[alchemist1e9]

The goal isn’t actually specifically employment increases, that’s mostly a marketing strategy, the real goal is national security. US, Japan, and South Korea seem to have decided enough is enough with Chinese aspirations and threats to Taiwan, so US has convinced them to build additional capacity in the US and also to have those nations increase defense spending. Notice Japan has started joining NATO command and participating in NATO missions. I predict Japan will the be first “deal” announced by Trump administration, with South Korea soon afterwards. It makes sense for these allies, the logic is we should fortify our supply lines building redundant facilities in US homeland which is much harder for China to disrupt and attack, you guys start buying lots of F-47s, we start massive ship building, re-industrialize as rapidly as possible. Then should China try anything and somehow mess you guys up, the US will come back a get you out of it.

[bluGill]

That would be sane, but it makes no sense then why Trump is threatening tarrifs on Canada or the EU - both places that also need to do the same. (move manufacturing out of China)

[alchemist1e9]

Sure it does. The strategy is based on chaos and reminding all the world, allies included that the US is in charge and they want some very specific changes from both Canada and EU, they need them to militarize quickly, the US military is furious that all their allies appear to be almost incapable, very little naval power specifically. I’d even argue the implied threat to leave NATO, the talk of annexation of Canada and Greenland, it’s all strategic psychological warfare on allies to shock them into action … and it’s working … take a look a Germany’s new military budget and plans. There is also an intentional devaluation of the dollar to assist in re-industrialization. This is all national security and world order driven, not economics, and it’s actually the optimal time during a strong domestic US economy to try to make these changes.

[cachehit]

It's national security to destroy all of your alliances? In that case, what is the reason Russia is exempt from these tariffs? Reverse-psychological warfare?

[alchemist1e9]

First of all there is (EDIT: almost) zero trade between the US and Russia currently, same with North Korea. (EDIT: perhaps some token signal of wanting to negotiate over Ukraine? or perhaps even more “sinister” - getting US political opposition to falsely argue Trump is a Russian agent and make themselves look silly)

Second, yes part of the strategy is to force allies to self assess themselves and their dependence on US power. Trump and Nixon had a personal relationship and his fundamental strategy in business is based on creating uncertainty, it’s literally like point 1 of his “Art of the Deal” and however another part of that strategy is being willing to walk away.

We are living through a turning point in history where current US administration has reversed the open policy to China and for national security reasons are working to re-industrialize and militarize quickly as a strategy to deter Chinese ambitions.

It’s fine to disagree and argue the neoliberalism strategy of globalism isn’t dead but politically it is. Of course that world order is fighting to survive where it can, UK, France, Germany all putting up resistance to the rise of neo-mercantilism and nationalism but we will see if canceling elections, restrictions on speech and jailing politicians will work to block it.

[kristiandupont]

>First of all there is zero trade between the US and Russia currently, same with North Korea.

No, there is trade, $3.5b worth of it. But even if there wasn't, why would they get an explicit exemption?

[gbear605]

> First of all there is zero trade between the US and Russia currently

Not true. The US imported 3.5 billion dollars of goods from Russia in 2024, and exported 500 million dollars of goods.

https://ustr.gov/countries-regions/europe-middle-east/russia...

[bluGill]

Maybe one change, but there is far too much going on and thus diverting attention. Pick something and fix it, not a million things and divide your attention and thus get nothing done. (not that other presidents were better, but part of that is good change is slow in many cases)