It is called Optimus 3 and is the mass produced product of Tesla and the Elon Musk teams.
Posted on 08/22/2025 6:44:12 AM PDT by lasereye
In my career, I’ve rarely seen a more biased policy debate than the reaction to Trump’s trade agenda. Democrats want him to fail. Old-guard Republicans hate tariffs. Almost no one is evaluating the strategy on its own merits.
One of my goals in this specific public discussion is to surface alternative scenarios. And there is a plausible path where tariffs—paired with industrial policy—strengthen, rather than weaken, the U.S. economy.
What the consensus said (in April 2025, and largely still today):
Tariffs will drive up prices
Growth will slow
Trade partners will retaliate
Reshoring won’t happen
Long-term damage will be severe
But what if that doom loop never arrives?
1) The realized hit looks smaller than forecast. The macro effects on prices and growth have been more muted than expected. The feared inflation shock hasn’t materialized, and manufacturing production is higher today than in early 2025.
2) Tariffs also raise revenue. Tariffs generate hundreds of billions in annual federal revenue. In a high-deficit environment, this revenue can support industrial investments, worker training, or even offset other distortionary taxes.
3) “Managed trade” may be replacing textbook free trade. Rather than sparking global retaliation, the U.S. is leveraging its economic scale and security umbrella to strike favorable deals: foreign investment in U.S. factories, rerouted supply chains, and commitments to buy American-made goods. This isn’t free trade. It’s managed trade—on U.S. terms. The U.S. is not being a good global citizen, but it may result in a significantly larger U.S. manufacturing base. Back in April, few expected that development. And the timing may be important.
4) We’re entering a new phase of AI-driven consumption. Smart, autonomous equipment is moving far beyond the factory floor—into kitchens, clinics, farms, homes, and construction sites.
In the next two decades, expect rapid adoption of: ▪️ Warehouse AMRs ▪️ Robotic cooks, cleaners, and delivery bots ▪️ Site-layout and bricklaying robots ▪️ Hospital and eldercare assistants ▪️ Tele-operated excavators ▪️ Smart kitchen appliances and home energy systems ▪️ Lawn, pool, and home helper bots ▪️ Eventually, robotaxis and general-purpose domestic robots
And of course, far more robotics inside factories themselves.
If the U.S. expands its manufacturing base now, this demand surge could translate into domestic production—not just more imports. Manufacturing has strong multiplier effects. New manufacturing activity doesn’t exist in isolation—it supports a wide range of upstream and downstream jobs: suppliers, maintenance, logistics, construction, services, and local retail. The manufacturing job multiplier is among the highest in the economy. Building domestic capacity today means more durable job creation across entire regional ecosystems tomorrow.
Bottom line: The costs of tariffs may be offset—or even outweighed—by a growing U.S. manufacturing base and additional federal revenue.
The icing on the cake: The Midwest—once the backbone of American industry—bore the brunt of offshoring and automation. A good outcome would be if it plays a central role in the next industrial revival. Shouldn’t a true manufacturing renaissance include the communities that lost the most?
Unfortunately, I’m less optimistic about this part.
I am especially perplexed by tariffs on food. What was one of the things that got people ticked off at Biden? Grocery prices shooting higher (cue the low-IQ defenses of higher grocery prices).
Gad Levanon is Chief Economist at The Burning Glass Institute. This is from his newsletter available on Linkedin.
I became aware of it because Marketwatch discussed it here: Have critics gotten the Trump tariffs all wrong? Here’s a case for why they will help the economy.
I don't see the obvious: Sex robots. And if he doesn't think that will happen he's smoking something.
“Tariffs generate hundreds of billions in annual federal revenue. In a high-deficit environment, this revenue can support industrial investments, worker training, or even offset other distortionary taxes.”
No no no! Tariffs are fine. But right away he looks for things to spend it on. This is like a broke person deep in debt, getting a big tax refund and thinking they can take a trip to Disneyland now.
It is called Optimus 3 and is the mass produced product of Tesla and the Elon Musk teams.
It's a shame that you can't see that on your own.
I think some of the substitution of items with tariffs on them is not being filled by U.S. domestic sources, but instead is being filled by imports that have a lower tariff because they come from nations that have been given a lower tariff.
Also, Trump should quit making his false statements referring to the tariff revenue as coming from the foreign countries. The exporting country does not pay the tariff, nor do their producers. The tariff is paid by the importing company in the U.S.. Its a tax, a tax on U.S. domestic companies that do the importing.
The only leverage the tariff has on the other countries is not because they pay the tariff, which they don’t, it is only leverage on the other countries to the extent the tariff reduces what U.S. companies will buy from them and/or raises the prices, in the U.S., for the imported items, possibly affecting their market competitiveness, or both. To the extent the exporting companies simply “eat” the extra cost to their U.S. importer, the tariff affects their bottom line - their profits.
Toyota, trying to keep the cars they import competitive here is eating a lot of the new tariffs, and costing them billion$. The unionized American companies are loving that, and they will, until Toyota increases production at its non-union plants here, which they will.
