Whenever the subject of commerce returns, many right -wing and neoliberal left traders on the left trot the same subject of discussion: “Economists agree that all prices are terrible!” And maybe they do it – or at least most of them do it. Obstacles to free and without hindrance trade may well seem ineffective for the loss of dead weights of an economic model – and they could well conflict with the theory of the 19th century trade of David Ricardo of the comparative advantage. Consumers' surplus may well be injured by restrictions on the free movement of goods.
But it is class theory. And “dismal science” which is the economic profession is not always known for its close relationship with, well, real life.
After the fall of the Berlin Wall, the elites of the two parties in the United States, too confident in their conviction that Western opening had just defeated the “Soviet Empire”, rushed to implement a Washington consensus of globalization and commercial liberalization – on all kinds of products, ending the selective barriers of the Reagan era. An adviser to President George HW Bush did memorable in 1990: “Crust, semiconductor chips, what is the difference? They are all chips. “
But it is economic theory, not real life. The reality is there East A huge difference: the United States would not be trained in a war to protect our access to the Croustilles, because we could be to defend the world's leading supplier of semiconductors, Taiwan, if China invaded.
More generally: it is certainly true that free and without hindrance trade lowers prices for consumers and thus maximizes consumption. And in contemporary western economies of post-Berlin mural, it can be easy to lose sight of other concerns of the economic state. But there are Other concerns: namely the resilience of production and the supply chain.
Les grands Américains l'ont compris au moins aussi loin que «Rapport sur les manufactures» d'Alexander Hamilton, dans laquelle il a soutenu que le libre-échange était souvent une illusion: «Si le système de liberté parfaite pour l'industrie et le commerce était le système dominant des nations, les arguments qui dissuadent un pays dans la prédication des États-Unis à partir de la poursuite de la politique de la politique de la politique auraient pu doute. nations. “Abraham Lincoln, who decades later would become the first president of the Republican Party, taken a similar position In a speech at the start of her career in 1832: “My policy is short and sweet, like the old woman's dance. I am in favor of a national bank. I am in favor of the internal improvement system and a higher protective rate. ”
In many ways, this Hamiltonian / Lincolnian impetus helped America become an industrial power. It is this same manufacturing power which beat both the Confederate insurrection of the 19th century and the 20th century Nazi war machine.
It is this noble impulse which seems, in 2025, to motivate President Trump as he embarked on the most aggressive pricing campaign that the nation has seen for decades. Investors, invariably in the theory of clarification to the class, reacted badly. But this experience has just started; The jury is always absent.
To tell the truth, we may not know all the effects for years. But already, there have been at least positive signs that Trump's promised approach worked. In February, Apple – the The biggest company in the world By market capitalization – announced that it would invest $ 500 billion in the United States in the next four years. Johnson & Johnson has promised $ 55 billion in American investment, and Nvidia plans to invest “Several hundred billion“Dollars in electronic manufacturing. Other recent examples abound, and we must expect the trend to continue.
This does not mean that everything is fine with the deployment of the Trump price. The prices unveiled so far in this second mandate, culminating in the speech of the “Liberation Day” on Wednesday, are correctly correct but clearly too inclusive. There is a huge difference between the slaps of punitive prices on China and Canada. China has stolen America every senses for four decades, and we depend far too economically on the nation which is also our main geopolitical threat this century. But what is the problem with our nice neighbor of the North, exactly? If anything, Trump's prices on Canada – combined with the recurrent imprudent conversation of the annexation – seem to have caused the political collapse of the Conservative Party of Canada on the precipice of a crucial national election.
There is also the question of consistency. The pricing deployment of the administration has discouraged the distinct impression of being done in a dispersed manner, shooting the-hanp. The markets appreciate stability and predictability – and it is probably the instability or unpredictability of the pricing policy, even more than the prices themselves, which have frightened both at Wall Street.
The Americans did not lead economists as our leaders to monolithically pursue the most “effective” policies. And thank God. Instead, we elect the leaders who will exercise prudence, discernment and solid judgment to continue the common good. Prices absolutely have a role to play. But while a thunderous hammer of a political disturbance can be attractive, sometimes a simple scalpel will suffice.
Josh Hammer's latest book is “Israel and civilization: the fate of the Jewish nation and the destiny of the West. “” This article was produced in collaboration with the union creators. @josh_hammer
