Peter Navarro Should Not Have Power Over U.S. Trade Policy—or Anything
Navarro is a crank and a sycophant, so naturally he's going to be one of Donald Trump's top advisors.

Shortly after then-President Donald Trump launched his "good and easy to win" trade wars in 2017, Peter Navarro sat down with CNN's Jake Tapper to defend the use of tariffs.
Asked whether Americans would end up paying the brunt of the tariff cost, Navarro told Tapper to "look at the data."
"China is bearing the entire burden of the tariffs," Navarro said. "There is no evidence whatsoever that American consumers are paying any of this."
The data, of course, say the exact opposite. American consumers and businesses bore roughly 93 percent of the cost of Trump's tariffs, according to one analysis by Moody's. The U.S. Trade Commission concluded in 2023 that American companies and consumers "bore nearly the full cost" of the tariffs Trump levied on steel, aluminum, and many goods imported from China.
Then again, analytical rigor and an understanding of basic economics have never been all that important to Navarro—who will serve as "Senior Counselor for Trade and Manufacturing," President-elect Donald Trump announced on Wednesday.
As I detailed in a 2020 feature for Reason, Navarro became one of the most powerful people in the first Trump administration after a failed left-wing political career—longtime California political pundit Joe Matthews called him "San Diego's Bernie Sanders"—and two decades of churning out books with titles like Death by China: Confronting the Dragon. Along the way, he invented a fake persona named "Ron Vara," who would dispense pearls of Sinophobic wisdom including "only the Chinese can turn a leather sofa into an acid bath, a baby crib into a lethal weapon, and a cellphone battery into heart-piercing shrapnel."
Is there any evidence to back up those claims? Of course not. Did Navarro apologize when he got caught fabricating Vara and passing him off (in several books) as a supposed Harvard-educated military vet with expert knowledge of global trade? C'mon. The first rule of running a grift is never admitting you're doing it.
As director of the White House National Trade Council during Trump's first term, Navarro left his mark in ways that went beyond the tariffs. He also played a key role in killing the White House's attempt at reforming the Jones Act, a terrible piece of protectionism that makes it more expensive to ship anything around the United States by boat. He was the driving force behind the Trump administration's harebrained idea to give a $765 million contract to the Eastman-Kodak Company, a bankrupt camera company, to produce pharmaceuticals (the contract, thankfully, was canceled after the Securities and Exchanges Commission began investigating it). He concluded his tenure by being held in contempt of Congress for refusing to testify or turn over documents as part of the investigation in the January 6 riot, and he served four months in prison.
Expect more of the same the second time around. Trump says Navarro's new role "leverages Peter's broad range of White House experience, while harnessing his extensive Policy analytic and Media skills. His mission will be to help successfully advance and communicate the Trump Manufacturing, Tariff, and Trade Agendas."
During Trump's first term, Navarro "pushed protectionism, which was a drag on economic growth, didn't work to change trade deficits, and didn't work to improve trade practices by China or others," Vance Ginn, who served as a White House economic advisor during the Trump administration, posted on X shortly after Trump's announcement on Wednesday. "Why continue failed policies and expect a different result?"
"Seeking advice from Peter Navarro on how to improve trade policy is akin to seeking advice from David Duke on how to improve race relations," Don Boudreaux, an economist and senior fellow at the Mercatus Center, told Reason in response to the Navarro pick.
Despite what Trump says, Navarro is clearly a crank who should not be given any authority to steer America's $7 trillion in annual imports and exports.
He is, however, a successful political opportunist who has wormed his way into Trump's inner circle by affirming the former president's loony opinions about global trade and demonstrating a high degree of loyalty. He'll go on CNN to lie about how tariffs work. He'll go to prison for four months instead of testifying to Congress about January 6. That's the sort of thing that matters to Trump. That's how you get one of the top jobs in this administration.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Elections have consequences.
Yes. That doesn't justify any and all policies and appointments. Did people vote to put this nutter into the administration? I think not.
So why do you defend Navarro, albeit obliquely? Because Trump appointed him? Because he's a bozo on economics so you feel some connection with him?
