
Why exactly is Trump so obsessed with tariffs?
Now, I know Trump's not big on reading, or history, or, you know, 'thinking.' But this isn't some innovative new radical idea he just cooked up at Mar-a-Lago. No, serious people (see Sen. Reed Smoot an d Rep. Willis C. Hawley in 1930) have tried this before.
And guess what? It doesn't work. It's the economic equivalent of trying to cure a headache with a hammer.
The sainted Ronald Reagan warned against this strategy. And Trump himself acknowledges it might cause a 'disturbance' and says he ' couldn't care less ' if car prices increase. Which, on one hand, is refreshingly honest. On the other hand, it's a little unsettling to hear this from a guy whose 2024 campaign sales pitch hinged on lowering prices.
So why is he doing this? Well, let's start with the kindest explanation — one that assumes he is neither scheming nor lying, just genuinely misguided and mistaken.
Maybe, just maybe, Trump truly believes tariffs are an unmitigated good. He's certainly been talking about them for decades, in that way certain old men get fixated on ideas that were debunked long before they were born. He sees the world as a rigged, zero-sum game, where America (and more importantly, Trump) is always getting fleeced. The only solution is to hit back — hard, indiscriminately and preferably with something that fits on a bumper sticker.
If you buy into Trump's victimhood logic — and you shouldn't — then maybe you believe there will be some initial suffering, some 'pain' before the 'gain,' as one of his minions put it.
And then what? Factories magically reappear in Ohio? American manufacturing rises from the dead like some sort of blue-collar phoenix? American kids can suddenly climb the rope in gym class and perform five pull ups?
Never mind that companies spent decades building a global supply chain because it was cheaper and more efficient (see David Ricardo's law of comparative advantage, circa 1817). Never mind that even if you could unwind that elaborate system, it would take decades — longer than Trump will be alive, and certainly longer than he plans to pay attention.
And in the meantime, American consumers, who are already gasping from inflation, get smacked with higher prices.
Now, if Trump actually cared about national security — and that's a big 'if' — there might be a plausible argument to be made here. Maybe the idea is to make America less dependent on foreign supply chains, especially from countries like China (and not, say, Canada). Remember when we couldn't get enough masks during COVID? That was fun.
But if that's the goal, wouldn't a competent leader go on TV, look the country in the eye and say, 'Listen, folks. This is going to hurt in the short term, but here's why your sacrifice matters'?
Instead, all we get are vague platitudes, the usual 'tough talk,' and press flacks and right-wing talking heads constantly assuring us that 'the president has been very clear.'
Spoiler: He hasn't. He never is. His entire communication strategy is to blurt out something inflammatory and let everyone else scramble to impose meaning on it (which he will then contradict).
Which brings us to the less-generous interpretations. Maybe this isn't about fixing the economy at all. Maybe it's about power: the raw, transactional, kingmaker kind. The ability to impose tariffs at will lets Trump dictate winners and losers, punish or reward entire industries and nations, shake down CEOs and generally feel like the most important man in the room.
Or maybe it's about money. Not for you, of course. For the billionaires. The ones who see economic crises as buying opportunities. The ones who made a killing off the 2008 crash and the COVID crisis. When everything is burning, they swoop in and pick through the wreckage for bargains. And wouldn't it be extremely convenient to know exactly when that wreckage was coming?
So here we are. The best-case scenario is that Trump is utterly misguided. The worst-case scenario is that it's all a con job. And the most likely scenario? Some combination of the two.
Either way, the result is the same: You pay more, he gets more power and nothing actually gets better.
In other words, just another day in the Trump administration.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Politico
17 minutes ago
- Politico
The Great Gerrymander War: California fires back at Texas power play
'I know the last thing Riverside County residents want is to eliminate the Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission and replace it with insider Sacramento politicians gerrymandering district lines behind closed doors,' Calvert said in a statement. When Newsom initially floated a California gerrymander to neutralize Texas, the reaction last month was a mix of enthusiasm and deep skepticism about the legal and political hurdles, given California's use of an independent redistricting commission. But as it became clear that Texas Republicans were unlikely to back down, Newsom pressed the issue, making California the tip of the spear for a counteroffensive embraced by Democrats at all levels of the party. Those dynamics make it likely the Democratic-dominated Legislature votes this month to put a new map on the ballot. While some expressed misgivings Sunday about a rushed process — to secure a November election, lawmakers will need to act quickly — several statehouse Democrats predicted they would muster the necessary two-thirds votes in each house. 'It's not a fight any of us want to be in, but we're in it, so we're going to fight,' said Assemblymember Buffy Wicks, a Democrat from Oakland. 'Nothing,' she added, 'unites the California Democratic caucus quite like Donald Trump.' But getting Sacramento Democrats on board is one thing. Persuading California voters will be entirely different — particularly because they would be asked to return line-drawing power to politicians, letting the Legislature craft new lines until the commission takes over again in 2031 after the next census. 'Voters want to weigh in on redistricting because they don't trust politicians,' said Chris Lehman, a political consultant who has worked on redistricting ballot initiatives. A survey conducted by Newsom pollster David Binder found that 52 percent of California voters would approve of state lawmakers redrawing its congressional district lines if Texas Republicans pulled off a similar gambit. The measure becomes more popular if the fight becomes more overtly partisan; 60 percent of voters back 'rejecting Trump's power grab.' Roughly eight in 10 Democrats and six in 10 independents are in favor of the effort, according to a person who was briefed on the poll's findings. The messages tested in the poll underscore how California Democrats will portray this as a fight they have no choice but to take on. The proposed ballot measure would be contingent on Texas' new districts being enacted. 'The polling shows that Californians overwhelmingly reject Trump's blatant power grab in Texas and want to fight back. The basic components of the program we are considering has strong support,' said Los Angeles-area Assemblymember Rick Chavez Zbur, another Democrat. A successful ballot campaign would still require a titanic political effort. Assuming the Legislature acts, Newsom and allies will have just a few months to raise tens of millions of dollars and educate voters on a sudden, off-year election. Republican foes could be motivated to throw down. With little else on the ballot, that could yield an enormously expensive showdown. 'That'll be the big question mark,' said Brandon Castillo, a political consultant who specializes in ballot initiatives. 'Does that national money pour in, on both sides?'


