Posted on 07/29/2018 5:48:39 AM PDT by Kaslin
“This trade war is cutting the legs out from under farmers,” said Senator Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) on Tuesday, “and White House’s ‘plan’ is to spend $12 billion on gold crutches.”
Referring to Donald Trump’s tariff brinksmanship with China, Senator Sasse was decrying Donald Trump’s request to Congress for compensatory farm subsidies. Sasse insisted that “America’s farmers don’t want to be paid to lose” — but regardless of what farmers want, we should want free trade.
Tariffs are taxes, after all. Consumers ultimately pay for them all.
Now, Trump’s requested “crutches” may amount to nothing more than just another fine example of a bad government program leading to an additional, “compensatory” government program. Also quite bad.
Old story. Too familiar.
Or is it? Could there be more to this story than a failure of trade policy? It seems so. The very next day after Sasse’s public statement, all of a sudden anti-Trumpers found new (and startling) cause to wonder: could we be misunderestimating Trump?
Sure, the senator is right to be alarmed by the “administration’s tariffs and bailouts,” for the president is playing a most dangerous game. Trade wars are not mutually beneficial. Trade is.
And the history of protectionist brinksmanship is definitely not pretty. Sasse himself predicted that Trump’s tariff hikes “aren’t going to make America great again, they’re just going to make it 1929 again.”
Sasse was referring to the passing of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1929, which led not only to a spooked Wall Street, but to bank failures and retaliatory protectionism from other countries.
And a worldwide depression.
And world war.
But Trump himself insists that his agenda isn’t ramped-up protectionism. Amidst all his ballyhoo about the greatness of — the sheer wonderfulness of — tariffs, we have occasionally received hints at a very different agenda. Beneath Trump’s pompous, know-nothing protectionist stance — which we have all heared in his decades-long talk-show blather as well as his campaign’s talking points and bizarre Twitter contributions — there has been this dog-whistle to the economists: that what he really wants is free trade.
And this week President Trump lowered the frequency of his transmission for anyone to hear, from ultrasonic whistle to clear clarion call. As Sasse was decrying the China tariffs and the proposed compensatory subsidies to agriculture, Trump stated that he was pushing the EU to drop all trade barriers and subsidies. And then, on Wednesday, he and the EU’s appointed top banana, Jean-Claude Juncker, publicly declared just that.
“We agreed today, first of all, to work together toward zero tariffs, zero non-tariff barriers and zero subsidies on non-auto industrial goods,” is how Trump put it.
Trump also mentioned a deal for Europeans to import soy from America — which was Trump’s way of addressing the China trade situation, which had been getting worse. Indeed, this week China announced a deal with Russia to purchase soy.
So what is really going on here?
Trump has always trumpeted his love of “fair trade,” not free trade. And by this, what he has meant, apparently, is multilateral free trade, not unilateral free trade.
According to classical economics, a country would benefit from a unilateral free trade policy, even if all other countries managed their trade on elaborate protectionist grounds, with high tariffs, subsidies, and all the trappings of mercantilism. But this analysis and policy package has never interested Trump. Indeed, he has decried U.S. official trade treaties like NAFTA as favoring other countries’ producers over ours.
Tellingly, he has never talked about consumers much, and a lot of what he has said was more farrago than genius.
No wonder we have been confused. We free traders expect free trade to be promoted honestly and coherently. It’s our style.
It’s not Trump’s.
Indeed, it should be obvious by now that clarity has never really been part of Trump’s combative modus. He preaches nationalism — economic nationalism, even damn-fool protectionism — while (apparently) really seeking multilateral free trade. The EU is merely the first to hop on board. Trump expects other nations to get on board, too. Soon.
The “irony” here is this: because multilateral free trade is better for everyone in all countries — well, everyone but politicians and the rent-seeking special interest groups that push for special advantages (which somehow also benefit politicians and the political class rather than consumers and producers at large) — Trump’s nationalism is in truth a mere Trojan Horse. America could get by just fine with unilateral free trade . . . but the whole world would benefit from multilateral free trade. Not just America.
For all I know, Trump’s status as a secret free trader could even be a secret from himself. It certainly was a secret kept from me.
But if his boisterous, seemingly bumbling, ugly and nationalistic threats and bluster succeed in getting the world’s nation states to take down existing trade barriers and adopt a more consistent free trade posture, the protectionist win-lose jibber-jabber will vanish amidst legitimate talk way beyond win-win. It would be a situation of win-win-win-win….