As of today, all federal agencies with the exception of the VA, have 10% smaller budgets than yesterday. All agencies are expected to provide the same, or better, service under these cuts. The money saved will be applied directly to the federal debt. Any agency director who cannot met this obligation will be immediately replaced with someone who can. Thanks, and have a nice day.
You're talking in vague generalities. I said "the way the tariffs have been done still makes no sense to me."
I think I was being spot on. The world imposes impediments for our products being sold in their nations, while we do none for the majority of the time. As this was the normal MO, many nations, if not all, took advantage of our stupidity.
Now, be more specific, as to what you mean by your vague statement.
In other words, what would you change, and include why you think that the current application makes no sense to you, and how your changes bring sensible reforms.
The problem with your vague idea is that they put tariffs on EVERYTHING. Has nothing to do with whether the particular country put tariffs on that particular item. Do you understand that the tariffs aren't based on that? Trump just put in across the board tariffs on every country.
As I said, the problem is that they just put tariffs on EVERYTHING.
Now, be more specific, as to what you mean by your vague statement.
First of all, they should put retaliatory tariffs only on those specific things in each country where they were imposing tariffs on our exports. That would be in keeping with your justification for the tariffs.
I specifically mentioned tariffs on food - including foods that we don't even produce - as being especially illogical. Has nothing to do with manufacturing, right? As I said, he's pushing up the cost of groceries:
Some of the tariffs have nothing to do with the stated objective of reshoring manufacturing.
I am especially perplexed by tariffs on food. What was one of the things that got people ticked off at Biden? Grocery prices shooting higher (cue the low-IQ defenses of higher grocery prices).
There are other things that have tariffs now, such as alcoholic beverages. We don't produce many of those things and never will. Even if we do produce the same thing, such as beer, I don't get the purpose of tariffs on that stuff. Are our breweries going overseas or something?
Another problem with the tariffs was that they were disruptive - because there were so many all at once. As I said, They put tariffs on pretty everything out there all at once, instead of being selective. It's disruptive in some cases, with little short-term benefits.
The obviously disruptive effects of the tariffs were why the stock market was plummeting last spring - until Trump suddenly postponed most of them. Do you recall that? Why did you think it was plummeting?
You want a specific example? They were forced to scale back the tariffs on auto parts last April. The Trump administration realized they were going to cause problems with the auto industry's supply chains.
Trump set to soften auto tariffs after industry pushback
To summarize:
There are other methods they use to block our products from being sold in their countries. There is currency value manipulation, in the case with China, there is intellectual property theft, as well as, unfair trade practices that are designed to purposely destroy American jobs that are then shipped abroad so that lower wages can be paid while taking away employee healthcare benefits etcetera, which places a greater burden upon the American Federal, State, and Local governments.
In other words laser eye, they are destroying the American economic wealth generator, and you are worried about a 6 percent rise in food prices? Local food prices can be lowered and the farmers still make a living, and the consumer gets their food products at a lower price, because tariffs do not affect them. In reality, they help the local farmers.
I personally would prefer to eliminate the trillion dollar trade imbalance per year, grow our economy, create jobs, shrink government, because the small rise in prices can be eliminated completely if we stop buying foreign goods which will also reduce the dependency of the safety net with people earning their own way in life, while tending only to those who no longer are able to earn a living themselves anymore. If we are able to promote a more healthy mindset & lifestyle, even those people in need will be reduced significantly.
I would rather we grow our way out of debt, and raise the standard of living to reduce crime and envy.
Our situation has grown rather dire, and it will take dire measures to to turn this nation around.
Quit listening to the likes of the Wall Street Journal & the National Review, that Bill Buckley started, but no longer is what it once was. Both publications are not out to enrich you, but rather themselves.
As far as alcohol goes, I do not imbibe anymore anyway, so that has no affect on me. But we still have plenty of people in this country that still produces the stuff. Besides that, I read that consumption of alcohol is declining anyway, which is a good thing in my humble opinion.
I think we are now once again on the right track. It will be bumpy for a while, but if we do not stay the course, it will only get worse, not better.
As the old British saying goes, be not penny wise, while being pound foolish.
In other words, stop focusing on the small rises, and instead focus on the rebirth of the economic wealth generator being reconstructed for our society as a whole.
Very good for national security and the longer-term economy if done right, with growth and incomes overtaking any inflation.
But in the near term, inflation will sting working and middle-class voters if actual mass deportations aren’t also done quickly.
Currency manipulation is something that has been alleged about China. Doesn’t apply to any other countries afaik. Likewise intellectual property theft.
The rest of that is once again vague generalities.
Importing food we don’t even grow is not “destroying the American economic wealth generator”. Unless you think importing ANYTHING destroys the economy. People with extremely low IQ’s think that.
BTW they put tariffs on countries we don’t have any trade imbalances with, on imports from those countries that we don’t produce.
