Why Trump's China Tariffs Won't Work

Plus: A listener asks whether or not Thomas Jefferson was right.

1x 1.1x 1.25x 1.5x 2x 3x

:15 :15

Download

Why Trump's China Tariffs Won't Work

HD Video Download

In this week's The Reason Roundtable, editors Peter Suderman, Nick Gillespie, Matt Welch, and special guest Mary Katharine Ham discuss President Donald Trump's trade war with China. They also talk about the taxes they hate the most—just in time to celebrate Tax Day.

4:30—Trump's trade war with China

15:36—How will Trump's tariffs affect the U.S. manufacturing industry?

23:06—Is the U.S. middle class hollowed out?

34:52—Tax Day is upon us, once again

43:31—Listener question about Thomas Jefferson's list of grievances

50:21—The Department of Government Efficiency's cost savings update

59:59—Cultural recommendations

Mentioned in this podcast:

"Apple, Nvidia Score Relief From US Tariffs With Exemptions," by Debby Wu, Josh Wingrove, and Shawn Donnan

"For me, one of the main benefits of making some money is not having to wear a gimp suit for anybody," by Cliff Asness

"Taxes: The Price We Pay for Civilization," by Meredith Bragg and Nick Gillespie

"A Current Snapshot of the Medicare Part D Prescription Drug Benefit," by Juliette Cubanski

"Medicare Madness," by Katherine Mangu-Ward

"Global Village or Global Pillage?" by Mario Vargas Llosa

"Viva Mario!" by Michael Valdez Moses

Reason on Mario Vargas Llosa

Hearts of Fire, starring Bob Dylan, directed by Richard Marquand

"Even on Pause, Trump's Trade War Runs Up a Big Price Tag," by J.D. Tuccille

"Trade War With China," by Liz Wolfe

"Rand Paul on China, Free Speech, and Banning TikTok," by Elizabeth Nolan Brown

"America Gained Nothing From Trump's Latest Tariff Stunt," by Eric Boehm

"Markets Rally as Trump Pauses Tariffs. Should Presidents Have This Much Power?" by Joe Lancaster

"Trump's Tariffs Violate the Constitutional Separation of Powers," by Damon Root

"Dealing with Despots," by Virginia Postrel

"Happy Birthday, Medicare Part D! Now Die! Die! Die!" by Nick Gillespie

Today's sponsors:

• Join the 2025 Great Connections Seminar in Chicago, July 26–Aug 2.  Designed for students 16–24, this week-long experience builds the core skills of entrepreneurship: critical thinking, persuasive communication, and intellectual independence. This year's theme, "Reason and Free Will," explores great minds like Aristotle, Ayn Rand, and Jefferson—not through lectures, but in dynamic, small-group discussions that train students to lead and innovate. Outside the classroom, they'll tour Chicago's museums, try improv, and connect with ambitious peers. In a world of AI and automation, original thinking is your competitive edge. Tuition is just $800, including room and board.  Scholarships available. Apply today at www.reliancecollege.org/reason.

• Video Editor: Ian Keyser

What are we consuming this week?

Matt Welch

• Bob Dylan Center

Nick Gillespie

• Work of Mario Vargas Llosa

Mary Katharine Ham

• Righteous Gemstones

Peter Suderman

• Daredevil: Born Again

---

Comments

[Dillinger]

>> Mary Katharine Ham

classing the place up are we?

[Strawmancasmic, Town Drunk and Gay for Booze]

MKat is certainly a step up versus the usual bitches.

[Strawmancasmic, Town Drunk and Gay for Booze]

It’s nice that a reason is so committed to pushing ChiCom hegemony around the globe. I’ll bet Boehm, Sullum and Lancaster are wet to the knees over that.

[sarcasmic]

4D CHESS!!!1!!!1

[Don't look at me! (No longer muted!)]

More like 44D chest, amirite?

[Strawmancasmic, Town Drunk and Gay for Booze]

Go on………

[f5ed7b7]

If you don't mind me derailing you for a moment. What are your thoughts on the TPP? Or what was the TPP, and how the US handled it?

[sarcasmic]

The ideal would be zero tariffs, regardless of what other countries do. Like Hong Kong or Singapore. They certainly didn't suffer from unilateral free trade.

I don't know much about the TPP other than I've been told it meant fewer trade barriers than the policies that preceded it. If that's the case then it's not ideal but better than nothing.

[JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)]

Other countries who had their own tariffs were advantaged we didn't have any on theirs?!? Lol.

I don't know much about the TPP other than I've been told it meant fewer trade barriers than the policies that preceded it. If that's the case then it's not ideal but better than nothing.

