Commentary by Stephen Macaulay
Kevin Hassett is the White House National Economic Council Director.
That is a fairly impressive title.
Hassett has a PhD in economics from the University of Pennsylvania, so presumably he knows considerably more than the average person about the subject, which is a good thing given that the purpose of the NEC is to provide advice to the president about economic policy matters, both domestic and international.
Hassett was a guest on ABC New’s This Week on July 13. He was interviewed by Jonathan Karl.
And right off the bat it became clear that Hassett must have missed some history classes.
Karl asked about the president’s announcement of a flurry of tariffs on August 1.
Hassett answered, in part, “the thing about President Trump, if you go back and look at his history, that he became one of the most successful, if not the most successful, businessman in the 20th century.”
Let’s see. . .
Warren Buffett. Bill Gates. Sam Walton. Andrew Carnegie. John D. Rockefeller.
Donald Trump?
Then there’s this:
Hassett said that when he is talking to negotiators from other countries, “what I am trying to get — the message we’re all trying to get across is this is about America getting itself ready for the golden age by getting our house in order, by getting our tariff and trade policy and tax policy exactly where it needs to be for a golden age.”
There has long been a debate about whether economics is more of an art than a science.
Listening to Hassett it sounds as though it is neither but some sort of fanciful fiction: “a golden age.”
We will all ride bejeweled unicorns on streets paved with crystals while wearing red ballcaps. . . .
Karl questioned Hassett about the announced 50% tariffs on Brazil. Karl noted:
“Brazil had a $6.8 billion surplus last year. In fact, the US hasn't had a trade deficit with Brazil since 2007. I mean, almost two decades. So why, why, why are we putting a punishing 50% tariff on Brazil?”
Hassett responded:
“Well, bottom line is the president has been very frustrated with negotiations with Brazil and also with the actions of Brazil. In the end, though, you know, we're trying to put America first. I think that a lot of people, when I'm talking to negotiators from other country is at some point they'll say, ‘What did we do wrong?’”
So let’s see: The president is frustrated, so even though there has been a trade surplus with Brazil (i.e., they buy more of our stuff than we do of theirs), he is going to stick it to them. By offending our customer, doesn’t that put America in a secondary place?
Does Hassett (or the president) know that even though Brazil is, along with America, in the Western Hemisphere, China is Brazil’s largest trading partner? Do they know that the B and C in the organization established to provide an alternative to Western-dominated economic institutions BRICS are Brazil and China? Does the US really want to push Brazil further into that space?
And the whole “when I’m talking to negotiators from [an]other country is at some point they’ll say, ‘What did we do wrong?’” is nothing short of pathetic: What seems to be lost is that the US is buying things from other countries because we want those things — those other countries aren’t doing anything “wrong” — although the way Trump is applying tariffs will make some of them realize that trading with the US may fit into that category.
Finally, the 50% copper tariffs.
Why?
Hassett: “The bottom line is that if there is a time of war, then we need to have the metals that we need to produce American weapons, and copper is a key component in many American weapon sets. And so, as we look forward to the threats that America faces, the president decided that we have plenty of copper in the US, but not enough copper production.”
Presently the US produces more than half the copper it needs. Presumably if there were a war of the magnitude that required more copper it would be diverted from applications like electric vehicles. Oh, wait, the elimination of the tax breaks for EVs in the budget bill is taking care of that.
Of the sources of imports, 31% come from Canada, which used to be a good thing before that country apparently starting doing something wrong.
What Hassett doesn’t mention is that transforming copper ore into copper is something with all manner of nasty things associated with it like arsenic, lead, mercury, radioactive materials, slag piles. . . .
Not the sort of stuff you’d associate with a “golden age.”Macaulay is pundit-at-large for The Hustings.