In next year’s election Democrats will run spots where they will say we’re paying more for groceries because of Trump. There will be no way for the Republican to defend themselves from that charge, because it’s true (unlike most of what Democrats say).
They can say we’re trying to get back manufacturing jobs, which makes zero sense.
Selective tariffs are require IMO not only to level the playing field with what other countries are charging us, but, yes, to bring back critical supply chains (pharma, strategic tech, rare earths, etc.). Much of that is absorbed by foreign sellers, but as people are finding out at the grocery store, not all of it.
My take is that the only way to offset the combination of price increases and the slow pace of reshoring is the one move that is already needed on its own to restore living wages for our low-skill working class AND to bring down the cost of housing that has priced way too many people out of it. That is true mass deportations. Unfortunately, Trump is doing no such thing. Only onesy-twosy violent criminal type deportations AND a commitment to amnesty.
Without getting literally 10s of millions of illegals out of the country, there is no way to simply restore the wage-to-cost ratios for our working people a generation or so ago.
This resurgence in 2020 was linked to capital flows driven by the COVID-19 pandemic, where some advanced economies sought to counteract currency appreciation by intervening in foreign exchange markets.
The U.S. Department of the Treasury uses a semi-annual monitoring process, which categorizes countries based on specific criteria related to trade surpluses, foreign exchange interventions, and reserve levels. As of the most recent data available in June 2024, countries on the U.S. monitoring list include Singapore, Vietnam, China, Mexico, Germany, Japan, Taiwan, Malaysia, and others.
The list is dynamic, with countries being added or removed based on their economic policies and trade balances. For example, in June 2024, Japan was added to the monitoring list due to concerns over its foreign exchange practices following a significant drop in the yen's value.
Therefore, while eight countries were identified as manipulators under a specific criteria set in 2020, the number of countries under U.S. scrutiny for potential manipulation fluctuates and is currently higher, reflecting ongoing monitoring.
As I was saying their are many different aspects taken into consideration when we levy tariffs on a nation.
As for food substances imported that are not grown here, they still create imbalances when they prohibit our food production to be sold in their countries.
Basically, the assessment of tariffs levied against nations with persistent trade imbalances with the U.S. under the second Trump administration is primarily based on a formula that uses the size of the bilateral goods trade deficit relative to U.S. imports from that country. Specifically, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) calculated the reciprocal tariff rate by dividing the U.S. goods trade deficit with a country by the total value of goods imported from that nation, aiming to approximate a tariff level that would drive the bilateral trade deficit to zero. This calculation does not directly account for actual tariff rates or non-tariff barriers imposed by the trading partner, but rather focuses on the imbalance itself. For example, in the case of China, the U.S. cited a $295.4 billion goods trade deficit in 2024 against $438.9 billion in imports, resulting in a calculated tariff rate of 67%. A minimum tariff floor of 10% was applied regardless of the outcome of the formula, and services were excluded from the calculation. Critics argue this approach misrepresents reciprocity, as it conflates trade deficits with unfair practices, even when countries like Lesotho, Saint Pierre and Miquelon, or Fiji—none of which are typically accused of trade violations—received some of the highest proposed tariffs. The administration justified these actions by declaring a national emergency under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), citing non-reciprocal trade practices, higher foreign tariff rates on U.S. goods, and non-tariff barriers as threats to national security and the economy. However, legal challenges have questioned the validity of using IEEPA for broad tariff imposition, with the Court for International Trade ruling such tariffs unlawful. Some analyses suggest the administration should prioritize countries with the most significant trade distortions rather than focusing solely on trade balances. The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) proposed a Trade Imbalance Index that evaluates countries on 11 indicators across trade restrictions, taxes, regulations, and intellectual property practices, concluding that China, India, and the European Union should be top priorities due to systemic mercantilist policies. Despite this, the actual tariff policy implemented emphasized deficit reduction over structural trade fairness. As of July 2025, some adjustments were made, such as reducing Fiji’s tariff from 32% to 15%, indicating ongoing negotiations rather than rigid adherence to the initial formula.
I don't care, because they have been taking our citizens to the cleaners for almost a century now. When we had a robust economy, it really did not matter, but then they started undercutting our job market which took away jobs, and that has pushed this nation to the brink. The middle class size which made the U.S. a strong nation that made it differ from all other nations has been eroded, which is why we now have two prominent classes, of rich & power with an ever continuous eroding middle class and college degrees fave become expensive worthless pieces of paper. Instead of educating our children we have fat too many foreign students, and those students are taking the best jobs with the stupid ridiculous H-1B vises that are handed out like candy, because these workers the employers do not have to pay FICA and other taxes.
If the prices for the imported foods you indulge in cost too much now, stop buying them. It is meant to penalize people who keep adding to the trade imbalance.
Grow up. The LACK of tariffs is how we got to this terrible place. Common sense says do the opposite to reverse that. Get it anti tariff idiots?
Use the tariff revenue to shore up SS.
Laser eye is really plankeye.
If the importing country lowers their price then they paid for the tariff.
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.