Have you ever thought of educating yourself? It was a set of agreed to caps, regulatory policy and... tariffs.

This is why nobody takes you seriously. Every you argue is from ignorance.

[f5ed7b7]

Do you have strong knowledge opinions on it? I am looking at it, it seems to have been a major mistake on our countries part not to get into it. The EU was deeply worried about it, it would have firmly tilted us to advantage against China, given us regulatory control and a major influence in other nations. Not to mentioned opened up markets for our farmers. Honestly seems like a lot of what people hope Trump will do with tariffs if he does actually intend to remove barriers between us and other nations, it would have done.

[Strawmancasmic, Town Drunk and Gay for Booze]

Sarc believes that ignorance is strength. Something he read in a book that he interpreted as an instruction manual.

[f5ed7b7]

Hmmmmm. I am still looking into it. It sought in part to bind US influence to nations, with a chance for growth for all. It was very secretive it seems neither Obama, Clinton, nor Trump wanted it either at all or that hard. IDK maybe Obama was just tired at that point, he seems to have abandoned it. Then again, Republicans and Democrats in congress fought it, especially the further left Dems, and Schumer.

[шинка]

And....

Zero discussion about the Chinese economy and how these tariffs affect 40% of Chinese exports (ouch). How does that affect their declining economy? How does that affect the disenfranchised youth who have zero job prospects?

So many unasked questions by the Reason Groupthink Link....

[JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)]

Isn't china's average age now 41 too?

[Strawmancasmic, Town Drunk and Gay for Booze]

Their ‘one child’ policy, combined with an obsession for only prodding male offspring, created some very unfortunate demographic distortions for them.

[шинка]

It's between 40-41 years old. China's population growth is negative with more people leaving than are being born each year. Their birth rate is around 1.18, which will not grow the population (you need a rate of 2.1 to break even).

China has the world's SECOND largest population, down from #1 and continuing to decline. Their population is predicted to go below 1 billion in 2100. So much for having a labor force to build stuff.

One other economic effect is growing and hasn't significantly materialized: The standard of living is going to increase. The means wages will rise. At some point it will no longer be cost effective to employ Chinese labor because it will cost more. The same thing happened to Ireland in the 1990s when tech moved to Ireland to use cheap, English-speaking labor. The standard of living rose, and labor moved to India.

Here's an excellent link on China's population.

https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/china-population/

[Strawmancasmic, Town Drunk and Gay for Booze]

I’ve read that China’s economy could collapse within six months if we cut them off from the US market. Their exports are one of the few things propping them up. Plus Xi is already being blamed for everything, and is in danger of being eliminated.

They have to make a deal. Their attempt at convincing the EU and others to gang up on the US is failing miserably. China has nowhere else to go.

[f5ed7b7]

This would be better if the US wasn't actively and systemically antagonizing every possible nation and ally. At a time when nations are very much revisiting their relationship with China, at a moment when a great bounty of opportunities is here. We have a President who seems intent on closing them, and wasting these chances.

[Strawmancasmic, Town Drunk and Gay for Booze]

No, that needs to happen. He needs to have ether on board so the global community freezes China out. They need us far more than they need China. And really, China doesn’t have any real ‘friends’. As they are openly engaged in a long game for world domination.

[TJJ2000]

Frankly. It doesn't matter if it works in negotiating trade deals.

It's just not fair to give foreign markets ZERO - Tax while Taxing domestic at 85% and regulating the the living sh*t out of them.

Domestic FIRST.
Not Foreign FIRST.

As-if the National (International Affairs) Government shouldn't be funded by the International Market.

[Strawmancasmic, Town Drunk and Gay for Booze]

Exactly. And the cost of tariffs on our businesses can easily be offset by cutting taxes and regulations. Which, contrary to what certain retarded winos here say, aphave. A far more significant impact than tariffs.

[Outlaw Josey Wales]

You should re-title the article 'Why Trump's tariffs don't work in the ten minutes we have given them.' You will be right.

[Reason4thinking]

A couple of points: First, China entering the WTO immediately preceeded a massive drop in manufacturing employment in the US. Second, the middle class is hollowed out. Median income is increasing but adjusted for inflation (real income) no so much. Inequality is another measure of the effect.

Insofar as changes in employment in a particular field, aerospace was mentioned. A great deal of job loss occurred in the early 1990's owing to significant consolidation but since employment has held steady.

Consider that this administration is effectively killing an industry - biotechnology - then what the heck are they talking about. This industry is vertical - research, development, manufacturing - and uses largely local inputs. Why kill this industry?

