Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
erronis
erronis's Journal
erronis's Journal
April 3, 2025
Tariffs are like military actions. They're ‘good’ or ‘bad’ based on specifics: Why, how, at what cost, toward what end. Donald Trump has just committed US power in a profoundly stupid way.
See the article for his further discussion.
Launching the Economic Version of the Iraq War. -- James Fallows
https://fallows.substack.com/p/launching-the-economic-version-ofTariffs are like military actions. They're ‘good’ or ‘bad’ based on specifics: Why, how, at what cost, toward what end. Donald Trump has just committed US power in a profoundly stupid way.
This post is about tariffs, the latest bit of chaos through which Donald Trump is satisfying his major need, which is to dominate minute-by-minute news coverage.
I drafted this before Trump delivered his deranged-seeming comments today in the Rose Garden, announcing tariffs on just about everyone. I’m posting it now, after, with a few real-time updates. What you see below is calmer in tone than I feel having seen Trump’s performance. But it’s usually wiser not to hit the keyboard in anger. The substance is still what I’d like to convey, so I’m going ahead as is. More on related topics ahead.1
The purposes today are:
I think this is a historically reckless moment in US economic policy. And even by Trump-era standards it’s a historically shameful moment for the Republican Party. Its leaders know that their alpha-figure is launching a dollars-and-Euros version of the Iraq war. And they stand by, grinning and clapping.
. . .
I drafted this before Trump delivered his deranged-seeming comments today in the Rose Garden, announcing tariffs on just about everyone. I’m posting it now, after, with a few real-time updates. What you see below is calmer in tone than I feel having seen Trump’s performance. But it’s usually wiser not to hit the keyboard in anger. The substance is still what I’d like to convey, so I’m going ahead as is. More on related topics ahead.1
The purposes today are:
To propose a model for thinking and talking about Trump-era tariffs that I find clarifying and would like to push into more general use.
To suggest a simple timeline for the changing roles of tariffs in US life. Those changes happened over the span of decades during the US’s early industrial development. Like so much else they are accelerating now, including today.
To offer a “what is to be done?” suggestion, plus links to articles, reports, books, graphs, and other resources with chapter-and-verse background for points in the other two sections.
I think this is a historically reckless moment in US economic policy. And even by Trump-era standards it’s a historically shameful moment for the Republican Party. Its leaders know that their alpha-figure is launching a dollars-and-Euros version of the Iraq war. And they stand by, grinning and clapping.
. . .
See the article for his further discussion.
April 3, 2025

. . .
Genius -- Digby
https://digbysblog.net/2025/04/03/genius/
BARTIROMO: Are we now gonna see egg prices move back higher because of the tariffs?
BROOKE ROLLINS: All to be determined. The president has said that we’ll have a little bit of uncertainty in the coming weeks, perhaps a month or two. I’m not gonna sit here and say everything is gonna be perfect and the prices are gonna come down tomorrow because this is an uncertain time, but that is the president’s genius in all this … God bless him.
Bartiromo, formerly known as “the money honey” knows very well what’s going on. Brooke Rollins is the Secretary of Agriculture.
The markets crashing is all part of Trump’s genius plan. Here’s more of that Wharton School genius:
It didn’t take long before someone cracked the code on how the White House decided to overturn the global trade order.
The White House claimed to base its decision on tariff rates and nontariff barriers, but economic journalist James Surowiecki reckons it was all just a back-of-the-envelope calculation. “Instead, for every country, they just took our trade deficit with that country and divided it by the country’s exports to us,” the former financial columnist for The New Yorker posted on X. “What extraordinary nonsense this is.”
That approach meant Trump and his advisers simply took the U.S. trade deficit with the European Union — $235.6 billion in 2024 — and divided it by the bloc’s exports to the U.S., which totaled $605.8 billion.
The result was 39 percent, which the administration interpreted as the “unfair” trade advantage the EU holds over the U.S. From there, the White House proposed a 20 percent tariff, framing it as a corrective measure to level the playing field.
Trump, speaking in the White House Rose Garden on Wednesday, said he was being “kind” by cutting the tariff rate almost in half.
