Do You Even Independence?
Power, Persuasion, and the Idiocy of Politics
I have long argued that decent people do not pursue political power. Fully human people want to engage with others on a voluntary basis, to persuade. Politicians, on the other hand, want their will—their understanding of the ideal society—to be imposed on everyone at the point of a gun.
Decent people find this repulsive. Because it is. If your ideas are any good, others will rally to them. Persuasion is the method of intelligent people confidant that their ideas are right and true.
As a result, politics attracts idiots. Perhaps exclusively. As we have seen in recent decades and most intensely since January 20th, when economic insanity became official government policy.
Marco Rubio and the Random Policy Generator
A case in point is U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Once among President Donald Trump’s fiercest critics, Rubio recently disgorged the following gem: “Markets are crashing because markets are based on the stock value of companies who today are embedded in modes of production that are bad for the United States.”
Let’s be clear, this is unintelligible random noise. Rubio is literally saying stock prices are crashing because stock prices are based upon stock prices.
Huh?
Markets Adjust—That’s the Problem
If we choose to be charitable, Rubio wants us to relax, be patient. Markets will adjust.
Adjust? Really? Adjusting is exactly what markets are doing now. They’re adjusting to the nonsensical, increasingly ad hoc, constantly mutating Trumpian trade policies and the now near certainty of a looming recession.
The stock market is a great discounting mechanism. With every trade, market participants render their, imperfect but informed judgement on the prospects for American business and the broader economy.
If, as Rubio appears to claim, the economy is truly on the mend, the pain is temporary, and the good times will soon be rolling, market participants would quickly factor that into their calculus.
We see that all the time, a company releases disappointing quarterly earnings but simultaneously announces promising plans or prospects, and the stock rallies as a result.
Today, the market is in full-blown panic, a situation that risks becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy. When Americans watch their 401(k) plans nosedive by 20%—as they have—they tighten their belts, invest and spend less. This is the Trumpian recipe for economic revitalization.
The Trump Tariff Revival: A Swampier Swamp
So much is wrong with Trump's trade policies that it's hard to know where to start. Indeed, fully cataloging these misguided moves would fill an entire book.
First, tariffs are magnets for corruption. That’s the reason the United States abandoned them generations ago. Even now, we see companies no longer competing on price or quality; but on the ability of their lobbyists to extract favors from an easily flattered Trump. The number of registered lobbyists is up over fifty percent so far during the Trump administration. So much for draining the swamp.
Tariffs inevitably invite retaliation. Soon enough, expect yet another round of taxpayer-funded bailouts for farmers as longtime international buyers reject the now overpriced bounty from America's breadbasket. Remember Trump's recent, lavish claims that farmers would "make a fortune"? A fortune? In what parallel universe do farmers make fortunes? Apparently, the same alternate reality Trump inhabits.
Donald Trump seems to be the only person alive who still believes tariffs aren't taxes. Tariffs are taxes—regressive taxes that fall disproportionately on average people. Taxes—all taxes— weigh on the economy, depressing demand, investment, and ultimately, the demand for labor itself.
The DOGE and the Disappearing Cuts
And this is to say nothing of his pre-textual and likely unconstitutional emergency declaration, the bald-faced lie that these tariffs are “reciprocal” and the Rube Goldberg-like mechanism used to calculate them.
Higher taxes, shrinking demand, slowing growth: this is a formula for reduced economic activity and falling tax receipts. Ironically, it exacerbates America's real economic challenge—the massive federal debt and structural deficits that Trump consistently ignores and that I will return to later in this essay.
Trump’s Twin Fixations: Trade Deficits and the Dollar
The root causes of Trump's misguided trade policies are his twin obsessions, neither of which actually matter nearly as much as he thinks. Yet, his attempts to "fix" them virtually guarantee that things will get worse. These twin fixations are: the merchandise trade deficit and the strength of the U.S. dollar. Let's examine each of these distractions in turn.
My Starbucks Trade Deficit and Why It Doesn’t Matter
Personally, I run a massive trade deficit with Starbucks. For most of the past thirty years, I’ve handed over a considerable chunk of my income to them, and they've never bought a single thing from me in return.
One could reasonably argue that my coffee habit is bad policy—it’s not good for me. Fair enough. But no one in their right mind would claim Starbucks is "ripping me off." Yet that’s exactly the crude, sophomoric logic of the Trumpian trade narrative.
Maybe I do spend too much time in coffee shops. But I love Starbucks. To me, it's a tremendous value. Every time I walk in, I make a deal. I trade dollars (which I value less) for fresh coffee, friendly staff, a pleasant atmosphere, and free WiFi—all of which I value more highly. Far from being ripped off, I feel like I'm the clear winner. Starbucks thinks they win too. That’s how trade works.
The self-described World’s Greatest Dealmaker apparently can’t grasp anything this obvious.