And we wouldn’t get tired of the winning.
In other words. STOP STICKING YOUR NOSE IN STUFF IT DOESN’T BELONG. WE KNOW WHO TO VOTE FOR AND NOT VOTE FOR. yOU OBVIOUSLY DON’T
Obviously you don’t or you would not have voted for Alexander and Corker.
Sasse the Ass is another UpChuck Hagel who promised to carry out the will of the people (who elected him) and instead goes his own way at the behest of his donors and the U.S. Chamber.
He’s not running again because the word is already out in Nebraska that he needs to go. He stands a sideways chance in hell of getting anywhere near the nomination for president.
Like Hagel, he’ll take up permanent residence in the DC area using his “influence” to rake in money as a lobbyist along with the pension he gets for his six miserable years in the Senate. Like Hagel, he believes in screw the Nebraska voters and the rest of the nation for personal political and monetary gain.
Both Corker and Alexander are Republicans and therefore get Republican votes
Conservative purists are always losers because of their sanctimonious puritism. The Republican Party is the only place conservatives can be to have a voice beyond uneffectively bitchin and whinen and moanen
I’m reading the article amazed at how obtuse the writer is. Trump has been explicit about his position on trade and tariffs. He has said that free trade with zero barriers is the ideal and that he will use tariffs or the threat of tariffs where necessary to either a) achieve the ideal or b) to protect ourselves from countries who won’t cooperate in achieving the ideal. In other words he perfectly weds free trade theory with real world pragmatism. Trump has squared the circle but these guys are too dense to see it — although it is encouraging that this writer at least has an inkling. Maybe he will share his discovery of the obvious with others of his ilk.
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/AgriculturalSubsidyPrograms.html
For 2018, see:
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS22131.pdf
Isn't it amazing? Every day I learn more about how different the progressives' view of the world is from mine. It's as if they are too lazy or inexperienced to think things through. And it seems that those that do understand spout nonsense to take advantage of the others.
Let’s just hope the Secret Service is maintaining an eagle-eyed looko0ut for Green Kryptonite.
bert, we all know you are for Bush League Republicans and their Plan for North Mexico (aka USA).
How much do you profit from open borders?
Enough to make it worth losing our country?
well, good he’s retiring .. so far as opponents, POTUS seems to have attracted an array of LOSERS: Sasse, Flake, Kasich ... man does work hard but also has some incredible luck!!
I’m familiar with the Farm Bill. Note that food stamps are 80% of the total.
Of the remaining 20% that actually is for agriculture, more than half is subsidized crop insurance and for public-use land conservation.
I only see a mention of sugar as a crop subsidy.
Note that page 8 pf the pdf notes that direct payments for traditional commodity crops have been eliminated.
Your narrow minded sanctimonius ignorance should cause you to quit posting in shame. You are so tightly focused on a very narrow view of reality you are unable to percieve the world as it is, newbie.
Without secure borders and the rule of law there is no nation.
Fool..... why do you in a blatant lie accuse me of favoring no borders.
You are so zealous in your desire to heap scorn you lie like CNN
The Newbie Lurkinanloomin is a Fake Poster
Don’t know why people debate over Trump in trying to pigeonhole him into “their brand”....Most people supported Him because his ‘Brand was His Own. He’s “The peoples President” says it best I think.
The only reason the republicans finally supported him because they feared he could win when it came down to the nuts and bolts of it all.
I like Trump as he is.....and if he has to wiggle side to side with Do-Do Head Congress to get his agenda passed and also in play then I’ll be happy to give him lots of wiggle room.....he did ask us all for just that in his run.
Everyone knows that... but of course neither were ‘enforced’ for decades and we still survived...... The difference now is we finally have a man at the top who understands fully the threats, is willing to push for enforcing ‘Law and Order’, and “Securing Our Borders” so that we are a prosperous and secure nation.
And it will only happen if we elect a different Congress.
The Bush League Republicans currently in office will not finance a wall or enforcement.
Amnesty is the only solution they will vote for.
Yes..and that’s what we’re doing. Sooo-ooo until their out we have to position the deck, if we can’t get it now we still have the rest of his term and second. This is a long game when it comes to immigration...we want it done right before he leaves office....and until then get all we can and change what we can.....
Yes..and that’s what we’re doing. Sooo-ooo until their out we have to position the deck, if we can’t get it now we still have the rest of his term and second. This is a long game when it comes to immigration...we want it done right before he leaves office....and until then get all we can and change what we can.....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.