[…]
The White House responded with a formula featuring Greek letters and six research references to underscore the credibility of its momentous economic decision. Incidentally, that formula describes the same calculation detailed by Surowiecki in his analysis.
Washington claimed its reciprocal tariffs, masterminded by the Council of Economic Advisers, were based on a formula accounting for trade barriers, import elasticities and tariff pass-through rates — aiming to set tariffs high enough to eliminate bilateral trade deficits. It also considered value-added tax as a trade barrier — even though this is paid on products and services sold in a country regardless of where the company selling them is from.
The White House’s calculated figure of 39 percent is more than 10 times higher than the actual average, trade-weighted tariff charged by the EU of 2.7 percent, according to the World Trade Organization.
. . .
April 3, 2025
David Dayen
Stop trying to place coherence on a policy that’s really just a mob boss breaking legs and asking for protection money.
They're Not Tariffs, They're Sanctions -- The American Prospect
https://prospect.org/economy/2025-04-03-theyre-not-tariffs-theyre-sanctions/David Dayen
Stop trying to place coherence on a policy that’s really just a mob boss breaking legs and asking for protection money.
I’m watching the stock market plunge, and the expectations for recession and stagflation rise, along with everyone else. I’m aware of the innumeracy of the Trump administration, apparently using a shortcut AI formula to reset global trade imbalances and trying to bullshit their way through the criticism.
But I think we give too much credit to Donald Trump and his lieutenants when we suggest that they’re pursuing a misguided trade policy, or that they aren’t pairing tariffs with the necessary steps to boost domestic manufacturing. Those things are true, of course: U.S. trade policy has been deeply inequitable for decades, favoring multinationals over workers and the environment, giving benefits to those corporations in free-trade agreements that they could never get through normal legislative channels, and handing over economic decisions to Wall Street. But these careful explanations, however correct, have nothing to do with what we saw on display in the Rose Garden yesterday.
Because these aren’t really tariffs at all.
Sure, in some functional sense, Trump announced a set of levies to be collected on imports upon their entry into the country. But a tariff policy would consider whether Americans have the wherewithal to make that good domestically, whether component parts that go into U.S. manufacturing should be targeted at the same rate as finished goods, and whether government policy has incentivized a transition to domestic production to encourage the investment. Even the Gilded Age era that Trump looks at longingly did not feature across-the-board tariffs; the famed McKinley Tariff of 1890 cut tariffs on sugar, the biggest revenue-raiser of the era.
What Trump is doing is a sanction policy, only he’s doing it against the whole world, all at once, for the assumed harm of “ripping off” the United States for decades. Sanctions have become a dangerously large component of American geopolitical strategy, an instrument of economic war felt disproportionately by the world’s poorest citizens. The stated reason that Russia and North Korea and other rogue states aren’t on the tariff lists is because sanctions have destroyed their ability to have a trading relationship with the U.S. Trump is applying those punitive measures to the rest of the world.
. . .
But I think we give too much credit to Donald Trump and his lieutenants when we suggest that they’re pursuing a misguided trade policy, or that they aren’t pairing tariffs with the necessary steps to boost domestic manufacturing. Those things are true, of course: U.S. trade policy has been deeply inequitable for decades, favoring multinationals over workers and the environment, giving benefits to those corporations in free-trade agreements that they could never get through normal legislative channels, and handing over economic decisions to Wall Street. But these careful explanations, however correct, have nothing to do with what we saw on display in the Rose Garden yesterday.
Because these aren’t really tariffs at all.
Sure, in some functional sense, Trump announced a set of levies to be collected on imports upon their entry into the country. But a tariff policy would consider whether Americans have the wherewithal to make that good domestically, whether component parts that go into U.S. manufacturing should be targeted at the same rate as finished goods, and whether government policy has incentivized a transition to domestic production to encourage the investment. Even the Gilded Age era that Trump looks at longingly did not feature across-the-board tariffs; the famed McKinley Tariff of 1890 cut tariffs on sugar, the biggest revenue-raiser of the era.