The Hill
18 minutes ago
- The Hill
Massive AI spending shows early payoff for Big Tech
After months of questions about whether major tech firms were overshooting AI spending, Google, Microsoft and Meta are taking a victory lap after outperforming investors' lofty expectations. 'It's showing it's starting to pay off and companies are doubling down,' Wedbush Securities analyst Dan Ives said, adding, 'It puts fuel in the engine for tech to rally more in the second half [of the year].' Major tech firms promised eye-popping investments in AI heading into 2025, as they pushed to build out the data center infrastructure that is expected to underpin the development of frontier AI models — a frenzy reinforced by President Trump's own AI infrastructure push. These investments, already under scrutiny because of their sheer size, faced additional pressure earlier this year with the emergence of DeepSeek. The Chinese AI startup released its R1 model, which it claimed could compete with top American AI models and was developed with a fraction of the infrastructure. However, the tech giants seem to have quieted critics so far with the results of their spending. Google kicked off a series of strong tech earnings last week, beating investor expectations with $96 billion in revenue and $28 billion in net income last quarter. The search giant, which initially planned to invest $75 billion in capital spending this year, also upped the ante with an additional $10 billion investment. This raised the bar for Microsoft and Meta coming into this week, said Dave Wagner, head of equity and portfolio manager at Aptus Capital Advisors. Microsoft did not disappoint, reporting $76 billion in revenue and $27 billion in net income last quarter. The company's cloud computing platform Azure surpassed $75 billion in revenue for the fiscal year, up 39 percent year-over-year in the last quarter. It also announced plans to invest another $30 billion in capital spending next quarter, after spending about $88 billion over the past year. The company's stock jumped Thursday on the strong earnings report, briefly boosting the company's market valuation above $4 trillion. It is only the second company in the world to cross the historic threshold, following Nvidia's lead last month.


The Hill
18 minutes ago
- The Hill
Charlamagne tha God responds to Trump's ‘racist sleazebag' remark
Radio host Charlamagne tha God responded on his show Monday to recent comments from President Trump calling him a 'racist sleazebag,' mostly shrugging off the insults and saying he wants the president to succeed. 'Now, the personal insults, I don't care. He called me a sleaze bag. I looked up the definition of sleaze bag, says it's a disgusting or despicable person, depending on who you ask, that may apply to me,' the radio host said Monday on 'The Breakfast Club.' 'Okay, I personally prefer friendly neighborhood, a-hole, okay? He said, I'm 'a low IQ individual,' I don't know. I've never taken an IQ test. He said, I have 'no idea what words are coming out of — coming out of' my 'mouth.' Absolutely true. Okay, I've been surprising myself my whole life,' he added. The radio host and frequent political pundit chafed at being called 'racist.' 'He called me a racist. I didn't mention race, not one time on Lara Trump. I didn't bring up the fact that President Trump issued an executive order directing oversight of institutions like the Smithsonian to remove or suppress narratives about systemic racism and Black history,' Charlamagne said. In a post on Truth Social on Sunday, Trump responded to Charlamagne's appearance on his daughter-in-law Lara Trump's Fox News show, calling the radio host a 'racist sleazebag' and asking 'Why is he allowed to use the word 'GOD' when describing himself?' 'He's a Low IQ individual, has no idea what words are coming out of his mouth, and knows nothing about me or what I have done – like just ending 5 Wars,' Trump added. Trump's post followed the radio host predicting on Saturday that anger among MAGA voters over his administration's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files would lead to traditional Republicans taking back the party in a 'coup.' 'I think there's a political coup going on right now in the Republican Party that people aren't paying attention to. I think that this Epstein thing is going to be a way for traditional conservatives to take their party back. I really do,' Charlamagne, whose given name is Lenard McKelvey, told Lara Trump. On his show on Monday, he said he wanted Trump to remain 'focused' on more important issues, 'President Trump, don't worry about Lenard, okay, don't worry about Charlamagne tha God. I know something I said hit a nerve and rattled you a little bit, but I don't want you rattled,' he said. 'I am an American. I don't care who's in the White House. I want America to succeed. But I need you focused, and right now you're not focused.'