Bernie while most rational people accept the premise that made in America items will cost more, I think you might be off base as to how much more expensive items will be.
A $100 retail pair of Nike's doesn't automatically equate to double the price just because it's made in the USA, and neither does a $50 shirt. It might be $60 or $85.
It really depends on manufacturing capacity and being able to produce at scale.
Both those things are untested at this point assuming companies want to do that.
If it's financially unviable, companies won't even attempt it. They aren't putting patriotism over profit anytime soon.
John has it exactly right.
I don't think Trump cares about the rest of his political legacy, His ego will and always has been the driving motivator behind his decision making process.
So if he economically burns down the country and takes the GOP with it, in a vainglorious attempt at transforming America, he'll do that.
Even if he turns out to be a lame duck after the mid-terms and the worst President in living memory, he won't see it that way and will claim he was one of the greatest to ever hold office!
1. I agree with Bernie and John that a lot of people don't fully understand what tariffs are, or how they work, despite Trump talking about them in his campaign. This is because Trump has made many contradictory or misleading statements about tariffs, either because he doesn't really understand them himself, or he is intentionally misleading people to get them to support his policy.
2. A tariff is primarily intended to protect a domestic industry and their workers from foreign competitors who can undercut them on price, mainly due to labor costs, but sometimes due to efficiencies. If you want to put tariffs in place to protect EXISTING American jobs in specific industries, due to some overriding national interest, that is a legitimate topic of debate, that should be vetted and passed thru the Congress.
HOWEVER, thinking that tariffs are going to "bring back jobs" that have been gone for 40 years in some cases, is simply foolish. No CEO of a major company is going to spend billions of dollars building a brand new factory in the US knowing that: a) Trump can and will likely change his mind at the drop of a hat, and b) By the time the brand new factory is fully operational, Trump will likely be out of office, and the next POTUS can reverse his tariffs with the stroke of a pen.
3. Bernie also made a really good point - do we really want to become a nation of people who make t-shirts and sneakers? Or do we want to be the next generation of innovators, who are at the forefront in areas like AI, medical advances, cybersecurity and cryptography? I also don't hear Trump complaining about all the software developer jobs that have been "stolen" by India over the past 25 years. Is he going to tariff India, or does he not understand the tech industry, and therefore has no interest in it?
4. Lastly, I agree with John, and disagree with Bernie, in that I don't think Trump cares about political damage. I think he already knows the Democrats are probably going to win back the House in 2026, and that they will probably impeach him. In fact, he will try to use the impeachment to his advantage, as he did with all the legal prosecutions he faced during his time out of office. Victimhood and grievance is a key part of the MAGA ideology, which used to be exclusive to the Left.
BERNIE, you asked the Mega people” are you happy now”? Yes, I am happy that Trump is president.
The both of you are narrow minded when it comes to the big picture. We have a 37 trillion burden and if we don’t do something about it, it’s not gonna go away. As a Vietnam veteran, I’m concerned and Trump is too that we have to turn this country around otherwise our grandkids will be speaking Chinese!
The reason why we’re not speaking German now is that the United States supplied the second world war Allies with food, clothing, and all types of war material. We don’t have that capacity anymore. We have to get some of it back.
The tariff talks are eventually going to lower our 37 trillion burden and bring back our automobile industry etc.
AGAIN, Trump's tariffs are neither intended to, nor can they possibly (by any economic theory imaginable), lower our debt. Believing otherwise is like believing that unicorns will fix the problem.
Trump, during his first term, added more to our national debt than any president in U.S. history, and his policies now, by every economic forecast, show him only increasing the debt by trillions more.
If you truly cared about fixing the debt, you would be outraged by what Trump is doing, not supportive.
Folks not only do NOT understand tariffs, they are too lazy to learn or even Google the info to comprehend. It's not rocket science-- it's complacency
in America that is the driving force behind ' low- information' people ; my observation. Yes Trump, and we can bank on it, will strive to be a winner, always a winner. There is some comfort in knowing that fact about Mr. Gotham city Trump. As far as Bill O. goes, thank God he can be a bug in Pres. Trumps' ear- he tells him to ' do the right thing for our country' and I pray he does.
After Trump won in November, I saw two old friends on Facebook share assurances that prices would finally now come back down. I could only shake my head.
I don't believe American manufacturers of cellular phones charge $2000 per phone and I don't believe American manufactures of sneakers charge $200 to $100/Nike sneakers out of South East Asia. I paid $500 for my Samsung Galaxy phone in 2019 (mfg in Texas because my neice works for them). I would never pay $200 or $100 for a pair of sneakers. I bought sneakers last year at Target for $39.95 and don't say they were manufactured overseas only because of the more inexpensive price.