What Trump is doing is a sanction policy, only he’s doing it against the whole world, all at once, for the assumed harm of “ripping off” the United States for decades. Sanctions have become a dangerously large component of American geopolitical strategy, an instrument of economic war felt disproportionately by the world’s poorest citizens. The stated reason that Russia and North Korea and other rogue states aren’t on the tariff lists is because sanctions have destroyed their ability to have a trading relationship with the U.S. Trump is applying those punitive measures to the rest of the world.
. . .
April 3, 2025
Editor’s note: the following is an excerpt from Cory Booker’s 25-hour marathon speech on the US Senate floor
Opinion piece by Cory Booker on The Guardian. What an inspiring person!
'Did you stand up?': read part of Cory Booker's blockbuster 25-hour speech -- Cory Booker
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/apr/03/cory-booker-speech-transcript-excerptEditor’s note: the following is an excerpt from Cory Booker’s 25-hour marathon speech on the US Senate floor
I rise tonight because silence at this moment of national crisis would be a betrayal of some of the greatest heroes of our nation
Tonight, I rise with the intention of getting in some good trouble. I rise with the intention of disrupting the normal business of the United States Senate for as long as I am physically able.
I rise tonight because I believe, sincerely, that our country is in crisis.
And I believe that not in a partisan sense, because so many of the people that have been reaching out to my office – in pain, in fear, having their lives upended – so many of them identify themselves as Republicans.
Indeed, conversations from in this body, to in this building, to across my state – and recently in travel across the country – Republicans as well as Democrats are talking to me about what they feel as a sense of dread about a growing crisis, or what they point to about what is going wrong.
The bedrock commitments in our country – that both sides rely on, that people from all backgrounds rely on – those bedrock commitments are being broken.
. . .
Tonight, I rise with the intention of getting in some good trouble. I rise with the intention of disrupting the normal business of the United States Senate for as long as I am physically able.
I rise tonight because I believe, sincerely, that our country is in crisis.
And I believe that not in a partisan sense, because so many of the people that have been reaching out to my office – in pain, in fear, having their lives upended – so many of them identify themselves as Republicans.
Indeed, conversations from in this body, to in this building, to across my state – and recently in travel across the country – Republicans as well as Democrats are talking to me about what they feel as a sense of dread about a growing crisis, or what they point to about what is going wrong.
The bedrock commitments in our country – that both sides rely on, that people from all backgrounds rely on – those bedrock commitments are being broken.
. . .
Opinion piece by Cory Booker on The Guardian. What an inspiring person!
April 3, 2025
So are you, Elon

See Rhiannon12866's post for the video:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/132145521
You're A Punchline, Donald -- Tom Sullivan
https://digbysblog.net/2025/04/03/youre-a-punchline-donald/So are you, Elon

“It’s like [Donald] Trump is stuck in the 80s — his music, his clothing, his thinking. He has been on this tariff thing forever,” Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz told MSNBC’s Chris Hayes on Wednesday. Hayes invited Walz to react to Trump’s bonkers tariffs announcement. Trump wants to get back at … the world (except Russia).
Hayes queried the border-state Democrat about Minnesotans’ attitudes toward their neighbors just to the north.
It was very satisfying, both the obvious question and the candid response from Walz. Hayes asked a question reporters should regularly ask all elected officials. It would drive home the absurdity and help immunize the public to Trump’s “ripping us off” nonsense. That’s even if Republicans’ answer will be to parrot Trump or utter some version of “many people say.”
Enjoy [timestamp 2:15]:
Hayes queried the border-state Democrat about Minnesotans’ attitudes toward their neighbors just to the north.
“Have you ever encountered in the wild,” Hayes began, “out of the mouth of someone at a doorstep or diner, ‘I hate those Canadians who are ripping us off. We gotta get back at them’?”
Walz burst out laughing.
“Never. Never,” Walz replied.
It was very satisfying, both the obvious question and the candid response from Walz. Hayes asked a question reporters should regularly ask all elected officials. It would drive home the absurdity and help immunize the public to Trump’s “ripping us off” nonsense. That’s even if Republicans’ answer will be to parrot Trump or utter some version of “many people say.”
Enjoy [timestamp 2:15]:
See Rhiannon12866's post for the video:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/132145521
April 3, 2025
Why Not Just ‘Disappear’ Diego Garcia?

