Trump's vacuous obsession with tariffs
What does Trump want on trade? Who knows.
Good news, folks. President Trump would like you to know that in addition to being a billionaire, a television icon, and the 45th president of the United States, he is a "a Tariff Man."
What does that mean, exactly? Should we understand "Tariff Man," on the pattern of "Yale man," as someone who graduated from Tariff College and maybe Tariff Law and has a sweatshirt to prove it? Is a Tariff Man like "Spider Man," bitten by a radioactive Tariff and endowed with a super Tariff sense? Or is a Tariff Man a guy who just enjoys Tariffs, the way a Beer Man does beer?
This might seem like a pointless semantic exercise, but I am not so sure. What it reminds us is that Trump is someone who is fixated on the idea of tariffs, who understands their potential and significance without being terribly interested in the details of what it means to impose them effectively. He dissents from the mad, ahistorical consensus that it is in a nation's best interests to open her markets to the entire world unconditionally. He knows that China, which does not respect the free and open movement of people or goods or intellectual property, has benefited from this.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
What he does not know is what he really wants. On more than one occasion he has given the impression that he thinks tariffs are a good strategy for increasing government revenue, as if the few billions we will collect from duties on steel are offset by the $1.5 trillion in tax cuts his administration threw out the window last December. His grasp of the newly renegotiated NAFTA appears shaky at best. He didn't even know where to sign the damn thing. While it is a significant improvement over what came before it, both for American workers and their foreign counterparts, it could and should have gone much further. Does he understand this? Does he care? Or was it just about the photo op?
The problem here is that, despite his reputation for stubbornness, Trump is fundamentally irresolute. He is the last person to defend crooked associates he will later disavow. He is the first person to heap praise upon enemies he has slandered in the vilest manner. America's participation in the 11-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership died the moment Trump was inaugurated, only for the idea to be revived at the behest of the president himself, baffling everyone involved. One of the many good arguments he and his advisers had made against it in the first place was that the United States already had bilateral deals in place with six of these Asian countries. By joining TPP instead, the United States would gain nothing and concede a great deal. Those facts haven't changed but apparently Trump's mind has. Imagine that.
One fundamental point that seems to have eluded Trump over the course of the last year is that trade wars must be won at home as well as abroad. He is remarkably gifted at communicating with his base, but the only Americans who are enthusiastic about his tariff agenda are 60-something rural Democratic voters and a few online #MAGA diehards for whom "Trade War" might as well be a shoot-em-up game. He needs to explain the long-term benefits of rebalancing America's trade relationships to voters who did not learn to criticize NAFTA at their grandfathers' knees. As things stand, voters see nothing but frightening headlines.
The other front on which he is failing is the businesses affected. Protectionism only works if you actually take steps to shore up domestic industries. A naive person might think that last year's tax cuts would be more than enough to persuade corporations to hire rather than fire employees. As it stands, both Ford and General Motors are about to announce thousands of layoffs. Things are even worse further down the supply chain. In small towns like Mendon, Michigan, the loss of 83 jobs at a tiny components manufacturing plant is something that cannot be sustained. Unfortunately Trump has already thrown away the leverage he might have had with these companies. Imagine a partial tax break for manufacturers willing to hire more employees and open new plants in this country, one that was negotiated with the input of labor unions and announced alongside a presidential tour of the post-industrial Midwest. It would have been better for everyone.
This is one reason why Trump's recently announced 90-day trade ceasefire with China makes no sense. There is no reason to believe that in three months he is going to convince them to make significant concessions. But it is possible to imagine him stepping back anyway — in deference to his advisers, because he is confused about the reality of what is being offered by the other side, or out of boredom.
Trump is the wrong man for this necessary job. Unfortunately, for now he is the only one.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Matthew Walther is a national correspondent at The Week. His work has also appeared in First Things, The Spectator of London, The Catholic Herald, National Review, and other publications. He is currently writing a biography of the Rev. Montague Summers. He is also a Robert Novak Journalism Fellow.
-
Why more and more adults are reaching for soft toys
Under The Radar Does the popularity of the Squishmallow show Gen Z are 'scared to grow up'?
By Chas Newkey-Burden, The Week UK Published
-
Magazine solutions - December 27, 2024 / January 3, 2025
Puzzles and Quizzes Issue - December 27, 2024 / January 3, 2025
By The Week US Published
-
Magazine printables - December 27, 2024 / January 3, 2025
Puzzles and Quizzes Issue - December 27, 2024 / January 3, 2025
By The Week US Published
-
US election: who the billionaires are backing
The Explainer More have endorsed Kamala Harris than Donald Trump, but among the 'ultra-rich' the split is more even
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
US election: where things stand with one week to go
The Explainer Harris' lead in the polls has been narrowing in Trump's favour, but her campaign remains 'cautiously optimistic'
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
Is Trump okay?
Today's Big Question Former president's mental fitness and alleged cognitive decline firmly back in the spotlight after 'bizarre' town hall event
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
The life and times of Kamala Harris
The Explainer The vice-president is narrowly leading the race to become the next US president. How did she get to where she is now?
By The Week UK Published
-
Will 'weirdly civil' VP debate move dial in US election?
Today's Big Question 'Diametrically opposed' candidates showed 'a lot of commonality' on some issues, but offered competing visions for America's future and democracy
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
1 of 6 'Trump Train' drivers liable in Biden bus blockade
Speed Read Only one of the accused was found liable in the case concerning the deliberate slowing of a 2020 Biden campaign bus
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
How could J.D. Vance impact the special relationship?
Today's Big Question Trump's hawkish pick for VP said UK is the first 'truly Islamist country' with a nuclear weapon
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
Biden, Trump urge calm after assassination attempt
Speed Reads A 20-year-old gunman grazed Trump's ear and fatally shot a rally attendee on Saturday
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published