Blog

Bad Bunny and the Influencers: The sad consequence of social media

I keep seeing the term “influencer” and was wondering “what is an influencer” and who does an influencer influence? Wikipedia says “An influencer, also known as a social media influencer or online influencer, is a person who builds a grassroots online presence through engaging content such as photos, videos, and updates.” I also saw this definition: “An influencer is someone who has the power to affect the purchasing decisions of others because of his or her authority, knowledge, position, or relationship with his or her audience. Influencers are usually active on social media platforms like Facebook, YouTube, X, TikTok, and Instagram.” 

So I guess that there are at least two types of “influencers”: one who influences opinions and one who influences purchases. But aren’t teachers influencers even though they may not have an online presence? Maybe it is just me and my scope of knowledge but I don’t know anyone who is influenced to purchase stuff because of someone on social media. I also don’t know anyone so addicted to a media personality to be swayed by their opinion either. Yes I know there are those who may be “influenced” but, thank goodness, I just don’t know anyone personally who is. I do remember CBS’s Walter Cronkite being called “the most trusted man in America” and Lyndon Johnson saying regarding the Viet Nam war “If I have lost Cronkite, I’ve lost Middle America.” Is Joe Rogan today’s Cronkite?

What got me thinking about influencers was media reporting on reactions by certain personalities to the Super Bowl halftime show. Of course, those on the right hated it while just as predictably those on the left loved it. But what did us mostly normal folk think? I haven’t seen a poll yet but I can report on a very small sample. As has been the case for a number of years, my other half and I joined the same set of couples for a wonderful gathering hosted by a close and dear friend to watch the Super Bowl. Usually at halftime a few of us gather in the kitchen to engage in conversation when the game is in hiatus. So I did not watch Bad Bunny. In fact, I have only watched one halftime show – Beyonce in 2013. After halftime, I asked “How was the show?” The most common answer was “It was ok – but a bit risqué.” They were referring to the dancers but not the lyrics (no one spoke Spanish). Reports were that many parents were upset over what some called the “excessive twerking and raunchy dancing” during the performance. 

Later when I read the translation of the lyrics, it seems that “risqué” might have been a wee bit understatement. Were the lyrics closed captioned? I hope not. Go see the English translation of “Tití Me Preguntó” and you will see why one republican congressman is calling for the FCC to fine Mr Bunny for vulgarity. On the other hand the Washington Post – which obviously has different standards – said “In general, Bad Bunny’s Super Bowl halftime show had the kind of wholesome, traditional family values that would have fit right in with some of the more sentimental commercials that appeared during the game.” Eye of the beholder, I guess. By the way, the most sentimental commercial was the Budweiser one with the eagle and the Clydesdale. How the Post thought that Mr Bunny and the Budweiser commercial were somehow aligned in “wholesome, traditional family values” defies credulity.

What about the influencers? Some people labelled as conservative influencers had a take that I thought called into question their intelligence. Someone named Jake Paul said that Bad Bunny was a “fake American citizen.” Huh? What is a “fake American citizen?” Does Mr Paul think that Mr Bunny and his fellow Puerto Ricans are “fake American citizens” of just Mr Bunny? With an attitude like that I would contend that Mr Paul is the “fake American citizen.” Then there is someone named Laura Loomer, who is reputed to be a MAGA influencer with the ear of the president. Ms Loomer said of the performance “This isn’t White enough for me.” (I thought Mr Bunny was wearing white). She also claimed that she “can’t even watch a Super Bowl anymore because immigrants have literally ruined everything.” If she really said this, Ms. Loomer is a racist fool and anyone influenced by her is also a fool. Was she referring to the eight children of immigrants who were playing in the Super Bowl? Was she referring to the racial mix of the NFL? Maybe she can watch old films of pro football and basketball in the 1950s to see all white sport teams. Or maybe she can watch film of my years at the University of Georgia from 1962-1966 when no black athlete played on the Georgia campus. Or then she probably loves the Winter Olympics – especially the events on snow. Again, anyone who claims to be influenced by this woman should be embarrassed. 

However, on the other side, the laudatory comments were almost as bad and biased – again see the Washington Post. ESPN’s Sportscenter was full of in your face DEI talk and was totally unwatchable. I turned it off. One writer wrote that “the Super Bowl is a color-blind celebration of excellence. It is the exact opposite of the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion efforts that the Trump coalition opposes.” To be kind, this is idiotic. This is not the embodiment of DEI at all. It is just the opposite. The Super Bowl and the world of sport have absolutely nothing to do with “equity”. Equity seeks to normalize outcomes. The Super Bowl is the opposite of that. The Super Bowl is about “equality” not “equity.” No player on the field got there in order to meet a quota – which is what equity is all about. They were on the field because of excellence and because of excellence there is inclusion resulting in diversity. 