John and Bernie, I can tell you what China is really good at. They are really "really" good at making American products for pennies on the dollar compared to the cost of American companies. Do you believe the Chinese strategy is to make technically superior products to compete head-to-head with American companies? I think you know the answer. And do you believe it is in their strategy to undermine American initiatives including America’s manufacturing?
China is in it for China. Never been any doubt of that.
This trade war "strategy", against close to 200 U.S. trade-partners, does not make our situation better... in U.S. manufacturing or otherwise. It only hurts us.
Aloha. I don't recall the example you cite, but I'm sure my general point was to suggest that one specific example can extend to a much larger example in the same general area. Here's a definition of writ large ... which may or may not make my case.
"Writ large" means something like "in a more obvious or larger form," or "on a grand scale." It's often used to suggest that something is a clearer or more prominent version of something else.
For example:
"The corruption in this company is just society's problems writ large."
→ Meaning: The company shows society's problems in a clearer, magnified way.
Aloha my friend -- who in a 30 minute discussion, where I uttered thousands of words, picks out one place where he says (perhaps correctly) that I misused a term.
I had querried Bernie once before when he used the term "writ large" in an earlier column. Accordingly, here's our exchange:
<What's this with "writ large"? Ever since Sen. Vance used the term, it seems everyone else - including VP Harris - is following. — Bob H.
<I added the writ large in the final edit, not thinking clearly enough to come up with something better. So, you make a good point about this particular example, but you also make a valid point, writ large.>
It seems more like a space filler or a substitute for "um" or "uh." Anyway, that's my story and I'm sticking to it writ large
Bernie while most rational people accept the premise that made in America items will cost more, I think you might be off base as to how much more expensive items will be.
A $100 retail pair of Nike's doesn't automatically equate to double the price just because it's made in the USA, and neither does a $50 shirt. It might be $60 or $85.
It really depends on manufacturing capacity and being able to produce at scale.
Both those things are untested at this point assuming companies want to do that.
If it's financially unviable, companies won't even attempt it. They aren't putting patriotism over profit anytime soon.
John has it exactly right.
I don't think Trump cares about the rest of his political legacy, His ego will and always has been the driving motivator behind his decision making process.
So if he economically burns down the country and takes the GOP with it, in a vainglorious attempt at transforming America, he'll do that.
Even if he turns out to be a lame duck after the mid-terms and the worst President in living memory, he won't see it that way and will claim he was one of the greatest to ever hold office!
Great episode guys! A few random thoughts:
1. I agree with Bernie and John that a lot of people don't fully understand what tariffs are, or how they work, despite Trump talking about them in his campaign. This is because Trump has made many contradictory or misleading statements about tariffs, either because he doesn't really understand them himself, or he is intentionally misleading people to get them to support his policy.
2. A tariff is primarily intended to protect a domestic industry and their workers from foreign competitors who can undercut them on price, mainly due to labor costs, but sometimes due to efficiencies. If you want to put tariffs in place to protect EXISTING American jobs in specific industries, due to some overriding national interest, that is a legitimate topic of debate, that should be vetted and passed thru the Congress.
HOWEVER, thinking that tariffs are going to "bring back jobs" that have been gone for 40 years in some cases, is simply foolish. No CEO of a major company is going to spend billions of dollars building a brand new factory in the US knowing that: a) Trump can and will likely change his mind at the drop of a hat, and b) By the time the brand new factory is fully operational, Trump will likely be out of office, and the next POTUS can reverse his tariffs with the stroke of a pen.
3. Bernie also made a really good point - do we really want to become a nation of people who make t-shirts and sneakers? Or do we want to be the next generation of innovators, who are at the forefront in areas like AI, medical advances, cybersecurity and cryptography? I also don't hear Trump complaining about all the software developer jobs that have been "stolen" by India over the past 25 years. Is he going to tariff India, or does he not understand the tech industry, and therefore has no interest in it?
4. Lastly, I agree with John, and disagree with Bernie, in that I don't think Trump cares about political damage. I think he already knows the Democrats are probably going to win back the House in 2026, and that they will probably impeach him. In fact, he will try to use the impeachment to his advantage, as he did with all the legal prosecutions he faced during his time out of office. Victimhood and grievance is a key part of the MAGA ideology, which used to be exclusive to the Left.
All great points!