Is The World Laughing Or Shuddering? -- Tom Sullivan
https://digbysblog.net/2025/04/03/is-the-world-laughing-or-shuddering/Why Not Just ‘Disappear’ Diego Garcia?

A sad and twisted man is Donald Trump. And an idiot. President idiot, okay. Heir to his father’s real estate empire, the man surrounds himself with idiots and yes-men. Degreed, ass-kissing idiots. Connected idiots. Rich idiots. But idiots.
The pathologically insecure Trump has complained for decades that “they” are laughing at “us” (meaning him). They are ripping off the United States (meaning him), says the man convicted of falsifying business records, stripped of his fraudulent charity, and assessed $25 million in penalties for cheating students of his fraudulent university. The man has spent a lifetime trying to prove to the world and to himself that he is the smartest person in any room, not an idiot, and not laughable.
. . .
Trump slapped tariffs on “virtually the entire world,” including Australia’s volcanic Heard and McDonald Islands inhabited by seals and penguins, and on other tiny islands with no exports. His list includes the British Indian Ocean Territory of Diego Garcia, the island home of a highly restricted UK-US military base. (Trump likely thinks Diego Garcia belongs to Tren de Aragua (TdA) and should be disappeared to El Salvador.)
. . .
Of course, it will not be any of those nations and uninhabited islands filling the U.S. treasury. It will be you. Paul Krugman dismantled Trump’s tariff incoherence on Wednesday at his substack. Analyses are pointless, he writes, “because there’s nothing to explain. I’m not saying that the Trump team’s thinking is unsound. I don’t see any thinking at all.”
. . .
The pathologically insecure Trump has complained for decades that “they” are laughing at “us” (meaning him). They are ripping off the United States (meaning him), says the man convicted of falsifying business records, stripped of his fraudulent charity, and assessed $25 million in penalties for cheating students of his fraudulent university. The man has spent a lifetime trying to prove to the world and to himself that he is the smartest person in any room, not an idiot, and not laughable.
. . .
Trump slapped tariffs on “virtually the entire world,” including Australia’s volcanic Heard and McDonald Islands inhabited by seals and penguins, and on other tiny islands with no exports. His list includes the British Indian Ocean Territory of Diego Garcia, the island home of a highly restricted UK-US military base. (Trump likely thinks Diego Garcia belongs to Tren de Aragua (TdA) and should be disappeared to El Salvador.)
. . .
Of course, it will not be any of those nations and uninhabited islands filling the U.S. treasury. It will be you. Paul Krugman dismantled Trump’s tariff incoherence on Wednesday at his substack. Analyses are pointless, he writes, “because there’s nothing to explain. I’m not saying that the Trump team’s thinking is unsound. I don’t see any thinking at all.”
. . .
April 3, 2025

HHS bomb going off -- Digby
https://digbysblog.net/2025/04/02/hhs-bomb-going-off/
Josh Marshall wrote this on Bluesky and I think it explains what’s going on with HHS as well as I’ve seen it anywhere:
There are so many atrocities coming from this administration that it’s hard to decide the worst of it. But when it comes to the most harm to the most people in short, medium and long term, I think this might be it. The U.S. has been one of the most prolific leaders in medical research for a very long time and we’re giving it up because Trump wanted to cover up his support for vaccines during the pandemic — and stick it to the people who made him feel stupid about it. No one can tell him anything so he’s letting Bobby Jr play. Many people will die needlessly.
Let’s hope that we can put this Humpty Dumpty together again but the damage is already severe and it will take a massive effort. It’s heartbreaking.
It’s getting a lot of attn today. But even before today most of the country had very little idea of what has happened at NIH or through it the entire ecosystem of biomedical research in the US. Simply put, Musk, Kennedy & Trump exploded a bomb right in the middle of cancer cure research in the US.
On purpose. For many cancers, research has been put back years or decades. Alzheimers treatment and cure research similar story. If you know people who are survivors of these diseases and fear recurrence or have genetic dispositions or are just like everyone else and know they are liable to these and other diseases potential cures are now less likely to be there when you need them. You have to ask: what is the goal when you pull the plug on the whole ecosystem of cancer cure research? What’s the agenda? The answers are so dark and twisted most people struggle to believe it could be real.