We don’t want equity in sports which ideally would result in all teams finishing with equal records. We should not want equity in life either. That is why socialism always fails. Sport is the opposite of socialism because it rewards individual excellence, achievement and in teamwork in team sports. Capitalism anyone?

I have opposed Trump’s war on DEI as being misguided. But I also opposed how DEI was implemented, practiced and abused especially in our universities. Years ago I wrote why the left favored “equity” over “equality.” The mess in higher education is a tribute to equity. The Super Bowl and excellence in sport are tributes to equality. And as to influencer, I don’t if this post changed anyone’s mind. Influencer I am not.

Who is stupider, Russian recruits or the rest of the world?

Excuse me but you don’t look Russian

Does this look like a Russian soldier fighting in the Ukraine? He is actually Kenyan. We know about the 12,000 or so North Koreans that are fighting alongside the Russians but Kenyans? Actually they are not alone.  Fighters from thirty six African countries including Cameroon, Ghana, Senegal, and Uganda are adding a bit of color to the front lines in that brutal war. Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says that foreign troops from China, Cuba, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Pakistan, and Nepal are also fighting for the Russians. Shades of the French Foreign Legion! However, there are foreigners fighting for the Ukraine as well – Brits, Canadians, Americans, Colombians and other westerners. The British rented Hessian soldiers during the Revolutionary War. I guess this may be a throwback to when countries like the Swiss leased out mercenaries to both sides of the same war. It’s highly likely to be the case here. Some reports say as many as 35,000 foreigners fighting in this war are from 50 different countries. The media seems to concentrate on saying that many of these fighters are duped into joining the Russian army. If that is true then the Ukraine is a test of Darwinism. It is hard to believe some of the accounts of how the media is portraying these recruits. Call they be that stupid?

The world is getting stupider

Maybe the Russian recruits are that stupid because it seems that everyone else is getting stupider. Literacy levels and math proficiency in this country are falling. Test scores show that almost each generation is less proficient in math and reading that the previous one. But we are not alone! In an OECD report of literacy levels in 31 countries it finds that literacy levels are declining in almost all of them.

https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/2024/12/do-adults-have-the-skills-they-need-to-thrive-in-a-changing-world_4396f1f1.html

The report says that in literacy, numeracy and adaptive problem solving proficiency, only Finland, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden excelled in all three areas. Literacy proficiency has declined more strongly among men than women, but men continue to outperform women in numeracy and adaptive problem solving. Chile, Croatia, France, Hungary, Israel, Italy, Korea, Lithuania, Poland, Portugal and Spain consistently perform below the OECD average in all skills domains. I was shocked to see Israel and Korea listed here. Notably, the lowest-performing adults saw the biggest decline in literacy skills, and on average across only one in five adults is only able to understand simple texts or solve basic arithmetic. Duh. Also adults with college education consistently score higher than those who have no college. But all education is not the same across countries and higher levels of education do not always equate to better skills and knowledge. The study finds that Finnish high school graduates consistently outperform college-educated adults in several countries, including Chile, Israel and Lithuania. Again I am shocked to see Israel on this list of poor performers. In countries with a large influx of migrants, the migrants are typically poorer performers than native residents. I guess that should be expected of the first generation of migrants but I would like to know how subsequent generations fare. I am reminded that almost all high performers at the national spelling bee seem to be children of immigrants.

The study also notes that internet usage has grown to 93. percent of those surveyed. This confirms what I have always said that we are now substituting tik tok and X for knowledge. The world is made up of three types: the three percent who make things happen, the 7 percent who know what’s happening and the 90 percent who haven’t a clue what’s happening. I had hoped that the internet would shrink the 90 percent as they became better informed. The OECD report shows I was wrong. The 90 percent is staying constant but is getting dumber. I was once criticized by a student who didn’t care for my course requirements and said “Why do I have to know anything when I have the internet?” Later in life he probably said “I went to the doctor and got a vasectomy because I didn’t want kids. When I got home they were still there.”

Given the failure of the US education industrial complex to educate our children we are getting dumber as a nation and may be less capable to compete on a worldwide level. But is that really true as the rest of the world is getting dumber along with us in a race to the bottom. The OECD study has opened my eyes but I get little comfort in finding that we are not alone in the march to stupidity. Speaking of marches, when is the best time to have a parade? March 4^th. Someone once said “Life is hard. But it is harder if you are stupid.” It’s even more harder if you are stupider.

Can Trump really be this insecure or this stupid?