Sock Tariffs and Economic Illiteracy
When an American consumer walks into Walmart needing socks and underwear, they're making a similar trade—this time with businesses in China or Vietnam, or wherever. Through Walmart, they exchange dollars for products they need. Everybody wins.
Trump prefers to imagine trade as an epic gladiatorial battle where only one side can emerge victorious—a childish fantasy that completely ignores the sock-buying consumer. "But wait," some protectionists cry, "if we pick a fight with Vietnam, won’t we start making socks in America again?”
No. Because America isn't any good at making socks—and who cares who makes them anyway? All that matters is that the deal gets done, that a consumer exercises their own agency and makes a choice that suits them.
Trade Isn’t Theft. It’s Cooperation.
But let's humor Trump’s argument on its own terms. Yes, it’s true that when all these individual transactions are added up, America buys more goods from other countries than it sells to them. Is this a problem?
No. Far from a problem, it’s evidence that America is wealthy enough to afford these goods and is smart enough to seek out the best deal. A trade deficit isn't evidence of anyone being cheated. That's absurd.
What Trade Deficits Really Tell Us
Trade deficits aren’t harmful. In fact, international trade greatly benefits the U.S. economy. Every dollar sent abroad to buy low value socks inevitably returns in the form of investment, funding U.S. industries we actually excel in—Boeing jets, Oracle software, consulting services, movies and music, financial services, pharmaceuticals, farm products and tourism. The U.S. runs huge trade surpluses in these high-value industries—a fact the protectionists conveniently overlook.
Financial services alone add vastly more to the U.S. economy than sock manufacturing does to Vietnam’s. But imagine what happens if Trump's trade war escalates: countries around the world stop hiring U.S. banks and consultants. They stop buying Otis elevators and Caterpillar heavy equipment. Suddenly, making socks in America might become aspirational.
The claim that trade deficits are "hollowing out" America’s middle class is nonsense. Unemployment is near historic lows (though likely to rise rapidly in the near future), and until very recently, U.S. stock markets were at record highs—boosted by all that foreign investment flowing back into the U.S. economy, lifting 401(k) balances nationwide.
And the middle class has never been in better shape. Houses are bigger, cars are newer, vacations more lavish—than ever. And household net worth is at an all-time high! Hollowed out? What are these people even thinking?
But, were you planning to retire this year? With stocks now down 20% or more, at least you can take comfort knowing your socks might soon say 'Made in the U.S.A.'
In reality, the economic value of U.S. exports are at record highs. Yes, these exports are less labor-intensive than clothing or furniture production, and yes, there's plenty we could do to encourage domestic manufacturing—but starving our trading partners of dollars certainly isn’t among them.
The Dangerous Fantasy of a Weaker Dollar
And that brings us neatly to Trump’s other bizarre fixation: weakening the U.S. dollar.
If Trump’s obsession with the trade deficit is economically illiterate, his obsession with weakening the dollar is economically suicidal.
The idea, such as it is, goes something like this: if the dollar is cheaper, American-made goods will be cheaper for foreign buyers. That will boost exports, shrink the trade deficit, and—voilà—Make America Great Again.
To achieve this, Trump has floated a number of ideas, from jawboning the Federal Reserve into cutting interest rates below zero (a gift to speculators and zombie companies), to outright currency manipulation—flooding global markets with newly created dollars to push down its value.
This isn’t new thinking. It’s old, bad thinking. Deliberately weakening your currency is the economic equivalent of setting your house on fire to stay warm. It might make you feel better for a moment—but soon you’re standing in ashes.
Inflation for Everyone, Prosperity for No One
But even if we set aside the pyrotechnics for a moment, the economics of a weak-dollar policy just don’t hold up.
From a classical perspective, currencies reflect fundamentals—like productivity, political and monetary stability, fiscal discipline, investor confidence, the rule of law. The dollar is strong because the world believes in the strength of American institutions. Undermining that trust on purpose doesn’t make us more competitive—it makes us poorer.
And then there’s inflation.
Weakening the dollar through interest rate cuts or money creation inevitably expands the money supply. More money chasing the same amount of goods raises prices. Add to that the second-order effect: imported goods become more expensive. The U.S. consumer—who, remember, drives 70% of our economy—pays more for everything from smartphones to socks. That’s not stimulus. That’s a tax disguised as policy.
And it gets worse.
Once the U.S. declares open season on its own currency, other nations follow suit. China has already signaled it will devalue the yuan in response. Europe will not sit idly by. What follows is a global race to the bottom—a cascade of competitive devaluations where no one wants strong money, and everyone ends up with inflation and instability. You don’t win that race. You just hit the ground last.
I don’t know about you, but personally, I like to be paid in strong money—not a political plaything, not a slogan, and certainly not in a currency weakened to satisfy the fever dreams of those who don’t understand the very thing they’re trying to manage.
More importantly, a weak dollar won’t solve the problem—because the problem isn’t the dollar. It’s bad policy.