I’m not here to defend anyone.
did it so obliquely you didn't even know it.
Nah, he's lying and you know it.
Or he means that Trump ran on tariffs so of course he appointed someone who agrees with him on that.
Leftists always project.
Oh the irony...
It's funny though - when the Democrats do it you're all 'well, if the people.don't like it they can exercise their voice by voting the politician who appointed them out'.
When the GOP does it you're all 'muh good governance!!1!1!'
Quite possibly. I have not, however, expressed such sentiments.
Except during the last three years.
Liar
Gov’na shrike mad.
Nope. Just observing how deferential so many of you are.
I still don't know whether you Trumpsters are so uncritical of even the crassest and stupidest acts of Trump's because your critical faculties have departed under the pressure of your instinctive authoritarianism, or you're simply being tribalist and defending the tribe even as you know the idiocy.
The appointment of Navarro is idiotic yet none of you have the stones to admit it.
Poor shrike, so upset.
I'm not shrike, you lying POS. And I'm not upset. though perhaps you feel that because you're so easily upset by disagreement, I must be. In that, you schneeflocken are all alike.
CALM DOWN SHRIKE!
I think the public has had quite enough of the masterminds behind Biden's policies, foreign and domestic. Do you think President Trump should retain the incompetents behind Biden's Afghan strategy? His economic masterminds? His border Czar?
Assuming arguendo that Biden's appointments were generally incompetent, that still doesn't justify Trump also appointing incompetents. Duh.
President Trump’s appointments are not incompetent and more importantly, they are committed to reform and a prosperous country. And we don’t have to assume anything about Biden and his administration. Their incompetence has been on display for the last four years.
Hahahahahaha
Hegseth is an alcoholic Fox News personality who was forced out of the only leadership roles he ever had (some Veterans advocacy group) for misconduct. That group had 10 employees and a budget of less than $10million. The Defense Dept has 3 million employees and an $857 billion dollar budget. You can like his looks and his Fox news schtick while admitting he will probably be incompetent.
You have a lot of stupid ideas, just like Boehm. So your condemnation of Navarro, just like Boehm’s, is really a ringing endorsement to real Americans.
Yes, people did vote for appointees like Dr. Navarro.
Like the man said: Elections have consequences.
Try some copium.
As do farts. From Boehm’s sketch this guy sounds awful. What am I missing?
an alternative to Boehm's sketch.
More data than the anecdotes from someone who hasn't shown themselves very reliable in the past.
Boehm is a dishonest moron.
I believe you've overlooked the fact that Trump didn't tax U.S. steel, etc. - it was steel coming from China, etc. And it gave U.S. companies the edge to be chosed as those used in place of unreliable cheap(er) China products. It also gave car mfgr.'s hope of buildig here once again and giving us jobs - Remember them offering $500 sign on bonuses ? Don't believe all you hear that seems to hurt the U.S. if Trump appoints someone that others dislike.
Bot
they'll never master the sarcasm.
Eric went full Jacob Sullum with this rant lol.
Sorry Eric, you've proven your history and communications degree doesn't make you an actual expert.
Wow. How much are you being paid by pro China lobbyists eric? The entire rant is a screed to China. And how amazing trade with China is. What payroll are you on?
We have seen the negative costs of China relations. You ignore IP theft, rampant. You ignore supply chain disruption costs, exploded during covid. You literally saw China recall sold goods after covid, already purchased, to take for themselves. You ignore their state mandates for a CCP member on ever company board. Their fraudulent exports such as titanium. You ignore every single fucking cost.
Whose payroll are you on Eric?
Looks like Charles Koch likes getting his cheap Chinese shit made by slaves.
Slaves are the most important thing.
Boehm the Birdbrain took a hard left turn.
We'll need to know if that hard left turn was strategic or reluctant.
Pete Navarro should be made Eric Boehm's boss. That would be hilarious.
Eric should be forced to actually read an econ book instead of relying on "one study from Moodys" as the validation of his argument. Literal cherrypicking.