It can’t really be true that the president told Chuck Schumer that he would release billions of frozen dollars for a New York infrastructure project if Schumer would get the Dulles Airport and Penn Station to be named after him. What is it with all this naming stuff? He had the board of the Kennedy Center that he had put in place while naming himself president of the board to rename the Center the Donald J. Trump and John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts. I thought you only put “memorial” on something if the person were dead. But he is shutting down the Center for two years saying it is for repairs when everyone knows it is because they are having difficulty booking acts to play there. 

Trump just loves to see his name on things. If its his buildings, golf courses, hotels or casinos that’s one thing but he has put his name on a new class of warships, Trump Accounts and Trump Rx. All this is sheer ego running amok. I am certain that we will see the name coming down once he leaves office, unless it was put there by an act of congress. I was surprised that his unilaterally trying to rename the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of America wasn’t the Gulf of Trump instead. Trump even wants his name on the new stadium being built for the Washington Redskins (er Commanders). How about the Trump Gold Card?

Politicians curry his favor by proposing to name stuff after him. One proposed June 14 as “Trump’s Birthday and Flag Day.” Another introduced legislation that calls for Washington Metro to be the “Trump Train.” Still another wants to rename Palm Beach International Airport as Donald J. Trump International Airport. Then there is the Trump Institute of Peace which replaced the United States Institute of Peace (USIP). He wants to add his picture to $1 coins set to be minted in celebration of the United States’ 250th anniversary in 2026. He has put his name on the ballroom addition taking the place of the East Wing of the White House (Trump’s House?). Remember Trump University?

Bernie Sanders has introduced legislation barring the naming of any federal building or land after a sitting president. I wonder what the vote in the House would be on such a bill? Would it even pass the Senate? Sanders said “If the American people want to name buildings after a president who is deceased, that’s fine. That’s what we do. But to use federal buildings to enhance your own position very much sounds like the ‘Great Leader’ mentality of North Korea, and that is not something that I think the American people want.” Bernie is just taking a backhanded swipe at the president comparing him to an autocratic dictator. Trump, though he may aspire to be like Kim Jong Un, just is self absorbed with a boundless self-obsession showing a outsized, but very fragile, ego. Am I the only one who after seeing the president’s name plastered on everything is starting to view it as graffiti?

Just to be curious, I wondered how much stuff was named for Trump. AI almost blew up. AI couldn’t give me a specific number because of all the namings in progress. So I went to Wikipedia and the list was 22 pages long. Well be assured, no way I am naming this blog after him (since he passed me over to name someone else chairman of the Fed).

There is a new section of I-95 being proposed to be built in South Carolina and some local politicians suggested that it will be named the Donald J. Trump (Memorial) Highway in hopes of getting federal funding. One of the supporters said “He seems to like his name on things. And if it makes a difference, I’m all about supporting it. I’d just like to have a road paved.”

Well the chances that Trump might support this South Carolina project took a hit when its Senator Tim Scott was critical of a video that the president posted which showed the Obamas depicted as monkeys. Scott said that he was “Praying it was fake because it’s the most racist thing I’ve seen out of this White House. The President should remove it.” The president made some lame excuse that he hadn’t seen the video and that it was posted by a White House aide. He said that he wasn’t going to apologize and the aide would not be fired. His press secretary Karoline (Lying) Leavitt was also defiant saying “This is from an internet meme video depicting President Trump as the King of the Jungle and Democrats as characters from the Lion King. Please stop the fake outrage and report on something today that actually matters to the American public.”

Fake outrage my rear end! I am outraged at the sheer stupidity of it all.

American socialism, where Bernie meets Trump

I am sometimes asked by my good friend Hallerin Hilton Hill to appear on his afternoon radio talk show. On more than one occasion he said “You are a republican?” And I answer yes because it is the only one of the two major parties that pays lip service to free markets. But that day may be past. Maybe it should now be that only one party used to pay lip service to the markets. I guess I have always been a conservative. My parents, my college and graduate school education all embraced conservative values. I used to be a fan of the Heritage Foundation under the leadership of Ed Feulner and Edwin Meese. Their mantra dovetailed nicely with my own values: “free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.” No more.

Those values are the same that I learned from my parents who steadfastly loved America even though living in the south under Jim Crow and the starkest racial discrimination. But my folks talked of how far we had come as a people, were optimistic about the journey we had taken and realistic about how far we had to go. Both Mom and Dad’s grandparents were slaves giving credence to that journey. Both would tell us of the progress made from one generation to the next and only in America could that journey be made. They were republicans because they could not be in the same party and the racist democrats. Southern republicans were probably racist too but they kept a low profile and were mostly invisible in those days.

