In case it wasn't clear before --
The main problem with Trump is not that he's "corrupt"-- I already laid out in a previous diary why the whole economy runs on "corruption" -- but rather that his attempts to control the world economy through tariffs will instead crash the US economy.
Oh yeah, and DOGE is nonsense too, having nothing to do with efficiency.
Here's a simplification: let's say you are thinking of starting a business in the US, producing everything Trump wants, because you're a big all-American fan of Trump. To accumulate the capital goods necessary to get this business off the ground, all the material stuff for your business, you will have to buy it. And the stuff you will be buying will have Trump's tariffs attached to it, because, under current conditions, a lot of that stuff comes from China, Mexico, Canada, and other countries being threatened with tariffs. The factories to produce everything you need from China will continue to be located in China, tariffs or no tariffs.
Moreover, if you are relying upon multinational banks/ corporations for your financial capital, your multinational overlords may at some point decide to put their money somewhere other than in the United States, because it's less risky to invest in businesses in places where people don't have to pay expensive tariffs.
Meanwhile if Trump decides to get serious about his big show of deportation and doesn't just make a show of his sadistic urges, none of those millions he will have deported will be contributing their hard work to the US economy. It won't help.
This, then, is why it won't work. Okay? Okay.
PS Dear Trumpies,
You want to get American goods to compete with Chinese goods? Have the government produce the goods directly. The problem is that over the past seven Presidents the US economy has been reorganized to appear far more as a parasite devouring the host organism than it once was. If you want to strengthen the American economy, you actually have to strengthen the American economy, not your ideology about it.

Comments
Yeah, maybe
.
.
This is more about optics than rational problem solving.
Genius understanding is not required to see this as just
another head fake (a sports term). Trying to game the media
for the next pass or goal is silly, if you pay attention. The boundaries
of the playing field do not change.
Thought is the wind, knowledge the sail, and mankind the vessel.
-- August Hare
I included a PS in the diary to clarify the points I made.
"To watch the leader of the most powerful nation on earth endorse and finance a genocide prompts not a passing kind of disgust or anger, but a severance." -- Omar el Akkad
Points well made
I listened to a Stiglitz interview saying basically the same thing recently. They simply don't know what they're doing.
About a month ago, I was talking to a business manager who sells imported materials to US domestic producers. They won't book any new supply contracts, since Trump began threatening new tariffs. I know some companies were loading up, after Trump was elected and before he took office, but now the uncertainty of future costs is causing a slow down in booking trade contracts (imports) and eventually is going to affect domestic production here, if it hasn't already.
語必忠信 行必正直
Exactly!
"To watch the leader of the most powerful nation on earth endorse and finance a genocide prompts not a passing kind of disgust or anger, but a severance." -- Omar el Akkad
A lot of the focus in on retail
But the point this manager made to me was, the losses imposed by tariffs to profit margins have to be allocated and determined along the supply chain. Negotiating new contracts is difficult under the circumstances, causing supply chain slowdowns if not breaks, because in production supply contracts, contract requirements cover fixed periods of time. So the dialogue goes something like this, "how much of the loss in profit margins are you going to take?" "I'm not sure yet how much we can take. How about you?" "You can pass your losses along to your retail customers." "I'm not sure how much of a price increase the end consumer will bear, or how much it will shrink demand, if I increase the wholesale price too much, the market will shrink to an undetermined degree, and I'll end up with inventories that I paid too much for, and then I can't project how much to order, or how much to pay for it."
Something like that. I don't have an MBA nor have I studied economics. The difficulties arise long before the retail consumer purchase.
語必忠信 行必正直
Trumps braggadocio will come back and bite him in the ass.
His inflated ego
and his delusional advisersis like an over inflated balloon ready to burst!Unfortunately the economy and the American public will also suffer the consequences
Passing this along since it is above my pay grade but it might
be relevant.
The rest of the tweet:
A collapsing world economy might finally achieve green degrowth
and enable world civilization to hit its anti-climate-change emission-reduction targets.
Assuming that those in league with satanic forces fail in their efforts to bring about hell-on-earth via a “tactical” atomic-bomb attack somewhere, leading to that old “War Games” favorite, global thermonuclear war.
It might eventually happen.
The idea that a collapsing world economy would achieve green degrowth, though, brings to mind Aldous Huxley's 1932 novel Brave New World. (Here's the PDF.) In the future depicted in the novel, there was in the past a catastrophic war (about which Huxley is not too specific), and the human population has been stabilized at an optimal two billion (I gather he wasn't too interested in the exact number; Huxley wasn't a scientist). Since the elites of this world, the Controllers, did not trust human creativity, everyone in the Brave New World was either made into an idiot, or asked to go along with the general stupidity (and so for instance the character of Helmholtz Watson). There is a permanent caste society.
Now of course a Brave New World "solution" to the ecological crisis would be an organized one -- there would, after all, be Controllers. What looks likely now would be something along the line of the Biden administration's response to weather disasters -- Lahaina over in Maui, for instance, or Asheville in North Carolina -- writ large. The government will give everyone affected a tiny, inadequate package, and then put its energies into some perfunctory war somewhere (like Biden's favorite, in Ukraine, only far more catastrophic -- Ukraine, after all, only swallowed up half a million soldiers out of a world population of eight billion. Maybe the Middle East, or China, or Africa or Venezuela?)
"To watch the leader of the most powerful nation on earth endorse and finance a genocide prompts not a passing kind of disgust or anger, but a severance." -- Omar el Akkad
Trumps corrupt
that's all there is to it. Tariffs are just a lever, along with dismantling the infrastructure, and he's too fucking stupid and lazy to do much himself. If the economy wrecks he'll be fine, maybe even profit from the wreckage. He'll just keep pushing until he gets stopped somehow. Musk is the zealot egomaniac that rolls up his sleeves to do a MY Lai on the bureaucracy. Trump just wants tribute to exempt businesses that didn't rush to kiss the ring, and he'll be happy to be #2 richest man in the world. He won't run again. Look for Baron or Don Jr to run in the future, against Chealsea Cinton or Mayor Pete.
I remain unpersuaded.
There is no "corruption" because it's all corruption. But let's be even clearer. America is not a democracy. There are four layers to the ruling class here:
1) Duopoly -- you must either believe in the (D) fiction or the (R) fiction if you wish to participate effectively. These people also control the NGOs.
2) The donor class -- if you cannot find a billionaire patron, you will receive no publicity.
3) Veto power by the alphabet agencies and the Pentagon -- if you piss them off, they will retaliate, like they did against the Kennedys and King
4) The Ivy League and the social clubs -- the two groups deciding how everything is to be run.
The reason I do not use the word "corruption," once again, is that there is no pure, pristine, outside to the abovementioned model of American rule.
"To watch the leader of the most powerful nation on earth endorse and finance a genocide prompts not a passing kind of disgust or anger, but a severance." -- Omar el Akkad
No argument from me on the above