By Matt Underwood South Africa says Trump’s 30% tariff is based on inaccurate trade view, and honestly, it’s hard to disagree. It’s not a new revelation, either. His trade policies, like so many of his other pronouncements, seem to be constructed from thin air, a reality tailored to benefit him. It’s become pretty clear that inventing a narrative that suits his needs is just part of his strategy. So, when South Africa raises concerns, it’s less of a shock and more of a “Here we go again.”
From what I understand, South Africa’s core concern is that the tariffs don’t reflect a realistic picture of trade dynamics. Apparently, the process behind the calculations is easily reverse-engineered and reveals a rather simplistic formula. It’s a process that appears to ignore the complexities of international trade, focusing on a trade deficit for goods with a particular country. They then divide that deficit by the total goods imported from that country and divide that number by two. This leads to a percentage which, when rounded up, determines the tariff.
The method of calculating tariffs appears incredibly simple. It essentially involves a percentage pulled from a hat, and that percentage then seems to dictate a trade penalty. The approach is remarkably devoid of nuance, ignoring geopolitical factors and the specific nature of the products being traded. This is like trying to bake a cake without a recipe.
It’s important to consider that the implications of this approach are far-reaching. Even countries with which the US has a trade surplus haven’t been spared. The UK, for example, faced a 10% tariff. This demonstrates that the formula is applied blindly, without any regard for existing trade relationships or the economic realities on the ground.
The focus seems to be less on understanding trade and more on personal gain. We’re talking about tariffs that can be detrimental to America but could prove beneficial to Trump personally. His stated enjoyment of the attention he gets from these trade negotiations really underscores this point. He thrives on the power dynamics of these situations.
In this framework, it seems that Trump’s approach isn’t rooted in a deep understanding of trade or its complexities. It’s about control and the ability to dictate the terms of the conversation. He seems to view his negotiating partners as mere pawns to be manipulated. It’s about setting the stage to his advantage, no matter the actual reality.
The lack of consideration for the truth or reality is alarming. He doesn’t seem to care about being constrained by facts. The goal isn’t to improve trade relations or address economic imbalances. It’s about power, ego, and potentially, personal enrichment.
This raises questions about the motivation behind his actions. The obvious question is, what does he gain from these policies? And it seems the answer lies in the attention, the control, and perhaps even more personal benefits, like using the power to bully others into submission.
The bottom line is this: South Africa’s assessment is correct. The trade view underpinning these tariffs is flawed. It’s a system built on inaccurate calculations, ignoring the realities of global trade and prioritizing personal gain above all else. It’s a recipe for global instability and, sadly, seems par for the course.