of supply and demand. His published work, particularly The Wealth of Nations – available online – introduced the idea of the "invisible hand". This...
mitchorr.com