I think he was talking about trade in more general terms.
I am as well. I’m actually talking in the biggest of big pictures on trade...
One of the other things that is going to need to be re-examined in the fullness of time is the belief that the Smoot-Hawley legislation is what did trade in during the Great Depression.
Today, we have no such trade restrictions, and yet trade with our larger partners (like Japan, Germany, S. Korea, Taiwan China, etc) is down by significant to huge amounts.
So the question will need to be asked in the future: Was it really Smoot-Hawley that caused the decrease in trade and economic activity? Or was is the failure of the financial sector that caused the decline in trade?
And if it turns out as the current evidence suggests that the vapor-locking of the financial sector is what did in trade, and not trade policy per se, then a huge component of the free-trade dogma is finished and done.
Part of why the GOP just isn’t “getting any traction” during this melt-down is that “free market” principles are not going to get things going again here. What has to happen is that the financial sector needs to be made functional again. Bailing them out isn’t going to do anything other than prolong the pain - a bankruptcy where the government is DIP and props up certain liabilities while these “too big to fail” companies are broken up and sold off is going to be necessary sooner or later.
A non-functional financial sector compromises both markets and trade, as well as future growth.
Right, and I think he needed to be talking about the budget in more general terms.