So when I went to the University of Georgia and had my first economics course, the text was Alchian and Allen’s University Economics. I still have that book today. In contrast to Paul Samuelson’s text, Alchian and Allen was one of market economics and taught the virtues of free markets, limited government and individual freedom. I knew immediately that I would major in economics. Georgia it seems only had market economists. I went to Ohio State to write under the great Karl Brunner who was an even stronger market economist and was good friends with Milton Friedman. No wonder I am who I am.

But today conservatism has been co-opted by something alien. Most congressional republicans have seemingly gone over to the dark side. The Heritage Foundation has abandoned basic principles and is losing many of its scholars, some going to Mike Pence’s think tank. Heritage is now aligning itself with the principles of Donald Trump. It flew the American flag upside down when Trump was convicted in New York. What Heritage has become is what many who call themselves “republicans” have become and that is a Trump “republican”. This is a new conservative and it is too bad that the term “neocon” is already taken.

Mind you, there is much to like about this president. But this is a president that has abandoned traditional conservatism and has dragged the republican party along with him. This is no leader espousing free enterprise and limited government like Ronald Reagan. This is a president (with Bernie Sanders) who wants to impose a 10% cap on credit card interest rates, have his own version of quantitative easing by buying $200 billion in mortgage bonds (Janet Yellen), buy shares in private firms and dictate their actions (Sanders again), let chipmakers sell to the Chinese but take part of their profits, set pharmaceutical prices (any democrat), confiscate Venezuelan oil and dictate who gets the spoils for its sale, stop investors from buying single family homes (Elizabeth Warren) and stop stock buybacks (again any democrat). 

What bothers me is that Trump in many ways is emulating left wing socialists in feathering his own nest. While in office Forbes says that his personal wealth has increased by an estimated $3 billion. In the rare earth deals where the government has taken a position in private firms, Trump’s son Don, Jr.’s 1789 Capital venture fund invested in one of the companies months before the administration announced its funding and equity stake. Commerce secretary Lutnick said “This investment ensures our supply chains are resilient and no longer reliant on foreign nations.” What Lutnick didn’t say was that Cantor Fitzgerald, which is chaired by his son Brandon was hired to raise private financing. Trump himself bought stock in Paramount/ Netflix while they were engaged in takeover talks. Some call this crony capitalism. I have other names in mind.

All the while most republicans have kept their mouths shut (with the exception of Rand Paul). Bernie Sanders has voiced his approval. Yet the same silent bunch would be up in arms had Joe Biden or Barack Obama done the same things. Republicans have abandoned their principles in the maelstrom that is Donald Trump. Some call this “populism”. I call it American socialism which is embraced by members of both parties and forebodes that future presidents both democrat and republican will likely expand socialism to the determent of limited government and market economics. Ronald Reagan said “The scariest words you can ever hear are ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help you.’” Trump actually believes this. I am hugely disappointed in the republicans for not standing up for their principles but I will never go over to the dark side. I am a Reagan republican will continue to support “republican” candidates because the alternative is much much worse. 

Are sanctuary cities legal?

I’m confused – I know many say that that is nothing new. I was wondering if sanctuary cities (or states) were legal and how can they refuse to assist federal law enforcement. For example, Minneapolis mayor Frey said “Minneapolis does not, and will not, enforce federal immigration law.” Isn’t there the supremacy clause? Article VI, Clause 2 of the Constitution states that federal laws constitute the “supreme Law of the Land” and thus take priority over any conflicting state laws. Not being trained in legalese that seems pretty clear to me. So why hasn’t Trump sued all the states and cities that have declared themselves “sanctuary cities” to impede the actions of ICE? There are over 200 sanctuary jurisdictions in the country including New York, Los Angeles, Chicago and Minneapolis. I asked AI about how can they be legal and was told that local entities have some discretion over law enforcement priorities. But why is it that that discretion trumps the Federal authorities? One must therefore conclude that the supremacy clause doesn’t establish supremacy after all.

The federal case that is relevant here is Printz which was on a provision of the 1993 Brady Handgun Act that required state and local police to enforce federal gun control laws. One of my legal heroes Antonin Scala opined that such “federal commandeering of state governments violated the constitutional principles of federalism that were safeguarded by the 10th Amendment.” Scalia ruled that “The Federal Government may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems nor command the States’ officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program.” So apparently the anti-commandeering doctrine of the 10th Amendment trumps the supremacy clause of Article VI.

I asked AI about the 10^th Amendment. It said “The Tenth Amendment is part of the U.S. Constitution, and it basically says that any powers that the Constitution doesn’t specifically give to the federal government are reserved to the states or to the people. So, it’s kind of a foundational piece for balancing power between the federal government and the states.”