I probably disagree with a lot of what Navarro has to say, but he seems to be on the same page as Trump. Did you expect him to nominate someone who doesn't want to implement the trade policies Trump ran on?
I don't particularly like Navarro either, but this is a deranged hit piece throwing spaghetti at the wall hoping something sticks. He starts from a position of hating the guy then slaps on shallow smears as evidence.
I’m so glad it pisses you off, both reluctantly and strategically, Eric. Now go cope harder, asshole.
Economic ignoramus picks economic ignoramus. Yawn.
You picked eric?
Imagine someone who thinks free trade means one way advantaged trade calling someone else an economic ignoramus. Lol.
Hey, that’s right. Sarc actually said that.
Multiple times. It is amazing. He tripled down after being given the literal definition.
Says the guy who rejects all economic thought that has happened since the 1700s.
Do you always go around with a total and complete lack of any self awareness whatsoever, or are we just special here and get to see this side of you?
Nope. That in no way reflects reality. Which is likely caused by severe alcoholism underlying a very low IQ.
Typed by a drunken ignoramus.
^Totally not hear to promote DNC talking points.
"Navarro is a crank and a sycophant, so naturally he's going to be one of Donald Trump's top advisors."
Yeah, Trump.
Be more like Joe Biden.
You didn't see any of Biden's ass kissers in his cabinet, now did you?
They couldn't get past the diapers.
I'mma just leave this here again.
Bring back the fine tradition of hiring trannies and luggage thieves.
Huh. That is interesting.
So the individuals singled out in this article who are implied to be incompetent, are:
Pete Buttigieg (gay)
Karin Jean-Pierre (lesbian)
Sam Brinton (transgender)
Rachel Levine (transgender)
I mean, there are so many people in Biden's cabinet who could fairly be labeled as incompetent to the job that they were appointed to. They could have picked Deb Haaland, who was a clear DEI hire, to be Secretary of the Interior. They could have picked Xavier Becerra, who is a lawyer and a politician with zero medical knowledge, to be Secretary of HHS. But no, they just happened to pick four people (three of which who aren't even in the cabinet) who are LGBTQ+. Why is that? I wonder. Could it be... trying to send a message about gay people generally?
Pete's not gay.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pete_Buttigieg
Thanks, Sarc. We'd never know Pete was gay without you.
ffs sarc can you be dumber?
Also, let's take a look at the two transgender individuals, Rachel Levine and Sam Brinton.
Rachel Levine was appointed to be the Assistant Secretary of Health. And she is an actual medical doctor, with specialties in pediatrics and psychiatry.
Sam Brinton was appointed as a deputy assistant secretary in the Department of Energy dealing with spent nuclear fuel. And Sam Brinton is an actual nuclear engineer. Yes he stole people's luggage, that was wrong and he was properly fired.
So the two transgender people who were claimed to be 'incompetent' actually have credentials and experience that are strongly connected to the positions that they held. Why are they considered 'incompetent' again? Hmm, it's a total mystery. I have no idea why.
Their achievements.....were minimal. And that is being generous.
Dr. Levine graduated from Harvard, earned her M.D. from Tulane School of Medicine, was a professor of medicine at Penn State, and was the Pennsylvania State Health Director. I don't know how you would say that is not qualified for the position.
It looks like she got those positions after transitioning. Which begs the question of whether she got those positions because of her identity.
Well, she became a professor in the 90s but she didn't transition until 2011.
But here is the larger point. Even if you think Dr. Levine was only hired because of her identity, one could make the argument about a lot of people on Biden's cabinet. And yet this article only singled out the LGBTQ ones. Why?
So?
“ Which begs the question of whether she got those positions because of her identity.”
Not among sane people. Normal, reasonable people don’t assume if someone is a minority of any stripe, they are automatically unqualified and got their job solely because of their identity. Only crazy or hateful people think that way.
At that level its mostly about who you know.
Cite?
“Yes he stole people's luggage, that was wrong and he was properly fired.”
A man who can’t control his compulsions to steal women’s luggage is mentally ill.