America doesn’t struggle with global competitiveness because our currency is too strong. We struggle where we over-regulate, overpromise, and overspend. We tax productive activity, subsidize inefficiency, and pretend that deficit spending is somehow costless. No amount of currency devaluation is going to reverse those self-inflicted wounds.
The Real Threat: Debt, Not Imports
The real threat to American prosperity isn’t trade. It’s not the Chinese currency. It’s not foreign manufacturing. It’s the fiscal time bomb sitting in plain sight: our runaway federal deficit and ballooning national debt. And unlike the imagined devastation of cheap socks from Vietnam, this one is real, measurable, and getting worse by the day.
Trump added more to the national debt in his first four years than any president in history. Yes, the pandemic turbocharged spending—but the stress on the system began before COVID. Even in the "boom years" of his first term, with low unemployment and a roaring stock market, federal deficits rose year after year. It was Keynesianism with no bust, no plan, and no brakes.
Worse, Trump’s “solution” to this problem—his so-called Department of Executive Government Efficiency (DOGE)—is political theater. Even if you squint hard enough to see real cuts in that spreadsheet, they’re meaningless. Why? Because all federal spending has a constituency. Real reform requires legislation, a slide deck. Congress—not DOGE—controls the purse strings. And what did Trump’s own party, which controls Congress, do with that power? They passed a continuing resolution that preserved every penny DOGE claimed to have “cut.”
On that basis alone, there can be no serious conversation about reducing the deficit. There is no path to debt reduction without a working partnership between the White House and Congress—and no political will in either branch to take it seriously.
And that’s a shame, because this—not trade, not tariffs, not currency games—is where Trump had a real mandate. A real opportunity.
Trump Had the Power. He Chose the Sideshow.
Trump has had the political capital to do something transformative. He campaigned as a businessman who knew what it meant to operate under the crushing weight of American regulation. And to his credit, his first term saw some real movement on that front—a little bit of streamlining rules, speeding up permits, and at least making noises about bureaucratic restraint.
Then Biden reversed it all. Overnight, red tape came flooding back. Worse than ever.
The problem with American manufacturing isn’t that the dollar is too strong or the Chinese are too clever. The problem is that we’ve made it too expensive to build anything here. American employers are drowning in compliance costs, labor mandates, legal risk, and regulatory friction. It costs about $14,000 just to hire one new manufacturing worker. Not pay them. Hire them. If you’re making socks, that means no one is ever getting hired. You can’t make $14,000 worth of socks in a lifetime, let alone in your first quarter.
Trump talks about restoring American manufacturing, but refuses to face the actual problem: we’ve made it irrational to hire people and impossible to scale.
He needs to make a deal with Congress. Not a tweet, not an executive order, but a real legislative framework for regulatory reform—one that endures past his term. One that makes it make sense to hire again. One that actually lowers the cost of building things in America, not just the cost of pretending.
But let’s be clear: there is no emergency.
Unemployment is near record lows. Until very recently, the stock market was hitting all-time highs. Consumer confidence, by historical standards, remains strong. Wages are rising, and household net worth is at its highest level ever recorded. If this is a crisis, it’s the strangest one in memory.
But even if there were an emergency, tariffs would still be the exact opposite of the right response. You don’t make yourself stronger by taxing your own citizens. You don’t spur growth by making everything more expensive. You don’t revive American greatness by declaring economic war on your own people.
Trump’s trade policy isn’t bold. It isn’t tough. It’s not a fight. It’s a surrender.
It’s a confession that we don’t believe we can compete anymore. That our products can’t win unless the other guy is handicapped. That we’ve lost faith in American workers, American innovation, and American dynamism. It is a declaration of weakness.
And it’s tragic, because Trump had the power—and the mandate—to go after the real problems. He could have tackled the debt. He could have built a real coalition for regulatory reform. He could have made it easier to build, to hire, to grow, and to win. But instead, he chose to relitigate the last century’s bad ideas, slap tariffs on socks, and pretend it’s leadership.
World Peace Through World Trade
I believe in the maxim formulated by Thomas J. Watson, the founder of IBM, one hundred years ago: World Peace through World Trade.
That’s not a slogan. It’s an organizing principle of a civilized planet. The more nations trade with each other, the less likely they are to go to war with each other. The more we cooperate economically, the more we see one another as partners, not enemies. Economic isolation breeds suspicion, fear, and ultimately—conflict.
That’s history. The protectionist spiral of the early 20th century helped pave the road to global catastrophe. We should know better. We indeed do know better. But now we seem determined to forget.
The truth is, free trade isn’t just a matter of economic efficiency. It’s a moral vision. It’s the belief that peaceful exchange is better than coercion. That persuasion is better than force. That cooperation is better than control. That wealth, widely shared, is the surest path to peace.
Trumpism—at least on trade—abandons that vision. It replaces confidence with fear, opportunity with retreat, and truth with empty slogans.
We should expect more. We can be more.