__________
So why is Trump doing this?
For the spectacle and quick "Winning!" which he hopes will boost his "ratings" and standing.
But also, for the same reasons Dems have been doing it before, and Biden did just recently, when not only he didn't cancel Trump's tariffs, but added some new ones ("targeted," of course) - because certain segments of trad Dem constituency, like unions, are attracted to protectionism, and because it also perfectly fits Trump's fake "populism" and "America First" themes - his guru on this issue was lifelong Democrat Prof. Peter "Don't call it a trade war!" Navarro. It doesn't matter that the math or policy doesn't work - it worked/works politically for him, and that's all that matters to him.
It also made it difficult for Dems to explain why "Trump's tariffs are bad" when it's a policy they've been associated with all along.
www.yahoo.com - How Trump wins from his damaging trade wars - YFin, 2024-02-09
|------- The former president promised to boost American manufacturing through import tariffs and other protectionist measures, and it didn't work. Yet the voters Trump was appealing to rewarded him anyway, according to a new study by prominent trade economists. That may explain why Trump now says he'll intensify his trade wars if elected to a second term.
... Trump's first trade war helps explain why. The study, by economists David Autor, Anne Beck, David Dorn, and Gordon Hanson, found that Trump's China tariffs did more harm than good to the US economy. Yet they boosted political support for Trump in key parts of the country. Whether through Trump's hucksterism or some other machination, voters seemingly embraced a policy that helped nobody and hurt some.
The study has three conclusions: First, the Trump tariffs produced no boost in manufacturing employment. Second, China's retaliatory tariffs reduced US agricultural employment. Third, Trump's farm bailout helped offset some, but not all, of the job losses in agriculture.
The Tax Foundation, for instance, finds that Trump's tariffs lowered US employment by 166,000 US jobs, with retaliatory tariffs killing another 29,000. The higher taxes paid by importers, meanwhile, amount to $74 billion in increased government revenue over a decade. Contrary to Trump's insistence, however, it's not China paying those higher taxes. It's American firms that import the products, pay the tax and pass the higher costs onto consumers.
The tariffs worked to Trump's advantage anyway.
... "The trade war appears to have been successful in strengthening support for the Republican party," the study concludes. "Residents of tariff-protected locations became less likely to identify as Democrats and more likely to vote for President Trump. Voters appear to have responded favorably to the extension of tariff protections to local industries despite their economic cost."
... The Autor study proposes two possible reasons Trump gained politically from tariffs that didn't really help anybody. The first is that "voters were misinformed about the employment impacts of the trade war." Trump certainly did his best to misinform voters. He called the two-way tariff escalation an "amazing deal" and a "momentous step" and repeatedly bragged about a manufacturing resurgence that never happened.
... Or, Trump made a deliberate and cynical show of trying to help, knowing it wouldn't matter. Sometimes, telling voters what they want to hear might be enough.
-------|
Because of general economic illiteracy and the allure of fake populism, often [both] parties choose "good politics / bad policy" over "good policy / bad politics."
__________
__________
#26 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2025-02-14 08:54 AM | Reply | Funny: 1
Thanks Obama!
Not "Funny", unfortunately - more like, "Sad but True" - How "The Elon" was made... "seriously":
obamawhitehouse.archives.gov - []PDF, 3pg]
FACT SHEET: President Obama's Plan to Make the U.S. the First Country to Put 1 Million Advanced Technology Vehicles on the Road
In 2008, the President set an ambitious goal of putting 1 million advanced technology vehicles on the road by 2015 " which would reduce dependence on foreign oil and lead to a reduction in oil consumption of about 750 million barrels through 2030. To reach that goal, President Obama will propose in his Budget a new effort to win the future by supporting advanced technology vehicle manufacturing and adoption in the U.S. through new consumer rebates, investments in R&D, and competitive programs to encourage communities that invest in advanced technology vehicle infrastructure.
...
The President's Budget proposes to make the United States the world's leader in manufacturing and deploying next-generation vehicle technologies through three new initiatives, expanding funding for vehicle technologies by almost 90 percent to nearly $590 million and enhancing existing tax incentives:
Making electric vehicles more affordable and accessible for American consumers:
A transformation of the existing $7,500 tax credit into a rebate will give consumers the ability to receive this benefit at the point of sale, similar to "Cash for Clunkers".
...
Recovery Act investments that have already transformed the advanced vehicle industry in the U.S.: ARRA included $2.4 billion for battery and electric drive component manufacturing, and for electric drive demonstration and infrastructure - investments that are already transforming the advanced vehicle batteries industry in the US.
...
Recovery Act investments will help cut battery costs in half, and make the U.S. a global leader in advanced battery production: As a result, in just the next few years, battery costs are expected to drop by half (2009-2013), the United States will be able to produce enough batteries and components to support 500,000 plug-in and hybrid vehicles and will have the capacity to produce 40 percent of the world's advanced batteries (2015).
...
GSA is preparing an initial purchase of 100 plug-in hybrid electric vehicles that are anticipated to be delivered in 2011 together with more than 40,000 alternative-fueled and fuel-efficient vehicles that will replace aging and less-efficient sedans, trucks, tankers, and wreckers for Federal agencies across the country. ...
__________