A man who thinks he is a dog is mentally ill.
On a side note, a man who thinks he is a woman is also mentally ill as a man is just as much not a woman as he is not a dog.
You mean two dudes wearing dresses, Jeffy. Mr. Levine is a doctor, yes, but not totally competent.
What you are missing is a control group. Let’s get a bunch of Douglas Murray types who are as competent as he is in their selected fields, and we’ll see how baseless your gay baiting is.
As for trans, IDK. I like Wendy Carlos. Genuinely cutting edge musician with a distinct sound. Extremely competent at her craft and from what I’ve seen, never really tried to draw attention to her identity. She usually just talks about analog synths and how cool they are. I’ll humor calling him “her” because I think it was a fairly legit case of gender dysphoria, she was an adult when she made the change, took the long road to get there at a time was zero social capital in doing so. And it all predates the neo-commie cult movement that went along with it.
The examples you’ve selected are more like the Billie Eilish, desperate narcissist cashing in on the latest thing to give themselves an identity variety. They were activists before being chosen and are tokens for the overlords.
Babylon Bee is The Onion for stupid people. It's like Mallard Fillmore, only not as edgy.
You must be some sort of Democrat then. The Onion hasn’t been funny since the first Bush administration.
The Onion is the Babylon Bee for phonies.
“ERIC BOEHM is a reporter”
Our lie detector test shows…that is a lie.
But was it an intentional lie? Maybe he just spelled "emoter" so badly that it spell-checked to "reporter".
New season of "Media: TDS Edition" is off to a great start and it's not even January yet.
Without TDS = Trump's Deranged Status, TWAT are we gonna DOOOOO for amusements and circuses, anyway?!?!?
"China is bearing the entire burden of the tariffs," Navarro said. "There is no evidence whatsoever that American consumers are paying any of this."
Twat more can ye say? Tell "The Big Lie" often enough, and shit becums the TRUTH!!!
"Trumpy-Poooo LOVES us ALL!!!"
Now, can I becum an appointee?
so definitely a good choice then lol.
This is what we knew would result from a second Trump term. Questionable policies, like before, but a willingness to go 100% loyalty over competence for his picks and a MUCH better knowledge of how to implement his policies.
Strap in, folks, because nothing is going to stop Trump from appointing patently unfit people with dubious policy beliefs.
There is an outside possibility that it results in a massive decrease in the size and scope of government. The more likely outcome, however, will be distressing to most American companies and consumers. Higher costs for American companies and higher prices for American consumers will be the inevitable result of tariffs. Abandoning Ukraine will damage our reputation with allies. Mass deportations will be expensive and have no long-term effect, but will negatively impact industries that rely on illegal immigrants to do the jobs Americans don’t want at a wage they wouldn’t accept. So things like meat will rise even more in price as the supply drops due to a lack of workers.
Trump knows how to accomplish things this time around. For better or for worse, most of what he wants to happen will be realized. I think it will be very much for worse, but I hope I’m wrong.
Trying to intentionally end a ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon because your base are Nazis is NOT bad for ally relations, it seems.
Only one party has organized supporters in their base who are Nazis. Hint: it’s the one that had a rally called Unite the Right, organized by a Nazi.
Extrapolating that into “all Republicans are Nazis”, as some hard left people do, is complete nonsense. But pretending that Nazis have common cause with Democrats? There are five-year-olds who are smart enough to know that Nazis have no common cause with liberals.
Abandoning Ukraine will damage our reputation with allies.
I think you misspelled "assholes".
Don't forget that we import 80% of our produce from Mexico and Canada. You think food prices are high now, wait until he puts a 25% tariff on your groceries.
Butt... Butt... Butt the Trumpanzees have FIRMLY assured us that that them thar evil FURRINERS will pay that them thar tariffs!!!
"China is bearing the entire burden of the tariffs," Navarro said. "There is no evidence whatsoever that American consumers are paying any of this."
sarcasmic, we have been through this one before. Tariffs were imposed back in 2018 and we did not see wholesale increases in overall inflation. Tariffs were placed on aluminum, did beer become super expensive because of the can, or aluminum foil skyrocket in price? Nope.