[Longtobefree]

No doubt about it; nothing says total failure like 130 countries lining up to negotiate.

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

'Why Trump's China Tariffs Won't Work'

Work for what? Optimizing free trade? Targeting specific countries economically (and politically)? Revitalizing American industry?

How about for confronting the global WEF one-world cabal? (I know Reason is conflicted about this.)

[Strawmancasmic, Town Drunk and Gay for Booze]

China is in bad shape economically right now. So this is the perfect time to squeeze them into submission. Same with Russia, now that petroleum prices are dropping.

Strangling the totalitarian regimes economically is the best way to defang them without violence. So of course, democrats, who are in thrall to Xi, will frantically work to derail all Trump’s plans.

[Uomo Del Ghiaccio]

It's far too early to know if Trumps tariffs will work and it's not even clear that we fully understand what his goals are. And No, Nick GIlespie, I don't think that Trump is playing 4-D chess. I do however believe that you are playing checkers.

I agree with Mary Katharine Ham, that Trump is not perfect, but he was a demonstrable better choice than Kamala Harris. However, I didn't vote for Trump.

I do believe that the extremely gross overreach of the Democrats during the last couple decades dwarf the overreach of the Republicans.

Of course there is the possibility that Trump and the Republicans will overreach, but much of the complaints thus far amount to more of a reset to a more reasonable position even if Trump with his shocking bluster oversells the reality of his actual actions.

In typical fashion, the people afflicted with derangement will hyperventilate, parse words, and expose themselves as fools. In today's day and age, it's far too easy to expose the cheap propagandist tactics.

The real threat is the over glorification of Israel and smearing anyone who questions the actions of the IDF in Gaza as being antisemitic. Asking questions, should not be a crime. I have sympathies for Israel and the threat from Hamas, but the actions of the IDF seem too extreme. I don't buy the excuses of either party to break the cease-fires.

Facilitating peace talks is difficult at best, but it is even more difficult when we are funding one side. Navigating this in the Gaza-Israel war or the Ukraine-Russia war is profoundly tricky and full of potential failure. However, the Trump regime has done more to promote a conversation in a short period of time than the entirety of the Biden regime.

I'm willing to reserve judgement of the Trump regime on many fronts instead of the knee-jerk reaction of condemning or declaring failure after mere hours or days even though I'm a critic of tariffs or any other form of taxation.

I realize that we live in a world, where free trade is not reality. In a world where we have frienemies who pretend to support the USA to our faces, but turn around to thwart and belittle the USA as a bunch of dumb rubes who are stupid enough to defend them freeing up their capitol for other ventures, prevent free access to their markets with some ridiculous tariffs of their own.

Putting some distance between these frienemies could very well be the proper prescription to instill some reality on both our and their worlds. We should not have massive deployments of troops around the globe. Individual countries, should be more self-sufficient in the defense of their own nation. Not promoting isolationism, but rather a reduction in the breadth and scope of our foreign deployments.

I want the USA to be a War as the last option, instead of War as the first option country. I don't want any military actions, engagements where we are shooting bullets, dropping bombs, etc. Unless there is a formal Declaration of War voted on and passed by congress and signed by the president. I understand the need for quick action under emergencies, but I would limit every executive branch emergency to 30 days. For anything longer, it should be passed by congress and signed by the president. I would disallow the use of any National Guard from any state without a formal Declaration of War. I would also make the state the sole command of their National Guard units until there is a formal Declaration of War.

If Trump overreaches and gathers up too much power for the executive branch, then the onus is on the legislative branch to use their power, rescind their abdication of their power to the executive, to limit the power of the executive. The onus is not solely on the Republicans, but on the Democrats who are complicit in giving away the legislative branches power to the executive where there are Democrat presidents. Opposition when it suits you politically demonstrates a lack of character that should exclude you from elected office.

Again, I reserve judgement and will wait before I condemn Trumps tariffs as a failure even though I'm skeptical.

[Bill Godshall]

Unfortunately for individual and market freedom, Reason's financier Koch and its liberaltarian employees have vehemently opposed US tariffs on foreign nations, while remaining silent (i.e. lying by omission) about the huge increase in tariffs, other trade bans/restrictions and intellectual property theft foreign nations (notably the Communist Chinese) have imposed on / stolen from US manufacturers during this century (and since WWII for many nations).

Meanwhile, the US has protected the vast majority of nations, their businesses and citizens from military invasions, piracy and terrorism since WWII (subsidized by US taxpayers).

Seems like Reason has been rooting for the Communist Chinese to increase their economy and military to ensure that US and other freedom loving nations continue to decline.