> You think you're going to get a solid answer interviewing some random person on the street?
Yes. We educate the population for good reason. People _should_ understand that a tariff is a tax imposed on consumers, and if done with reasonable intent it is to prop up a key industry despite the distortionary effects with a particular goal in mind, such as national security, improvement of the populace, etc.
"Bringing back manufacturing" is not a coherent goal, it just sounds like one, because as soon as the tariffs are removed the US is back to offshoring again OR the purchasing power of the dollar is so low that it doesn't matter.
"Establishing manufacturing in key industries" is a completely reasonable goal -- which Biden did (solar, among others).
So once again, the Trump policy set is not actually good policy.
> people _should_ understand that a president getting shot at live on television is not a hoax.
I am not seeing how this tangent is connected to the rest of the conversation. Can you please explain why you thought it related to discussions regarding interviews of random individuals on the street?
> Do you really think farming plebs for political gain on social media is going to break for democrats? Really? That feels a bit out of touch to me.
Are you saying I'm farming plebs for political gain on social media for the democrats? That's weird. I've no association to any political party nor do I care for their political gain. I think political parties are unfortunate and strongly prefer ranked choice voting explicitly to weaken their grip. That said, I do analysis for policy and strategy, so perhaps I should have been more explicit in my recommendation that actual outcomes-focused policy is better for people than vibes-focused word salads (which Trump often espouses as well as most Republicans and Democrats as they attempt to make soundbites) regardless of political affiliation. Please forgive my clear lack of clarity.
By interviewing random people you can easily find people who say seemingly dumb shit that make members of a particular political party look incredibly stupid.
A video of a random Trump supporter misunderstanding tarrifs is not a steelman argument against Trump supporters.
In the same way coastal liberals denying the assassination attempt and calling it a hoax is not a steelman argument against liberalism.
Both sides do this but theres a particular brand of "dumb out of touch liberals" that is pervasive on social media.
> A video of a random Trump supporter misunderstanding tarrifs is not a steelman argument against Trump supporters.
By way of background and disclosure, I got a PhD in economics at a point in life. This just means I've spent a bit of time thinking about tariffs and impact more than the average person. I understand the "theory" of tariffs and their impact, and the data has mostly supported the stylized facts that people point to for why they aren't good policy.
It's definitely true that tariffs aren't the first thing people think of in the morning (me included), and I consider it reasonable to say it is unfair to most people to expect, without some prompting first, a solid understanding that tariffs are a distortionary tax that the end buyer pays for. Higher tax means higher price. What concerns me is when I see people choosing to willfully ignore even a basic definition of something because of who said it, regardless of political affiliation. I strongly believe we can't operate on different facts, and should work to reduce jargon that confuse understanding.
> a particular brand of "dumb out of touch liberals" that is pervasive on social media.
I agree. I think this is an area where there is a lot of "both sides do this". Elitism is never a unifying attitude, nor are shibboleths generally.
> In the same way coastal liberals denying the assassination attempt and calling it a hoax is not a steelman argument against liberalism.
Yep. What chaos that event was. There are details both sides ignore that I call out only to acknowledge them, not agree with -- the shooter having strong affiliation with one party and weak affiliation with the other, the acknowledgement or ignoring of Trump's prior behavior and actions to influence opinion drawing from his entertainment background in WWE/The Apprentice -- but most of the speculation is crass and downplays the fact that someone tried to shoot a candidate for president. Speculate all you want about conspiracies on either side, it's not something that draws people together nor promotes liberalism.
Yes. We educate the population for good reason. People _should_ understand that a tariff is a tax imposed on consumers, and if done with reasonable intent it is to prop up a key industry despite the distortionary effects with a particular goal in mind, such as national security, improvement of the populace, etc.
"Bringing back manufacturing" is not a coherent goal, it just sounds like one, because as soon as the tariffs are removed the US is back to offshoring again OR the purchasing power of the dollar is so low that it doesn't matter.
"Establishing manufacturing in key industries" is a completely reasonable goal -- which Biden did (solar, among others).
So once again, the Trump policy set is not actually good policy.