You were wrong then. Why are you right now?
Read and heed!!!
Clear-cut case below, showing the UTTER FAILURE of protectionism in general, and Trumpist protectionism specifically:
Meanwhile in the real world…
https://reason.com/2019/04/22/trumps-washing-machine-tariffs-cleaned-out-consumers/
Trump’s Washing Machine Tariffs Cleaned Out Consumers
A new report finds the tariffs raised $82 million for the U.S. Treasury but ended up increasing costs for consumers by about $1.2 billion.
PROTECTIONISM DOESN’T WORK!!! DUH!!!
Protect American washing-machine makers from Chinese competition? The FIRST thing that American washing-machine makers do, is jack UP their prices… AND the prices of dryers to boot, too! To SOAK the hell out of all of us consumers!!!
From the above-linked Reason article about washing machines…
“All told, those tariffs raised about $82 million for the U.S. Treasury but ended up increasing costs for consumers by about $1.2 billion during 2018 … (deleted). Although the trade policy did cause some manufacturers to shift production from overseas to the United States in an effort to avoid the new tariffs, the 1,800 jobs created by Trump’s washing machine tariffs cost consumers an estimated $820,000 per job.”
Summary: Nickels and dimes to the USA treasury; boatloads of pain for consumers. USA jobs created? Yes, at GREAT expense! Putting these 1.8 K workers on a super-generous welfare program would have been WAY better for all the rest of us! Plus, you know the WORKERS don’t make super-huge bucks (no $820,000 per job for THEM); the goodies flow to the EXECUTIVES at the top of the washing-machine companies! The same ones who play golf with The Donald, and join him for gang-banging Spermy Daniels! Essentially at our expense!
The 2018 tariffs didn't cause wholesale inflation, no. Though they did cause the prices of certain items to go up. Reason had several articles that showed that.
Know why those 2018 tariffs didn't cause overall inflation? Because they were targeted. The currently proposed tariffs are blanket tariffs on all imported goods. That's not the same thing. Trump is proposing federal sales taxes between ten and twenty five percent on all imports from our three biggest trading partners. That will make imports and things made from imports more expensive which will indeed cause inflation. Additionally those trading partners are going to respond in kind, raising the prices their people pay for our exports, resulting in fewer products being exported.
The end result will be less imports and less exports. That's not the path to prosperity. Quite the opposite. Economists figured that out three centuries ago. Unfortunately Trump and his defenders reject all economic thought since the 1700s, and instead embrace mercantilism and protectionism as the means for increasing a nation's wealth.
I used to think Shrike was the dumbest commenter here. I'm sorry to say, Sarc, you've managed to dethrone Shrike as the dumbest motherfucker here.
Do you recall the awesome enchanter named “Tim”, in “Monty Python and the Search for the Holy Grail”? The one who could “summon fire without flint or tinder”? Well, you remind me of Tim… You are an enchanter who can summon persuasion without facts or logic!
So I discussed your awesome talents with some dear personal friends on the Reason staff… Accordingly…
Reason staff has asked me to convey the following message to you:
Hi Fantastically Talented Author:
Obviously, you are a silver-tongued orator, and you also know how to translate your spectacular talents to the written word! We at Reason have need for writers like you, who have near-magical persuasive powers, without having to write at great, tedious length, or resorting to boring facts and citations.
At Reason, we pay above-market-band salaries to permanent staff, or above-market-band per-word-based fees to freelancers, at your choice. To both permanent staff, and to free-lancers, we provide excellent health, dental, and vision benefits. We also provide FREE unlimited access to nubile young groupies, although we do firmly stipulate that persuasion, not coercion, MUST be applied when taking advantage of said nubile young groupies.
Please send your resume, and another sample of your writings, along with your salary or fee demands, to ReasonNeedsBrilliantlyPersuasiveWriters@Reason.com .
Thank You! -Reason Staff
Waving the white flag of de feet, shit eater?
sarcasmic, I appreciate your concession to reality: tariffs did not cause wholesale inflation in the economy.