I then asked AI if there were federal statutes banning sanctuary cities. Here is the response. “There’s no overarching federal law that outright bans sanctuary cities. The concept is mostly governed by state and local policies. The federal government has tried, at times, to cut off funding to sanctuary cities, but those efforts have faced legal challenges. Courts have generally ruled that the federal government can’t force localities to enforce immigration law, so it’s a bit of a gray area.”

So why not pass a federal law outlawing sanctuary cities? Of course there is no way such a law would get 60 votes in the senate.

The Westminster Dog Show and a few random thoughts 

Penny, a Doberman pinscher, won the Westminster Dog Show — the first of her breed to receive the best in show honor since 1989. Well it is about time a real dog won best of show! Apologies to all those poodle owners but that poodle cut is awful and must be embarrassing to the dog. I favor the German Shorthaired pointers first and Scottish Terriers second. There is no better looking dog than a GSP.

The American Society of Plastic Surgeons just broke ranks with other US medical groups by recommending that gender altering surgeries be delayed until a patient is at least 19 years old. Hallelujah! The statement applies to facial, chest, and genital procedures performed for “transgender” and “nonbinary” patients. The ASPS report says that 23,000 people aged 19 and under received some sort of plastic surgery in 2024 while between 2016 and 2020 only about 4,000 people total received any gender altering surgery. Something to ponder.

Another one of Trump’s tariff deals was just announced with India. Trump says that India will stop buying Russian oil and its tariffs will be magnanimously reduced from 50% to “only” 18 percent. But the Indian government has not confirmed that and the details have not been released. With Russian oil being embargoed India rushed in to fill the void buying Russian oil at a significant discount from world prices. If they really stop buying it, they will be forced to pay about $7 a barrel more for oil. They currently import 1.1 million barrels a day from Russia. Trump says they will buy US oil but not so fast my friends. India’s refineries process Russian heavy crude not American light and would have to be retooled. Moreover, it takes twice as long to transport American oil than Russian oil. Trump issued the customary ransom note saying that India will “‘BUY AMERICAN’, at a much higher level, in addition to over $500 BILLION DOLLARS of U.S. Energy, Technology, Agricultural, Coal, and many other products”. I wonder how much of that $500 billion will go into his businesses or businesses headed by his buddies? Meanwhile, we await the fine print. But I guess that China could step up and buy the Russian oil instead.

Remember when the president was demanding a $200 million ransom from Harvard? Well since that haven’t forked over the money, Trump is now demanding $1 billion and is going to sic his “Justice” Department on them tweeting “This should be a Criminal, not Civil, event, and Harvard will have to live with the consequences of their wrongdoings.”  I guess the $1 billion would go into his personal account. Of course, Harvard will eventually have to cut a deal since Trump is threatening to cut off federal funding and ban foreign students, both of which are vital parts of the university. Apparently, Harvard is willing to spend more on certain programs and projects but does not want to make a direct payment to the president, er government, which is what Trump is demanding.

While Trump has threatened to have the Census Bureau count only citizens, the state of Missouri has sued to make it so. The state has filed suit against the Commerce Department and the Census Bureau to end the counting of illegal aliens. Interestingly, the state is also seeking a recount of the 2020 Census and 2021 apportionment. Recall that the census count is used to dole out federal handouts to the states and importantly to determine congressional seats. Missouri has 6 republicans and 2 democrats in its congressional delegation. Maybe they are trying to get rid of the two dems. Since democrat states may lose up to 10 seats in the 2030 census due to outmigration of illegals from the US and legal residents to republican run states, this would mean an additional decrease in the number of seats in democrat-controlled states.

Finally, I had earlier reported on Trump ending several wind projects in democrat states. Well federal judges have overturned his edit for all five projects. Of course the president who hates windmills (as do I) used the justification that the windmills were a threat to national security. The courts are not convinced and have allowed the projects to continue while the cases are being appealed.

A Laffer curve for tariffs

There a Laffer curve for tariffs. You may recall that the Laffer curve shows that at some point, raising taxes results in less tax revenue. This is also true for tariffs. If you raised tariffs to 100 percent you would get less tariff revenue than at 10 percent because of less trade. That is why the logic of punitive taxes escapes me. When Trump lashes out at a country and increases tariffs that means only fewer and higher priced goods to Americans. Why is dramatically raising taxes punishing those that dare incur Trump’s wrath especially if they are just motivated to find trading partners elsewhere? Instead the tariffs are punishing Americans.

Trump wants us to import less. Well he is succeeding. But will importing less goods make us better off? That is virtually impossible as consumer prices go up and real incomes go down. Prices go up because there are fewer less costly goods available – that is what comparative advantage is all about. Domestic producers of competing goods find demand (and prices) rise for their goods. They have less competition and hence have less incentive to innovate and economize.  The tariffs have a disproportionate impact on small businesses and on low and moderate income households. Let them eat cake!

