The Meerkat Responds: The Trouble with Tariffs

It seems my recent post on the subject of Trump’s tantrum over Greenland, and his invocation of tariffs to get what he wants, touched a nerve. Was the response a measured, detailed, fact-driven riposte? Of course not. I have refrained from responding to Derrick Thiessen’s efforts to provoke me (I guess he misses me?), but in the midst of a head cold and a bad mood, he has poked the bear one too many times, and so now he’s going to get an education.

To quote:

Certain people can only complain and complain. They like to criticize, point fingers, and say stupid things that prove they know nothing about tariffs and economics. They do not like someone, thus he can do nothing right in their eyes, regardless of the fact that hundreds of millions of people think otherwise.

The issue here, though, is not what they are saying but what they are NOT doing. They are not starting any business or charitable organization that puts into practice their views. Instead of taking the risks involved in creating and showing a better way than what a leader is doing, they sit back in the comfort of their chairs, or sofas, or beds, and complain, criticize, and say foul things.

Neither paragraph actually contains anything to address what I wrote, but can there be any surprise with this? This is Derrick Thiessen’s classic modus operandi: respond to points not made, whine, and offer no substance whatsoever. Will he provide context for his complaint about charities? Is he doing any of that himself, or is he merely displaying yet further proof of his massive hypocrisy?

It is the Strawman Fallacy in action, and that, dear Derrick, is a form of dishonesty. You are well-versed in lying, but your lies lack even a token effort to connect to the subject, so if you must be dishonest, at least try harder next time to make it look credible.

If Derrick’s complaint is that I am critical of Trump and his policies, then he ought to remember the expression ‘pot kettle black’. Derrick complains – often in very bitter terms – about the actions of Democrats, and any group he does not like. What is he doing to lead by example?

Moving anyway from Derrick’s massively deceptive smokescreen, let’s address whether or not tariffs are a wise move. Remember, tariffs are paid in imports, so when Trump sets out tariffs on incoming goods, he is affecting US businesses. For Derrick’s attention, he may want to consider how tariffs have impacted US farmers. To quote:

Businesses across the US have been crying out for months about the damage inflicted by sweeping tariffs President Donald Trump imposed earlier this year.

Now one group is poised to get relief: farmers.

President Trump has said his administration is developing plans to send billions of dollars in support to farmers, especially growers of soybeans, who have been hurt as purchases from China – the world’s biggest buyer of the legume – have dried up this year.

The plan is a reprise of the bailout Trump extended to farmers hit by the trade wars of his first term and reflects pressure he is facing from a key part of his voter base over the consequences of his tariff policies.

But the plans have frustrated many other kinds of businesses that have also been hurt, as the new taxes on imports raise costs for firms based in the US and alienate long-time customers overseas.

“It just seems like a blatant political move,” said Justin Turbeest, a craft brewer in Hudson, Wisconsin, who shut his tap room and laid off 20 staff this summer.

He said tariffs were the final blow for his business, prompting costs to jump roughly 40%, as suppliers of everything from aluminium cans and barley to brand merchandise raised prices.

Mr Turbeest acknowledged that offering wider relief would be impractical, given the vast number of businesses affected.

But the 42-year-old said the discrepancy still stung.

“On a personal level, of course it feels unfair,” he said. “The position we’re in now is due not to normal economic factors. It’s political costs.”

More on the struggles faced by US farmers can be found here. Derrick has chastened me for not being an expert in economics; I am sure his epic, unquestionable wisdom and knowledge in every single field of conversation means he is a champion of economic policy, and an expert that should never be challenged on any topic. Since he is so clever, and knows best in all things, perhaps he can validate the use of tariffs that damage US citizen’s interests as a means to coerce allies into giving up territory (and who’s citizens have no desire to be US citizens). I await his detailed, evidence-driven response.

He can ponder the increasing impact of tariffs on consumer prices, the steel industry, and the automobile industry as well.

Derrick should also weigh up the impact on general prices, as per this Harvard study.

Perhaps Derrick can also address how wielding tariffs to manipulate allies into surrendering territory (not to mention refusing to rule out military action against allies) is meant to promote economic stability for anyone. Maybe the all-knowing Derrick Thiessen can explain how damaging long-standing alliances against belligerent nations like Russia is good for the world, and for the USA?

Unless he can back up his extreme arrogance, Derrick should not be trying to tell me what I can and can’t write about, not least of all considering his own behaviour. Hypocrisy, thy name is Derrick Thomas Thiessen!

Back to The Meerkat Responds