But it is real. And it’s happened so quickly, most of the country doesn’t know it yet. Indeed, I got some key indications over the weekend that even people in the biomedical research world outside of NIH don’t get yet what’s happened. So the bomb has gone off but most people don’t realize it yet. It’s like Bobby Kennedy and Elon and Trump just drove a big semi full of fertilizer Tim McVeigh-style up in front of the national labs and detonated it.
The prospect of more life saving cures and treatments already got much bleaker. If you think you or a loved one might one day get one of these cancers, or Alzheimers, or various other dread diseases 10, 20, 30 years from now your chances have already dimmed because of what’s happened just in the last two months.
And now they’ve decided to up the pace and make it far worse because of a mix of difficult to fully comprehend pathological motives tied to political extremism, belief that AI will supplant medical research & that destroying the current research world will add to their wealth and political power and cement their hold over what was the American republic.
It will take a determined, smart, relentless and implacable counterattack to begin to undo the damage.
There are so many atrocities coming from this administration that it’s hard to decide the worst of it. But when it comes to the most harm to the most people in short, medium and long term, I think this might be it. The U.S. has been one of the most prolific leaders in medical research for a very long time and we’re giving it up because Trump wanted to cover up his support for vaccines during the pandemic — and stick it to the people who made him feel stupid about it. No one can tell him anything so he’s letting Bobby Jr play. Many people will die needlessly.
Let’s hope that we can put this Humpty Dumpty together again but the damage is already severe and it will take a massive effort. It’s heartbreaking.
April 2, 2025

More fascist fashion.That’s not Kristi Noem. It’s the new US Attorney nominee Alina Habba, former parking lot lawyer and Trump confidante.
It’s as close as they can get to their private bdsm fantasy.
Botox Nazi Kitsch. -- Digby
https://digbysblog.net/2025/04/02/botox-nazi-kitsch/
More fascist fashion.That’s not Kristi Noem. It’s the new US Attorney nominee Alina Habba, former parking lot lawyer and Trump confidante.
It’s as close as they can get to their private bdsm fantasy.
April 2, 2025
I would say that there are some experts far away from the White House and cabinet that have the brains to try and annihilate democracy in the US.
There Is No Plan -- Digby
https://digbysblog.net/2025/04/02/there-is-no-plan/Paul Krugman published this earlier before the tariff announcement and he is 100% right:
As he goes on to point out, Trump’s advisers are all hacks and yes-men. There are no grown-ups.
This is all Trump’s whim, ungoverned by any expertise or any sense of responsibility. He believes his hype and all the rest of his sycophants and henchmen are just going along for the ride — and that’s assuming they know this is lunacy in the first place.
. . .
From Apocalypse Now:
Willard: They told me that you had gone totally insane, and that your methods were unsound.
Kurtz: Are my methods unsound?
Willard: I don’t see any method at all, sir.
. . .
Does he really believe that Canada is a major source of fentanyl? Worse, does he believe that fentanyl smugglers pay tariffs?
But is it all a cover for the real, probably sinister agenda of Trump’s tariff push?
No. There isn’t any secret agenda, devised by people who know that the public story is nonsense. How do I know that? Because who, exactly, do you think is devising this secret agenda?
As he goes on to point out, Trump’s advisers are all hacks and yes-men. There are no grown-ups.
This is all Trump’s whim, ungoverned by any expertise or any sense of responsibility. He believes his hype and all the rest of his sycophants and henchmen are just going along for the ride — and that’s assuming they know this is lunacy in the first place.
. . .
I would say that there are some experts far away from the White House and cabinet that have the brains to try and annihilate democracy in the US.
