4mo ago

The Economist Trashes Trump’s ‘Flat-Out Nonsense’ Tariffs in Scathing Editorial: Most ‘Unnecessary Economic Error in the Modern Era’

www.mediaite.com

51 comments

Almost everything Mr. Trump said this week—on history, economics and the technicalities of trade—was utterly deluded. His reading of history is upside down. He has long glorified the high-tariff, low-income-tax era of the late-19th century. In fact, the best scholarship shows that tariffs impeded the economy back then. He has now added the bizarre claim that lifting tariffs caused the Depression of the 1930s and that the Smoot-Hawley tariffs were too late to rescue the situation. The reality is that tariffs made the Depression much worse, just as they will harm all economies today. It was the painstaking rounds of trade talks in the subsequent 80 years that lowered tariffs and helped increase prosperity.
On economics Mr. Trump’s assertions are flat-out nonsense. The president says tariffs are needed to close America’s trade deficit, which he sees as a transfer of wealth to foreigners. Yet as any of the president’s economists could have told him, this overall deficit arises because Americans choose to save less than their country invests—and, crucially, this long-running reality has not stopped its economy from outpacing the rest of the G7 for over three decades. There is no reason why his extra tariffs should eliminate the deficit. Insisting on balanced trade with every trading partner individually is bonkers—like suggesting that Texas would be richer if it insisted on balanced trade with each of the other 49 states, or asking a company to ensure that each of its suppliers is also a customer.
👊🇺🇸🔥🤡
- Money is fungible so that we don't need perfectly balanced trade. It's a feature.
  
  In before MAGAs are on your case wondering what mushrooms have to do with anything.
It's a shame Trump supporters won't consume anything that doesn't feed their confirmation bias.
- To be fair, the economist is shit.
  They cheer welfare cuts that are projected to put tens of thousands of children into poverty and complain about tiny tax increases on the rich.
  The economist is the magazine of the upper class. They may be neo-liberal instead of straight up facist, but they are morally bankrupt.
  
  It's why I canceled. They have good news reporting but they personally view countries (notably the USA) as nothing but an economic engine. They don't honestly care about the lives of the people who live there. Kind of like how they think the USA needs to cut "red tape" with DOGE but can't specify what or precisely why. But it's crickets on usable healthcare..
  
  That's a good point, I really can't argue.
- I dunno pretty sure they consume groceries
  
  They've been told to stop talking about grocery prices.
  
  For now
The trump regime was designed to TANK the US economy so that stocks, businesses, and industries can be bought by billionaires at rock bottom prices.
All is going according to plan.
- That plan assumes an eventual recovery... That is looking less and less likely or feasible
  
  The eventual recovery is part of the plan, but you won’t be the one recovering.
The Economist: [Endlessly promotes fascism]
...
The Economist: What's with this fascism!??!?!
- They haven't encouraged this, they've been pretty critical of trump.
  They're openly capitalist and liberal.
  
  Scratch a neoliberal...
  In all seriousness, capitalism is exactly why we're here right now. (That said, technocrit is an idiot with some of the dumbest takes on this site. They blanket basically everything as fascist/fascism-adjacent, and I'm not going to say The Economist promoted this, because they didn't.)
- I don’t think you know what fascism is? Liberal, capitalist, sure, pro Trump? Definitely not, pro fascism? definitely not…. That’s even true for the very woolly definition of fascism as most people use it today
  
  If it's not Mao-era China, it's fascist.
  
  A good example of why "literally fascism!!!" Didn't get people to the polls last year.
  
  “LiBz!11”
  
  They're not pro-Trump, but the base of inequality, arrogance and hate necessary for fascism to take hold was co-produced by the Democrats. You support that and you're pro-fascism whether you like it or not.
Hang on, more of an unnecessary economic error than Liz Truss?! That's impressive "hold my beer" territory
- He’s the most incompetent, demented rapist to hold the office. Many people are saying it. People are calling him Mr. Brexit. Bigly.
This will just confirm to the MAGGAots that they're doing the right thing,.if the orthodox liberal elite are agaist it theyre in the rigth track as far as they are. .concerned.
- And if it all goes to shit they'll come up with conspiracy theories to help them avoid facing the reality of having made a mistake.
Here's the list - Who can find The Country Not On The List!
timer theme*
- I didn't look, but it's Russia, isn't it?
  
  ding!
  studio applause*
The actual Economist editorial is here (paywalled but archived).
- Cheers.
It’s almost like he doesn’t know what the fuck he is doing. Almost like someone is telling him what to do. Someone who greatly benefits from this sort of chaos on our former allies.
- If only they had left a clue, like being passed over for the tariffs. Who could it be?
Getting closer...
Error makes it sound like an honest mistake instead of an intentional, economic attack on the nation. Sure, Trump will probably sue for such language but on what grounds? The US government is not a business so how could it be slandered or libeled?
- The trump regime was designed to TANK the US economy so that stocks, businesses, and industries can be bought by billionaires at rock bottom prices.
  All is going according to plan.
A real shame he wasn’t aborted.

51 comments