What do you think of President Trump’s threat of last night to impose tariffs on products from Mexico? So far I haven’t found anyone who thinks it’s a good idea and the most common reaction seems to be that it’s “mindbogglingly stupid”.
I think there’s a lot of moving parts here. I think there is, indeed, an obvious crisis at our southern border. It isn’t being created by Mexicans trying to get into this country illegally but Guatemalans, Hondurans, and Salvadorans making their way through Mexico to the United States to file largely fraudulent asylum claims.
The tariff threat smacks to me of Maslow’s Hammer: when the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem begins to look like a nail. There are plenty of other strategies that President Trump could use other than tariffs and sweeping tariffs could undermine all sort of other initiatives we have going with Mexico.
I’ve already given my proposal for reducing immigration from Mexico and Central America. I understand the frustration but I don’t think this is a productive way of venting it.
What do you think?
Dave, your website has reversed its background from white to black (at least on my machine), rendering it virtually illegible. Please fix.
What computer, operating system, and browser are you running?
I have tried six different computers and several operating systems and browsers. The issue appears to be specific to IE and Edge.
I am on Chrome. The background is all white, but the text is black.
On Topic:
I am still thing it through, but I am leaning towards using tariffs for economic reasons, only. While there is an economic component to illegal immigration, the border crisis is more of an enforcement issue.
Safari. Half the time it is white and half black. Very PC.
Back on topic, this seems like a pretty blunt tool that may have side effects you dont want. I might actually work, who knows, but it feels pretty impulsive. Like much of what he does not well thought out or planned.
Steve
I agree with TastyBits on both accounts (also Chrome user). I’m less anti-tariff than most, but I don’t want to see it become impossible for any country to enter into any trade agreement with the U.S. ever again.
Maybe I’m being unduly critical but I think that Trump is the kind of manager who very much goes by his gut, is very seat-of-the-pants. I’ve had managers like that. It can be a bum py ride.
Although I agree with the comments that CuriousOnlooker made to the effect that at least Trump is doing something, I’m skeptical about using tariffs with respect to China. I’d be more inclined to use other tools available to the president that would (IMO) quickly prevent companies from using Chinese sources.
The site looks fine to me in Edge and Chrome.
Don’t have an opinion on the tariff threat – I’m not informed on the details.
I think the EU just initiated a WTO complaint against China on the matter of technology transfers. (Maybe someone mentioned that here) I think there would be an opportunity for international coalition to isolate China, but Trump likes tariffs.
I don’t recall what your “fix” was Dave for immigration. Perhaps you could post a link to that column.
In the meantime, I think Trump is running out of both patience and options dealing with the border. He has had to overcome those who say it’s a “manufactured crisis,” but who have merely viewed the situation from the safe confines of DC. In the meantime you have a majority of the CBP, current and former DHS secretaries and a slew of others who have either covered or been on the border saying it’s out of control and needs Congress’s assistance. I’m also hearing that some border officers are threatening to just walk off the job because it has become so chaotic and unmanageable.
So, how is an administration supposed to correct this problem when an opposing congress denies you the tools, humanitarian aid, changing the laws to deter much of the overcrowding, refusing to come to the table even when offers have been extended dealing with the DACA problem? Per the usual it seems the party out of power must see greater benefits in resistance than cooperation. IMO, that’s why Trump is taking out that hammer, as an act of desperation, even though there are negative unintended consequences and political blow-back to be contended with in association with putting these tariffs on Mexico.
It is counterproductive; it will certainly be challenged in court. Unlike the other tariffs this has not followed the required months long rule-making process.
A reasonable short term ask for Mexico is to suppress human smuggling / human trafficking. It breeds illegality and a recipe for a horrific incident. The US should offer some type of work visa that migrants can apply for from their home countries.
Economic development of Southern Mexico and Central America is the long term solution; but it is dependent on willing Governments to reform themselves.
“So, how is an administration supposed to correct this problem when an opposing congress ”
Glad you asked since it is very easy.
1) When you controlled both houses of Congress you could have passed legislation.
2) Now that you dont control both houses, you have to make a deal (that word deal seems familiar, almost like someone in politics claims to be a great deal maker) that will let the other side have some of what they want in the deal. (Like they offered before.)
“that’s why Trump is taking out that hammer, as an act of desperation, ”
No, they essentially had an agreement before, but Miller (representing the farthest right) nixed it.
Steve
I’ve mentioned my proposals many times. Mandatory eVerify with much more serious penalties coupled with a publicity campaign/information op in Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador. Greatly increased number of work visas for which people in those countries are eligible. Skills-based immigration very much along the lines that the Trump Administration as put forward. An end to sponsorship and diversity visas.
Those first two measures alone should take some of the pressure off and allow resources to be placed where needed.
Other measures: eliminate the judge-created requirements for families with children, increase the number of people reviewing asylum applications (IMO at this point 90% are bogus).
As CuriousOnlooker noted above, the long-term plan should foster economic development in Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador.
I also think that the Supreme Court needs to be pressured to discipline lower courts to a greater extent than they have. Lower courts are not The Resistance or at least they shouldn’t be.
Basically, I second Jan’s comment.
And I would love it if there were economic measures that would make Guatemalans want to stay home. But we know that’s not under our control.
I see Trump’s move as arm twisting, and Mexico knows it’s negotiable.
With our political situation as it is, Trump has no other lever.
I don’t know what you guys are talking about when it comes to the IT talk. I’m on an iPod and google. Something is different, but it’s perfectly readable.
Far under reported unless it’s politically convenient (child separation; cages) is the absolutely horrific practice of child recycling, the rapes and so on. In that context I don’t really care if the current approach is a hammer, or crude. And I’m not impressed that European Gentleman approaches are effective. A hot poker straight up thecass hs a tendency to focus attention. The Mexican government need some focus. They are laughing at us.
“Trump is the kind of manager who very much goes by his gut, is very seat-of-the-pants. I’ve had managers like that. It can be a bumpy ride.â€
Indeed. But acute situations with intransigent issues most often require cut and slash managers. In situations like that no one promised you a rose garden. There is a reason this situation has lingered on for decades: managers unwilling to do what is necessary. Our term for them is “ ex-managers,â€
” I think there would be an opportunity for international coalition to isolate China, but Trump likes tariffs.”
If both the EU and the US isolated China that seems like it would be more effective that just us putting tariffs on China, but Trump seems to believe in bilateral actions only. Plus tariffs seem to be his only trick.
Steve
Dave, your suggestions are sound, have been bantered around by others, but seem to fall on deaf ears in both political camps. Unfortunately, the border problems have gotten so severe that measures giving immediate relief are now needed. It seems to me that the first “simple†remedy would be to reverse the catch and release provision. Hiring more judges, more border patrol, and putting border security (whether physical barriers, sensors, or whatever works) at the most porous and corrupted areas of the border would definitely help. But, such measures need bipartisan support, and that’s not possible with the mix of hyper partisans now occupying congress.
Dave, it’s now black on white and very readable. Thank you. However, all your former web links are gone.
A real comment: Whatever your opinion of the tariff threat, it certainly got AMLO’s immediate and undivided attention. Which IMO was the main intent, especially since if the USMCA fails in the Mexican congress (it’s being debated right now, I believe) all trade agreements between the US and Mexico will revert to pre-NAFTA agreements that were in place. NOT a good deal for Mexico. BTW, during his campaign for President AMLO announced that migration was a human right and that he intended to flood the USA with migrants. A sort of national-level Cloward-Piven tactic. Sundance at CTH has a good write-up on this including the quote on migration:
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/05/31/mexican-president-lopez-obrador-asks-for-emergency-meeting-friday