For those of us who work professionally in risk management, it’s striking how many of the controversies surrounding the Trump administration are essentially controversies about risks. That means that if you want to argue more effectively (and intelligently) about many of these controversies, you need to know some basics from the discipline known as risk analysis. The good news is that the basic concepts are very easy to learn.
From the conservative American Enterprise Institute:
Bottom Line: An economic analysis of protectionism tells us that the deadweight losses that result from tariffs are guaranteed to make the economy worse off on net and guaranteed to reduce our economic welfare, which would be reflected in a loss of U.S. jobs, and a reduction of wealth, prosperity, and national income. You could argue about the size of the deadweight losses moving from free trade to protectionism, but you can’t argue that they don’t exist.
From the right-wing Washington Examiner:
If Trump wants to reduce illegal immigration (already at an all-time low), the best thing he can do is to encourage our neighbors to the South to continue embracing free trade and commerce that has been empirically proven to raise the standard of living, create jobs, and lift millions out of poverty. To the extent we are able, we should be encouraging increased economic opportunities for Mexicans in Mexico. This will result in even less migration.
If Trump thinks Mexico is bad now, just wait until our neighbors to the South turn their back on the free enterprise system.
LINK (H/T: WinteryKnight)