As for targeting, why do you think they won't be targeted this time? Back in 2018, there was a lot of talk initially about hitting everything Chinese, and it wound up being targeted.
Why do you think it won't be targeted now?
Because Dear Leader SAID that they would be ACROSS THE BOARD rather than TARGETED, this time, hello?!?!?
Simple analogy: Last time that I shot at you, 5 shots at 2,000 yards, all of my shots missed... So WHY are you bitching now that I plan to fire off 100 rounds at you from 20 feet?
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/trump-favors-huge-new-tariffs-how-do-they-work Trump favors huge new tariffs. How do they work?
"This time, he’s gone much further: He has proposed a 60% tariff on goods from China — and a tariff of up to 20% on everything else the United States imports."
Sheer idiocy!!! READ this link!!!
The best web link to show that President-elect Trump plans for broad, rather than narrowly targeted, tariffs is:
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/trump-favors-huge-new-tariffs-how-do-they-work
Below from Perplexity AI:
This PBS News article directly states that Trump has proposed a 60% tariff on goods from China and a 20% tariff on everything else the United States imports[4]. This demonstrates Trump's intention to implement broad, sweeping tariffs across multiple countries and product categories, rather than focusing on specific industries or trade partners.
Citations:
[1] https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/what-does-trumps-latest-tariff-plan-mean-for-the-u-s
[2] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-tariffs-mexico-canada-china-truth-social/
[3] https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/12/3/can-donald-trump-enact-tariffs-without-congress-and-can-anyone-stop-him
[4] https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/trump-favors-huge-new-tariffs-how-do-they-work
[5] https://www.cnn.com/2024/11/08/politics/tariffs-donald-trump-strategy/index.html
[6] https://www.hklaw.com/en/insights/publications/2024/12/president-elect-trump-announces-tariff-plans
[7] https://www.factcheck.org/2024/11/trumps-agenda-tariffs/
[8] https://www.perplexity.ai/elections/2024-11-05/us/president
sarcasmic, I appreciate your concession to reality: tariffs did not cause wholesale inflation in the economy.
Nobody said that they did. That is what's called a strawman.
Why do you think it won't be targeted now?
It depends on if there are enough Republicans left who still support free trade. If there are then Trump will be limited in what kinds of tariffs he can impose by himself. That would mean he could single out specific products like computer chips, declare them to be a national security issue, and then go through a process to put a tariff on them. Or he could move specific countries off of 'most favored nation' status, putting them into a different bracket.
If he has succeeded in pushing free-traders out of the GOP then he could get Congress to impose blanket tariffs on all goods from specific countries, which is what he has repeatedly said is his goal.
If he does get his way and impose a 25% tax on all imports from our three largest trading partners, then that will indeed result in wholesale inflation as that cost is passed onto consumers, and as domestic producers take advantage of their competitors' prices going up and raise their own prices.
Tariffs do not make us richer. That was clearly established centuries ago.
“ Tariffs were imposed back in 2018 and we did not see wholesale increases in overall inflation.”
Correct. However, we did see higher inflation on the things they put tariffs on, as well as the things made using those things. To which anyone with a brain says, “Well, duh”.
If foreign companies have to raise their prices 25% to pay for a tariff, American companies will raise them 24% (mostly to cover the increased production costs, the rest because that’s what the market price is and they like making a profit). That still leaves American consumers paying a lot more for the same products, with the windfall from tariffs going straight into the government coffers.
“ super expensive because of the can, or aluminum foil skyrocket in price? Nope.”
Because the cost of aluminum is negligible for beer production. Cars, on the other hands, went up more than the base inflation rate. When you put across-the-board tariffs on imports, there won’t be just one sector that takes the hit. It will be everything.
This isn’t some crazy theory. It’s pretty much a baseline in economics. If you increase production costs, prices will also rise. No one is in a capitalist market to lose money, so there’s no other path.
We do not, in fact, import 80% of our produce from Mexico and Canada.
80% of the produce we import is from Mexico and Canada.