Dang it! I should have pursued that degree from Trump University so I would understand how he "put his famous brain to work for the little guy."
Great insight and commentary!!!!
BERNIE, you asked the Mega people” are you happy now”? Yes, I am happy that Trump is president.
The both of you are narrow minded when it comes to the big picture. We have a 37 trillion burden and if we don’t do something about it, it’s not gonna go away. As a Vietnam veteran, I’m concerned and Trump is too that we have to turn this country around otherwise our grandkids will be speaking Chinese!
The reason why we’re not speaking German now is that the United States supplied the second world war Allies with food, clothing, and all types of war material. We don’t have that capacity anymore. We have to get some of it back.
The tariff talks are eventually going to lower our 37 trillion burden and bring back our automobile industry etc.
AGAIN, Trump's tariffs are neither intended to, nor can they possibly (by any economic theory imaginable), lower our debt. Believing otherwise is like believing that unicorns will fix the problem.
Trump, during his first term, added more to our national debt than any president in U.S. history, and his policies now, by every economic forecast, show him only increasing the debt by trillions more.
If you truly cared about fixing the debt, you would be outraged by what Trump is doing, not supportive.
Bernie and John are anything BUT narrow-minded. Come on, man. Now that is B.S.
This is a must read on the grift that keeps on giving, but only if you're connected.
https://washingtonmonthly.com/2025/04/16/trumps-huge-tariff-exemption-grift/
Folks not only do NOT understand tariffs, they are too lazy to learn or even Google the info to comprehend. It's not rocket science-- it's complacency
in America that is the driving force behind ' low- information' people ; my observation. Yes Trump, and we can bank on it, will strive to be a winner, always a winner. There is some comfort in knowing that fact about Mr. Gotham city Trump. As far as Bill O. goes, thank God he can be a bug in Pres. Trumps' ear- he tells him to ' do the right thing for our country' and I pray he does.
After Trump won in November, I saw two old friends on Facebook share assurances that prices would finally now come back down. I could only shake my head.
Some day they may, but not all at once. I doubt food ever will come down in price.
I don't believe American manufacturers of cellular phones charge $2000 per phone and I don't believe American manufactures of sneakers charge $200 to $100/Nike sneakers out of South East Asia. I paid $500 for my Samsung Galaxy phone in 2019 (mfg in Texas because my neice works for them). I would never pay $200 or $100 for a pair of sneakers. I bought sneakers last year at Target for $39.95 and don't say they were manufactured overseas only because of the more inexpensive price.
John and Bernie, I can tell you what China is really good at. They are really "really" good at making American products for pennies on the dollar compared to the cost of American companies. Do you believe the Chinese strategy is to make technically superior products to compete head-to-head with American companies? I think you know the answer. And do you believe it is in their strategy to undermine American initiatives including America’s manufacturing?
China is in it for China. Never been any doubt of that.
This trade war "strategy", against close to 200 U.S. trade-partners, does not make our situation better... in U.S. manufacturing or otherwise. It only hurts us.
Dear Bernie,
Writ large? Really? Are you aware that you used/misused that term in your dialogue?
Maybe you really are an equal opportunity offender.
Mr Hadley
Aloha. I don't recall the example you cite, but I'm sure my general point was to suggest that one specific example can extend to a much larger example in the same general area. Here's a definition of writ large ... which may or may not make my case.
"Writ large" means something like "in a more obvious or larger form," or "on a grand scale." It's often used to suggest that something is a clearer or more prominent version of something else.
For example:
"The corruption in this company is just society's problems writ large."
→ Meaning: The company shows society's problems in a clearer, magnified way.
Aloha my friend -- who in a 30 minute discussion, where I uttered thousands of words, picks out one place where he says (perhaps correctly) that I misused a term.
"who in a 30 minute discussion, where I uttered thousands of words, picks out one place where he says (perhaps correctly) that I misused a term."
Answer: Lawyers. LOL
Of course! We charge by the syllable But here, you get my mana'o gratis. :)
hyper -critical for no other reason than a solo- pseudo 'crap fit' nothing burger!
I had querried Bernie once before when he used the term "writ large" in an earlier column. Accordingly, here's our exchange:
<What's this with "writ large"? Ever since Sen. Vance used the term, it seems everyone else - including VP Harris - is following. — Bob H.
<I added the writ large in the final edit, not thinking clearly enough to come up with something better. So, you make a good point about this particular example, but you also make a valid point, writ large.>
It seems more like a space filler or a substitute for "um" or "uh." Anyway, that's my story and I'm sticking to it writ large