Lone Candle
Champion of Truth
“President Donald Trump says his tariffs protect American businesses, but more than 700 small businesses represented by We Pay The Tariffs beg to differ.”
https://reason.com/2025/10/30/these-small-business-owners-explain-how-trumps-tariffs-are-more-of-an-existential-crisis-than-covid/
Trump’s deal with China has made things less bad than they were before the meeting, but they are still way worse than they were before Trump engaged in a trade war with China.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dr-gB3BNykQ
“Board game makers have been hit particularly hard by Trump’s tariffs, which have raised the cost of importing just about everything. Cephalofair is based in California, but like many other businesses in the industry, Johnson’s company relies on contractors in China and Vietnam to make the tokens, pawns, cards, and other physical elements of its games.
Manufacturing all those parts in the U.S. is not possible if game companies want their products to be competitively priced. With high tariffs in place, the costs compound quickly. Nathan McNair, the co-owner of Pandasaurus Games, broke down the math in a post on his company’s website. The added cost of the tariffs makes every step more complicated, from design to sales, and can even change what games a company chooses to make in the first place. “This has not just squeezed our margin; this has substantially increased our risk,” he concluded.
Trump’s tariffs have already stung Cephalofair in several ways.
…
for businesses like Johnson’s, which can’t afford to risk the possibility of being hit with a massive tariff bill just because a shipment arrives at the wrong time.
Instead, those businesses will do what Johnson has done: Delay orders, slow production, and hope more stability emerges.”
https://reason.com/2025/10/31/trumps-tariff-chaos-crushes-board-game-makers-the-u-s-is-our-least-trustworthy-trading-partner/
“the “national security” argument clearly has been foundational to Trump’s trade policies. Higher tariffs will make America’s military more self-sufficient and capable against future threats; that’s the White House’s point of view.
One problem: that’s not how the people actually in charge of America’s national security see it.
“The Defense Department routinely acquires items and materials from foreign sources indispensable to meet defense needs that are not readily available or produced in sufficient quantities within the United States,” wrote John Tanaglia, director of pricing, contracting, and acquisitions for the Pentagon, in a memo dated August 25.
The memo instructs other officials at the Pentagon to provide “duty-free entry certificates” to military purchases that would otherwise be subject to tariffs. Doing so, the memo explains, will “maximize the Department’s budget to meet warfighter needs.”
First and foremost, that’s yet more proof that tariffs are raising costs for American purchasers of foreign goods. And it is true, of course, that Trump’s tariffs are straining budgets everywhere. Being able to ignore those costs must be nice—many, many businesses across the United States surely wish they had the power to simply wave away those costs as easily as the Pentagon apparently can.”
https://reason.com/2025/10/15/trump-says-tariffs-are-about-national-security-pentagon-officials-say-they-need-a-tariff-exemption/
“American goods are losing ground fast. A recent KPMG survey finds that “60% of businesses reported decreased overseas sales” in the first six months of President Donald Trump’s tariffs. For instance, U.S. liquor exports tumbled 9 percent in the second quarter of this year, with steep declines across the European Union, Canada, Britain, and Japan, which together buy about 70 percent of these exports. In another example, China—once a key customer for U.S. farm goods—has turned instead to Argentina and other suppliers, and total U.S. soybean exports are down 23 percent this year.
Smaller companies are also adversely affected. A valve and gas component maker in Napa Valley just announced that it will shut down a plant and discharge 237 employees, citing weak overseas demand linked to tariffs. Let’s not forget the upcoming Supreme Court case of V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. Trump, where U.S. importers and resellers of wine, electronics kits, apparel, and other goods argued that the April 2 “Liberation Day” tariffs disrupted their supply chains, forced steep price increases, and threatened their viability.
American consumers, too, are paying the price. KPMG finds that nearly half of American companies have already raised prices because of tariffs; two-thirds have passed at least part of those costs on to shoppers; and nearly 40 percent have paused hiring, with a third cutting jobs.