There is a difference. We produce the vast majority of produce domestically, and export a great deal of it.
I'm not talking about corn, wheat and soybeans. I'm talking about fruits and vegetables. You know, stuff in the produce section.
Yes, and the vast majority of that stuff is grown here. You’re confusing two different things (what else is new?), percent of imports and percent of the total, including imports. The imports are about 80% Canada and Mexico, but that’s only 80% of the grand total of 12.7% actually imported.
From Google:
Slap a 25% tax on that and prices are going to go up.
Tariffs can be for revenue or protectionism, but not both. To bring in revenue they must be low enough that it's still cheaper to import it. To be protectionist it must make it so expensive to import that it's cheaper to make it here. Can't be both.
The number of times your post says "imports" in the context of this argument is truly amazing.
Sarc, do you even read what you're responding to anymore, or have you gone full spaz?
He’s gone full spaz.
Um, no, Sarc, you just pulled that number out of your ass. Here's the real number on imported produce (total of all countries):
https://usafacts.org/articles/what-happens-to-the-food-we-grow-in-the-us/
Now, 80% of that 12.7% may be from Canada and Mexico, but we don't import 80% of all our produce from anywhere. Almost 90% is home-grown.
will damage our reputation with allies.
What "allies"? You mean the Islamic Republic of Western Europe?
Hey, Boehm! The word for today is Omertà
Everybody should have held that committee in pure contempt.
Prosecuting the committee for their violation of law would be a fun undertaking.
Navarro promoted the hydroxychloroquine junk science too.
Could be worse. He could have been pushing a "vaccine" that did not work much at all and trying to demand people take it or lose their jobs.
That's a MUCH better policy.
You're aware we are just about done with an admin that has been appreciably worse in every potential measure known to man.
Hey Damiksec, damiskec, and damikesc, and ALL of your other socks…
How is your totalitarian scheme to FORCE people to buy Reason magazines coming along?
Free speech (freedom from “Cancel Culture”) comes from Facebook, Twitter, Tik-Tok, and Google, right? THAT is why we need to pass laws to severely constrict these DANGEROUS companies (which, ugh!, the BASTARDS, put profits above people!)!!! We must pass new laws to retract “Section 230” and FORCE the evil corporations to provide us all (EXCEPT for my political enemies, of course!) with a “UBIFS”, a Universal Basic Income of Free Speech!
So leftist “false flag” commenters will inundate Reason-dot-com with shitloads of PROTECTED racist comments, and then pissed-off readers and advertisers and buyers (of Reason magazine) will all BOYCOTT Reason! And right-wing idiots like Damikesc will then FORCE people to support Reason, so as to nullify the attempts at boycotts! THAT is your ultimate authoritarian “fix” here!!!
“Now, to “protect” Reason from this meddling here, are we going to REQUIRE readers and advertisers to support Reason, to protect Reason from boycotts?”
Yup. Basically. Sounds rough. (Quote damikesc)
(Etc.)
See https://reason.com/2020/06/24/the-new-censors/
(And Asshole Extraordinaire will NEVER take back its' totalitarian bullshit!!!! 'Cause Asshole Extraordinaire is already PERFECT in every way!!!)
This (above damikesc quote) is a gem of the damnedest dumbness of damikesc! Like MANY “perfect in their own minds” asshole authoritarians around here, he will NEVER take back ANY of the stupidest and most evil things that he has written! I have more of those on file… I deploy them to warn other readers to NOT bother to try and reason with the most utterly unreasonable of the nit-wit twits around here!
Unread
Charliehall is the dumbest fucker alive.
Sarc's contesting him for that title.
We could set the, both on fire and see if that determines the winner.
Hydroxychloroquine worked better than Pfizer's Paxlovid, among many other alternative treatments,
Here's a list of hundreds of Covid-19 treatments and summaries of their relative effectiveness (the site links to original papers so one can perform their own relative evaluation):
https://c19early.org/
Peter Navarro kinda looks like a crank; he's got that sort of look about him. No denying. Yep.