Tariffs will not bring in the revenue that Trump trumpets. To do so would assume that as prices increase due to the tariffs that demand stays unchanged. Instead as prices increase – and we pay 96% of the increase – imports fall decreasing tariff revenues. Raising tariffs even more would decrease – not increase – revenues. So if raising revenues is a motive for tariffs, it is a failed one. So tariffs will not make us rich as hell. It cannot replace the income tax. There is not enough to give everyone $2,000. It won’t get rid of trade deficits – if he wanted to do that then he should simply ban all imports. It was never “reciprocal” because it was levied on countries with tariffs lower than our and on countries with which we had a surplus. Foreigners do not pay the tariffs, we do – whether at the consumer level or the importer level. Trump’s tariffs have had the equivalency of a 16 percent tax hike. Foreign central banks have been replacing dollar and Treasury holdings with gold. Foreigners have been restructuring their supply chains and making other trade agreements. Trump has brought the world closer together and has made China’s trade surplus bigger than ever, having topped $1 trillion as the Chinese have broadened their trading worldwide. Why would Trump want to help the Chinese and hurt Americans is beyond me.

If tariffs were to rebuild American manufacturing then why has manufacturing fallen over the past year? Trump seems to forget that half of our imports are intermediate goods. Thanks to the president we are now facing record high prices on aluminum. Industries such as automotive, aerospace, packaging and construction have seen dramatic increases in their costs, lower margins, profit squeeze and a struggle to survive. Small businesses have been particularly affected. Trump doubled tariffs on U.S. aluminum imports to 50% and aluminum costs for U.S. consumers have risen by 40% to above $5,200 a metric ton. The tariffs resulting in a drop in imports which reduced aluminum stocks, increasing prices even more. Foreign producers sent their aluminum elsewhere. Also the high tariff meant that importers were actually losing money on importing aluminum and ratcheted down their purchases further reducing US stocks and increasing US prices. In the national security argument why impose tariffs on aluminum (or steel) if it is vital to national security? Wouldn’t it more sense to impose no tariffs on imported aluminum while subsidizing the domestic aluminum industry?

Isn’t it ironic that Trump wants to rebuild American manufacturing while he has actually instituted policies that have done the opposite? Don Boudreaux points out that US manufacturing has declined under Trump’s protectionist policies. I cannot think of hardly any circumstance where I would support tariffs because almost without fail they increase the prices to American consumers and make us worse off. US manufacturers facing less competition become less efficient. 

What about the argument that the Chinese heavily subsidize their export industries so that they can price in local markets at below cost leading to unfair prices competition? This means that the Chinese government bears the cost of below market pricing and causes the Chinese to be worse off while making the rest of the world better off. It is no wonder that the Chinese economy is actually in trouble with heavily subsidized export industries producing at excess capacity. Huge trade surpluses are symptomatic of declining investments – especially foreign investment. Business investment in China’s private economy fell 6.9 percent last year. Retail sales depend on subsidies as well also leading to overproduction and more losses. Then there is the property bubble. High levels of debt exist at the national and local levels. Overcapacity is leading to price deflation at home and in the export sector. China may be exporting more but at losses that are not sustainable. And Trump wants us to be an export economy?

There a Laffer curve for tariffs. As Trump’s tariffs increase, we become worse off. Also his threats are running into diminishing returns. Not only will tariff revenue fall as imports drop, countries will find other trading partners if it is rational to do so. I know that the president frets about slow economic growth and blames the Fed. But what would happen if suddenly he completely lifted all of his tariffs? Can you imagine the impact on growth if all of a sudden there was a universal tariff of zero?

February is Black History Month

On MLK, Jr Day a close friend said “Happy MLK Day.” Well February is Black History Month and although the president issued a proclamation for MLK, Jr Day, I don’t think he has issued a proclamation for Black History Month this year, as he did last year. I don’t really care but I am certain that all the legions of Trump haters will make a note of it.

I wrote these words last year.

When I was young we observed Black History Week. In 1926 the eminent historian Carter Woodson proclaimed the second week in February “Black History Week.” This was chosen because Abraham Lincoln’s birthday is February 12 and Frederick Douglass was born on February 14. Being me, I asked my sainted mother “Why is there a Black History Week?” She said “Because they have the other 51.” In 1976, the week was extended to the entire month. Gerald Ford proclaimed it and every subsequent president, including Donald Trump observed it. So in 1976, I asked my sainted mother why was February chosen as Black History Month? She answered “Because it has the fewest days.” Love you Mom.