April 2, 2025
After months of surrender, the Democrats have finally stood up to Trump - thank you, Cory Booker
Thank you, Emma Brockes. A great opinion published on The Guardian.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/apr/02/cory-brooker-25-hour-speech-donald-trump-democrats
Watching the New Jersey senator hold court for 25 hours felt radical and cathartic
ne of the problems beleaguering political opponents of Donald Trump has been finding a form of protest that, given the scale of his outrages, doesn’t seem entirely futile. You can parade outside a Tesla showroom. You can hold up dumb little signs during Trump’s address to Congress inscribed with slogans such as “This is not normal” and “Musk steals”. You can, as Democrats appear to have been doing since the election, play dead.
Alternatively, you can go for the ostentatious, performative gesture. On Monday evening, Cory Booker, the Democratic senator for New Jersey who carries himself like someone who’d have been happier in an era when men wore capes, started speaking on the floor of the Senate and carried on for 25 hours and five minutes, breaking the chamber’s record by almost 50 minutes and delivering – finally – a solid, usable symbol of rebellion.
This wasn’t a filibuster per se; no legislation was being passed. Booker decided to speak for “as long as I am physically able”, he said, in general protest against Trump and in what he described as a “moral moment” – a claim that, when he ended his speech on Tuesday evening, hoarse of voice and teary-eyed, didn’t seem to me an exaggeration.
The power of the filibuster is vested in the iron-man stamina required to perform it: in Booker’s case, standing for longer than a direct flight between Washington DC and Sydney, without food, rest or toilet breaks. It puts him in a category of protest that floats somewhere between a sit-in and a hunger strike, a measure of commitment that demands a kind of default respect, as does the technical challenge of filling the airtime. A few hours into his speech, Booker asked a Senate page to remove his chair and with it the temptation to sit down. Democratic senators were permitted to ask him questions or make short remarks to give him brief respite from speaking. Mostly, however, it was on Booker to keep talking and talking, which he did – it should be noted, quite easily – by enumerating all the terrible things Trump has done in his first three months in office.
There was something immensely satisfying – cathartic, even – in watching Booker protest against Trump via a form of dissent that, while radical and pushed to its absolute limit, still fell within congressional norms. Part of the fallout from Trump and his cohorts’ behaviour has been the shocking realisation that you can ditch standards and protocols, ignore judges and bin entire social and scientific programmes created by Congress, and, at least in the immediate term, nothing will happen. (In the medium to long term, of course, people will die.)
. . .
Alternatively, you can go for the ostentatious, performative gesture. On Monday evening, Cory Booker, the Democratic senator for New Jersey who carries himself like someone who’d have been happier in an era when men wore capes, started speaking on the floor of the Senate and carried on for 25 hours and five minutes, breaking the chamber’s record by almost 50 minutes and delivering – finally – a solid, usable symbol of rebellion.
This wasn’t a filibuster per se; no legislation was being passed. Booker decided to speak for “as long as I am physically able”, he said, in general protest against Trump and in what he described as a “moral moment” – a claim that, when he ended his speech on Tuesday evening, hoarse of voice and teary-eyed, didn’t seem to me an exaggeration.
The power of the filibuster is vested in the iron-man stamina required to perform it: in Booker’s case, standing for longer than a direct flight between Washington DC and Sydney, without food, rest or toilet breaks. It puts him in a category of protest that floats somewhere between a sit-in and a hunger strike, a measure of commitment that demands a kind of default respect, as does the technical challenge of filling the airtime. A few hours into his speech, Booker asked a Senate page to remove his chair and with it the temptation to sit down. Democratic senators were permitted to ask him questions or make short remarks to give him brief respite from speaking. Mostly, however, it was on Booker to keep talking and talking, which he did – it should be noted, quite easily – by enumerating all the terrible things Trump has done in his first three months in office.
There was something immensely satisfying – cathartic, even – in watching Booker protest against Trump via a form of dissent that, while radical and pushed to its absolute limit, still fell within congressional norms. Part of the fallout from Trump and his cohorts’ behaviour has been the shocking realisation that you can ditch standards and protocols, ignore judges and bin entire social and scientific programmes created by Congress, and, at least in the immediate term, nothing will happen. (In the medium to long term, of course, people will die.)
. . .
Profile Information
Gender: Do not displayHometown: Green Mountains
Home country: US
Member since: Tue Feb 5, 2013, 04:27 PM
Number of posts: 18,737