CEOs overwhelmingly expect tariffs to weigh on business for years. Goldman Sachs estimates U.S. consumers are now footing 55 percent of the total tariff bill, while foreign exporters bear only a sliver of the costs.”
https://reason.com/2025/10/16/trumps-new-tariffs-on-furniture-will-be-costly-and-americans-will-pay/
“”I think a global tariff is the right way to do things,” Cass said. “It’s a very simple, broad policy that conveys a value that we see in domestic production.”
That is, more or less, the view that the White House adopted during the first year of Trump’s second term: Making stuff in America matters, and the best way to encourage more production in America is to make it more expensive to import anything made somewhere.
Of course, there are two major flaws with that logic. First, there are things that can’t be made in America—or can’t be made here in sufficient quantities to satisfy Americans’ demand. Coffee, chocolate, bananas, and many other agricultural products, for example.
Second, making things in America often requires importing raw materials or intermediate goods. More than 50 percent of all American imports are unfinished goods that are used to make other things, from cars to houses to industrial pumping equipment and chocolate bars. If all those materials are suddenly more expensive, it becomes harder, not easier, to manufacture more things here.”
https://reason.com/2025/10/21/donald-trump-and-oren-cass-promised-tariffs-would-bring-prosperity-both-are-now-confronting-reality/
“By hiking tariffs on nearly all imports to the United States earlier this year, President Donald Trump effectively imposed one of the largest tax hikes in American history—and did so without congressional approval.
Now, the Trump administration is reportedly preparing to spend some of the revenue from those tax increases—also without congressional approval.”
https://reason.com/2025/10/03/trumps-planned-farm-bailout-should-require-congressional-approval/?nab=1
“”The most persuasive case against protectionism is not the standard one that undergraduate students are taught in their introductions to international economics, which goes like this: Tariffs distort the allocation of resources and impose a ‘deadweight burden,'” Mokyr wrote in the June 1996 issue of Reason. “The standard argument is certainly correct, but somehow it has failed to persuade many people since it was first enunciated by Adam Smith and David Ricardo.”
The better argument, instead, is that “protectionism and insularism impede innovation, depriving our children of the comfort and security that progress and economic growth bring,” he said. “Free trade and international competition not only lead to a better allocation of resources; they ensure that countries do not lull themselves into the technological lethargy that is the archenemy of economic growth.””
https://reason.com/2025/10/13/this-years-nobel-winners-for-economics-explained-how-innovation-makes-us-rich/?nab=1
“A decade ago, only a fairly small group of congressional Democrats voted to support President Barack Obama’s free trade agenda. Protectionism was on the rise, helping fuel the campaigns of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders. Most of the “yes” votes for Obama’s trade program were Republicans.”
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2025/10/05/jared-polis-trump-democrats-campaign-free-trade-inflation-00592744
“President Donald Trump is considering imposing a 100 percent tariff on semiconductors to incentivize chipmakers to invest in domestic manufacturing, a move that would make it harder to build out American chip fabrication.
…
The Chamber of Commerce warns that a 1 percent increase in tariffs on chips and semiconductor manufacturing equipment will increase the construction costs of all announced domestic semiconductor fabrication plants (valued at $540 billion) by as much as $3.5 billion. A 100 percent rate increase, then, could increase construction costs for these projects by $350 billion. Moreover, “additional costs will reduce demand for end market products [and] reduce investments in semiconductor R&D,” diminishing American semiconductor dominance instead of enhancing it.
…
Intel, “the only American company [that is] capable of producing leading-edge logic semiconductors,” warned that “Section 232 tariffs could increase U.S. manufacturing costs for essential materials and components.” The Semiconductor Industry Association, a trade association and lobbying group, said that “removing trade and other barriers to U.S. chips in overseas markets,” which account for 70 percent of revenue to the U.S. semiconductor industry, is key to making the expansion of domestic capacity economically viable. Right now, “the complete onshoring of all semiconductor supply chain elements is not feasible, much less in a short period of time,” because “supply chains have evolved over decades and cannot be rearranged overnight or even within a decade””
https://reason.com/2025/09/29/trumps-100-percent-chip-tariff-could-make-it-more-expensive-to-build-more-semiconductors-in-the-u-s/