Boehm on the other hand, is in fact an ACTUAL crank. That he gives any legitimacy at all to the cranks who brought us the J6 committee Soviet style show trial, after the totally engineered Reichstag Fire 2.0, with help from a rogue FBI... tells us all we need to know.
Navarro, while he looks like he could play the part of a crank in a Made-for-Mockingbird-TV movie, spent four months in prison for refusing to play along with the above-mentioned Soviet style show trial, and therefore has more honor in his pinky toenail than Boehm has in his entire being.
True. But TARIFFS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Is that supposed to be clever? Because it's not. It looks like something Dlam would say, and he's one of the dumbest people I've ever seen in my life. Definitely not someone anyone should emulate.
TRUUUUUUUMMMMMPPPPP!!!!!,!,!
Not half as clever as you think you are, Sarc.
Sarc, the dumbest person you’ve ever seen in your life is the one you see in the mirror.
There are plenty of people with honor or integrity or loyalty that, nonetheless, are incompetent or cranks or espouse evil ideologies.
advice from David Duke on how to improve race relations
It could be argued that segregation does improve race relations.
Eat a bag of dicks, Eric. (I mean another one.) You may do it reluctantly or strategically, whichever you prefer.
Why haven't you moved to Canada yet, Eric? The way you've been having a month-long public meltdown since the election, I would have figured you'd be long gone by now.
I think because Canada gets a vote.
Please. He could just illegally cross and show up in Toronto, Quebec, Ottowa, or Ontario. They'd be like, "are you gay, hate farmers, and a Swiftie?" Which, of course, is a solid yes for all three for Eric.
They'd probably ask him if he wants to be an MP.
Trumpster reasoning: because some experts were incompetent, therefore we should hire people who are not experts. Preferably celebrities, because we've heard of them, and that has to count for something.
We know they have correct opinions because they've been presenting news in a fair and balanced way, and they pass the loyalty test by giving the correct answer to who won in 2020. What other qualifications could there possibly be?
DNC reasoning: Kamala Harris is a lawyer who accomplished nothing as VP, so she is perfectly qualified to be Leader of the Free World. We should hire people to endorse her, preferably celebrities, because we've heard of them, and that has to count for something.
Since yesterday I've had an impression that Peter Navarro is either a well respected figure in libertarian circles or has a name very similar to someone else who is. Maybe another Peter or another Navarro I knew personally or knew of. "Crank" would be a very unlikely descriptor of this person.
Wait a minute, wasn't he the guy who came up 40+ years ago with the plan to buy off future Social Security recipients and thus get us out of the developing hole?
The regime guppies certainly have demonstrated resolve considering they were skull fucked in November.
"...the Trump administration's harebrained idea to give a $765 million contract to the Eastman-Kodak Company, a bankrupt camera company, to produce pharmaceuticals..."
Eastman is a major chemical manufacturer. Not a stretch at all for them to produce pharmaceuticals. I feel like I clicked on a Mother Jones article rather than one from Reason.
If you don’t understand the massive difference between the facilities, regulatory Administration, insurance, liability, and personnel of chemicals and pharmaceuticals, you should probably look into it before saying something as dumb as that.
You’re like those people who think switching factories (and/or countries) in a supply chain is quick and easy. Totally, completely ignorant, but unafraid of showing the world how clueless you are.
Dude, they make pharmaceuticals in mud huts in Africa. Regulatory compliance is a known discipline. They would have to hire experienced people and managers.
Yes, that perfectly describes you and your democrat thinking.
"He was the driving force behind the Trump administration's harebrained idea to give a $765 million contract to the Eastman-Kodak Company, a bankrupt camera company, to produce pharmaceuticals"
A fine example of misrepresentation. Kodak was a CHEMICAL company, not a camera company, though they did sell entry-level cameras, to stimulate the sale of film and chemicals. Images were fixed onto film via chemical processes.
And what else is made via chemical processes? Why, pharmaceuticals.
Conclusion: Boehm is ignorant or dishonest.
Can’t it be both?
Who did you vote for in '20, Eric?