Black history still is not fully integrated into our US history and I don’t know how to address that issue. The history books are far from being unbiased. Growing up in the segregated south, the history books in our schools made little mention of the achievement against the odds of black scholars, inventors, soldiers and industrialists. Much the same can be said today. While the revisionist history of the 1619 Project has gotten much press and is even included in some school curricula, the Woodson Center’s 1776 Unites (1776unites.com) project has received scant attention. Yet this website fully explores all those pioneers that have been forgotten by the writers of (mostly white) history. But 1776 Unites does not wallow in blaming racism and slavery for racial disparities because pointing fingers will not close those disparities. Disclosure: I am one of the contributors to 1776 Unites.

I know that many on the right, and some readers of this blog, do not care for Dr. King. I urge them to read Taylor Branch’s “Parting the Waters.” I fully credit King for there not being a shooting race war in the 1960s. People tend to forget that we black southerners had guns too – despite gun control laws written to deny blacks the right to bear arms. My Dad and Dr. King were denied handgun permits. But Dad had a handgun anyway. King preaching that nonviolent resistance was the best way to achieve civil rights, kept a lid on a volatile environment. Those were truly scary days. There is even a lynching in my family history. My Dad once said that he would not live to see the day when the schools were integrated because whites would start shooting black kids first. It was somewhat fitting that he and Mom were among the first blacks to integrate public school faculties in Atlanta. 

At Georgia, I was cautioned not to walk past two fraternity houses for fear of being cursed, having things thrown at me or worse. I was warned not to carry my books when walking on the perimeter of the campus for fear of being shot. These were days where white politicians race baited. I remember when Atlanta got their first black policemen – who couldn’t arrest whites. There were no black legislators, no black judges, all white juries and all white boards of education. That was the American deep south and Dr. King in his famous “I have a dream” speech said

“I have a dream that one day in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of interposition and nullification, one day right here in Alabama little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.

This will be the day when all of God’s children will be able  to sing with new meaning: ‘My country, ’tis of thee, sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing. Land where my fathers died, and of the pilgrim’s pride, from every mountain side, let freedom ring.’”

There were two silos, one white and one black. As long as blacks stayed in their silo, we were basically left alone. But going outside of it was often met with violence. The Freedom Rides, the lunch counter sit-ins, the voter registration drives, the boycotts and marches and pictures of little black children going to school being spit on by screaming whites filled the news as the blacks were trying to move from one silo into the other. One of the most poignant pictures of the day was of a little black girl (Ruby Bridges) having to be escorted by marshals to school in New Orleans. Also on the news was the violent response of some whites – beatings, lynchings and murders. Once more recall the civils rights anthem “We shall overcome.” We used to say that white folks didn’t mind us overcoming so long as we didn’t come over.

Again, I never talked to a white person before I went to the University of Georgia in 1962. I recall a university administrator was perplexed saying to me that we (blacks) had perfectly good schools (my mother graduated from Fort Valley State and my father from Savannah State) so why did we want to come to the University of Georgia? Well we did crossing over from one silo to the other. But Dr. King set an example that gave us all strength and hope.

Some call King a leftist or even worse a communist. But those labels were put on anyone in those days who defied the status quo of segregation. Yes King favored affirmative action. But he saw it as temporary. More importantly, King loved America. Today, that love would not brand him as “communist”. Would it? Can you say that anyone on the far left loves America? I have yet to hear any of them say it.

Here is part of the president’s proclamation on MLK, Jr Day.

Today, we honor the noble work of the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., whose commitment to justice paved the way to the full realization of the American promise.  Inspired by the tenets enshrined in our Declaration of Independence, we proudly renew our pledge to uphold our Nation’s long-cherished principles of liberty, equal justice under the law, and the God‑given dignity of the human person.

Again here are words from Dr. King’s “I have a dream” speech. Words that we should all heed.

“In a sense we’ve come to our nation’s capital to cash a check. When the architects of our Republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men — yes, black men as well as white men — would be guaranteed the unalienable rights of life, libertyand the pursuit of happiness. 

I say to you today, my friends, though, even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream. I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up, live out the true meaning of its creed: ‘We hold these truths to be self- evident, that all men are created equal.’”

Amen.

Trump versus Carney: Redux

The president seemed to be taken by surprise that Canada is acting like an independent country rather than the 51^st state. Is he really surprised that his tariffs have driven the Canadians to cozy up to the Chinese rather than bend to his will? Canada and China resolved a trade dispute and pledged more economic cooperation, causing the president to go bonkers.  Trump said “Carney thinks he is going to make Canada a ‘Drop Off Port’ for China to send goods and products into the United States, he is sorely mistaken. China will eat Canada alive, completely devour it, including the destruction of their businesses, social fabric, and general way of life.” He then threatened to impose a 100 percent tariff on all Canadian goods and services if Canada secures a trade deal with China. He has also threatened to ground all Canadian made jets over a dispute with Gulfstream whose jets are manufactured in Savannah, Georgia.

