Posted on 04/09/2025 10:40:44 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
Behind President Trump’s decision to hit some of America’s largest trading partners with stiff tariffs is his fixation on the trade deficit that the United States runs with other nations. But many economists say that is a poor metric for judging the quality of a trade relationship.
The steep tariffs, which went into effect on nearly 60 trading partners on Wednesday, were calculated based on bilateral trade deficits, or the gap between what the United States sells to each country and what it buys.
Mr. Trump has long viewed that gap as evidence that America is being “ripped off” by other countries. He argues that other countries’ unfair behavior has made trade so skewed and that the United States needs to be able to manufacture more of what it consumes. But economists argue this is a flawed way to approach the issue, given that bilateral trade deficits crop up for many reasons beyond unfair practices.
“It’s totally silly,” Dani Rodrik, an economist who studies globalization at Harvard University, said of Mr. Trump’s focus on bilateral deficits. “There’s no other way to say it, it makes no sense.”
Some economists do agree with the Trump administration that America’s overall trade deficit with the rest of the world reflects a problem for the U.S. economy, because the United States is so dependent on manufacturing elsewhere, including in China. But others don’t see it as an issue. And nearly all economists say that focusing on imbalances from country to country can be highly misleading.
Last year, for example, the United States ran bilateral trade surpluses with 116 countries globally. It ran bilateral trade deficits with 114 countries, according to World Bank data.
Often these relationships just follow the flow of trade, without suggesting much about a country’s trade practices overall. Matthew Klein, who...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Are these "economists" also "experts?"
We know all about "experts."
Trading partners? Is that what they call it where they dump their stuff here, most all of it subsidized or made with quasi-slave labor... and erect huge barriers and tariffs against ours?
NYT -Trash moving on.
Patience, Grasshoppers.
They should think of it as the “Great Reset” they wanted, but without them in control.
Does anyone read the Times?
It doesn’t bewilder real economists, only those that the NYT journalism majors actually believe.
Big business doesn’t care if the products come from China or elsewhere. All they care about is who can deliver it the cheapest. If China is no longer the cheapest, watch the business shift who they are buying from. So instead of having to pay 60% more on a product from China maybe you will now see from USA being 20% what you paid before or 10% higher from Vietnam (after negotiations of course).
It’s all the talk in big retail right now. It’s not freaking out about what prices doom Chinese products will be. It’s who are we moving to going forward. The decision has already been made in their heads.
IMO credibility is lost on pretending that country-to-country trade balances are key.
Reindustrializing, bringing critical supply chains home, and balancing tariffs are important, but different.
It’s pretty weird to be worrying the balance of trade with Madagascar which is a major world wide source of Vanilla and apparently some cloves, and not much else.
I can see where there might be a burning desire to be even with Chy-nah and some other larger countries with large economies where Trump would like to be able to persuade some governments who are not on a fully Trumpian path to shape up both economically and politically.
I’d guess that Trump would be happy to explain just why he wants a balance with everyone. Trade balances are going to be dynamic. It’d be a big job for US bureaucrats to monitor and then balance for each country going forward.
Economists are the nes who got us into our current economic black hole.
I thought the USA.
The Dismal Science has about as many opinions as practitioners.
Finally Trump hired some to help him take a look under the hood [Like Perot was interested in to find the source of that sucking sound..]
The NYT idea of an economist is the idiot, Paul Krugman 🤣🤣🤣.
The Slimes is like a cat trying to cover its shit on a hot tin roof!
NYT, you are the silly one.
Just peruse the list of what the nations’ rates are.
The way trade deficits are resolved is that the foreign entity uses the excess funds to buy your land and businesses. Keep it up and you are a wage slave in a colony.
Buying up businesses and real estate in place - the means of production - is not included in “imports and exports”.
The world’s suckers are emoting!
Whaaaaaah!
Step off! Suckers!!!
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.