Canada also declined to join Trump’s so-called “Board of Peace” – saving the Canadians the $1 billion buy in – the president then rescinded the invitation writing “Dear Prime Minister Carney,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform late Thursday. “Please let this Letter serve to represent that the Board of Peace is withdrawing it’s invitation to you regarding Canada’s joining, what will be, the most prestigious Board of Leaders ever assembled, at any time.””

I wonder if Trump will rescind the tariffs on the countries that come bearing him the gift of $1 billion? 

Canada’s prime minister Carney had delivered a speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland urging smaller powers to unite against economic coercion from the world’s great powers. Carney the said that China was now a more reliable trading partner than the US. Again the president was furious saying “Canada lives because of the United States” and “Remember that Mark, the next time you make your statements.” 

Apparently the president and his team did not like Carney’s use of the term “economic coercion.” Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick accused Carney of “an arrogant kind of thought,” and said that Carney was whining and complaining. Lutnick, ever the deep thinker, intimated that the US might even end the U.S.-Mexico-Canada free-trade pact. Huh? Wouldn’t a 100 percent tariff on all Canadian goods and services end that agreement? 

Treasury Secretary Bessent who has emerged as the president’s major interpreter called Carney’s speech “value-signaling.”  Carney realizes that China cannot replace the US as Canada’s major trading partner and later said that Canada had no intention of proceeding with a trade deal with China or “any other nonmarket economy.” So it might seem that Carney was all bluster and folded in the face of Trump’s threat of 100 percent tariffs. However, the EU and India have reached a free trade agreement so watch for Carney to pivot in that direction also.

Bessent also said that the president’s attempt to seize Greenland had nothing to do with his not receiving the Nobel Peace Prize despite Trump’s letter to Norway’s prime minister. He said that Trump’s threat to increase the tariffs on the NATO allies supporting Greenland was to avoid a future national emergency saying “It is a strategic decision by the president. This is a geopolitical decision, and he is able to use the economic might of the U.S. to avoid a hot war.” Go figure out that one. When the president said that he had reached an agreement on Greenland (we have not seen the details) and had withdrawn the tariff threat, Bessent said that was the president’s objective all along and that the president didn’t really back down as all the media had reported. Sure. Obviously, Bessent is trying to couch the tariff use as a national emergency but the threat to Canada hurts Trump’s argument that his tariffs come under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

But speaking of Canada, Alberta may vote on independence from Canada – much like Quebec once did. Alberta is resource oil rich and conservative, unlike the Canadian government. It has been at odds with the government about the utilization of its resources and the building of pipelines. A delegation from Alberta actually recently met with US officials. What was discussed? Perhaps Alberta as the 51^st state? Well Carney has told the US to not meddle in Canadian business and to stay out of aiding Alberta’s independence movement saying “We expect the U.S. administration to respect Canadian sovereignty,” 

Where does spat end? Is there any doubt that the president is using the US’s economic might to force Canada to do his bidding? Is there any doubt that most Canadians want to remain Canadians? Will it take a Supreme Court ruling on tariffs to bring back our trading relationships – the American distilling industry certainly hopes so.

I hope so too.

Frank L. Stanton Elementary School is still standing!

From the mouth of babes.

What’s in a name? On a visit to my son’s home in north Atlanta, his grandson (my great grandson) and I had a pleasant talk. He (my great grandson) is living in my old home house and I was shocked to find out that he was going to my old elementary school. My son said “Yes Dad it is still standing. But they have renovated it a couple of times since you left.” I certainly hope so. When we moved to Atlanta our newly built neighborhood bordered on all-white neighborhoods and the nearest elementary school, Frank L. Stanton, was white only. So I had to go five miles away to E.R. Carter, an all-black school which was adjacent to the Morris Brown college campus. I spent two years there before Atlanta made Stanton all-black. So in 1953, my third grade year, I went to Stanton which was less than a mile away. I have no idea where the white students and teachers were sent because in those days the schools were totally segregated. 

One bit of silliness was the debate over whether the school should be re-named. Frank L. Stanton had been a columnist for the Atlanta Constitution and was designated in 1925 as the first poet laureate of the state of Georgia. Some blacks insisted that the school be named after a black – like all the other black schools in the city (I later went to Booker T. Washington High School). Whites were also in favor of a name change as well, being aghast that black kids could go to a school named after a white person. However, because the Stanton family wanted the name to remain on the school, the school board – which was all white – opted to keep the name. 

I told my great grandson that story and his reply was “That was stupid.” So it was.