Economy & Business

Trump’s Economics of Exhortation

(Al Drago/Reuters)
He specializes in wheeling and dealing rather than creation and commerce.

A  strain of American politics has always longed for the government to be run like a business, and thus for a president to come from the private sector. Republicans chose corporate executive Wendell Willkie for their presidential nominee in 1940, and the populist entrepreneur H. Ross Perot attracted more than 18 percent of the vote for his independent bid in 1992. Carly Fiorina of Hewlett-Packard fame (or infamy) ran for the Senate and then president.

In 2016, we got our businessman. His trade war, which officially commenced July 5 with $34 billion in tariffs against China, suggests we got him from the wrong business — one based on wheeling and dealing rather than creation and commerce.

To be sure, the desire for a fusion between business and political practice has always been folly. Politics is not a business, and we should not wish it to be so. Businesses are characterized by concentration of power, constitutional government by the separation of it. Businesses properly pursue profit single-mindedly; governments must seek multiple ends and balance many constituencies.

But if the idea of an entrepreneur president holds any appeal, it ought to be that he or she should understand the conditions of wealth creation and therefore economic growth. President Trump’s trade war raises questions about whether he grasps even the nature of wealth, much less the conditions that encourage its production. Wealth is the product of the creation and exchange of things of value that did not exist before. These are activities a free economy encourages by rewarding them with profit.

President Trump’s indifference to wealth creation is unsurprising for a creature of the real-estate sector, especially the New York City variant of it: It’s a business in which deals are negotiated, properties are swapped, and the lines between the public and private blur.

That is not to say the Trump Organization does not create value: The swapping of buildings often entails improving them. Value, moreover, is subjective. The economic worth of a book consists not in the physical materials of which it is made but rather in its audience’s willingness to pay for the stories or ideas on the page.

But the very fact that Mr. Trump’s chief business acumen lays in his supposed brilliance at negotiation suggests he is less skilled in creating wealth than in moving it around. Negotiation is a vital economic function, to be sure, but it is not a whole foundation for economic growth. It is significant both that much of his purported personal fortune consists of the asserted value of his name, which is a mirage, and that he announced his candidacy with the bromide “We need a leader who wrote The Art of the Deal.”

But the art of the deal is different from the art of wealth creation. Enter the president’s trade war, which is rooted not in the creation of wealth but rather in the economics of exhortation. The premise of free trade is that it benefits consumers — a class of individuals curiously exempt from Trumponomics — and thus creates jobs by encouraging the efficient production and exchange of new, better and cheaper goods. Trump, by contrast, is interested in cutting deals and issuing demands.

Two problems result. One is that foreign consumers cannot be compelled or exhorted to buy American goods. They can be induced to do so only by the value American products and services provide, which is and ought to be a function of dispersed enterprise rather than centralized politics. To wish otherwise is to aspire to a concentration of power that neither economics nor constitutionalism can bear.

Would that he appreciated how free economies, and free constitutions, actually run.

Thus the second problem: Mr. Trump echoes the New York City real-estate market of his youth, a place of backroom deals and sordid politics, by blurring the lines between the public and private spheres. When Harley Davidson rationally announced it would move some manufacturing overseas to avoid the tariff war Mr. Trump triggered, the president’s response was not to ask what conditions would encourage domestic manufacturing but rather excoriation and an apparent attempt at intimidation.

There are other indications of Mr. Trump’s attitude toward markets. He thought he could keep jobs at the heating and air-conditioning manufacturer Carrier in Indiana by means of artisanal deal-making. (This was supposed to be a shakedown of a private business by a political figure — itself problematic — but the fact that Carrier extracted concessions and then shipped jobs off anyway raises the question of who shook down whom.) His then-spokesman ventured that a 20 percent tax on $50 billion of Mexican imports would raise $10 billion for a border wall, as though taxing an activity had no effect on its extent. Mr. Trump attempted to compel by empty demand the use of American steel in domestic pipelines.

Yet it is not within the competence or constitutional capacity of presidents to direct the location of manufacturing or the allocation of capital. And to say that Mr. Trump is uniquely capable of this because of his checkered background in business, even if it were true, would be to authorize a less economically gifted president to do so as well.

These are two concepts — the creation of wealth and the limitation of power — that seem to elude our businessman president. Would that he better appreciated how free economies, and free constitutions, actually run.

NOW WATCH: ‘Trump Tells May To Finish Brexit So The US And UK Can Make A Trade Deal’

Greg Weiner is a political scientist at Assumption College and the author of Madison’s Metronome: The Constitution, Majority Rule and the Tempo of American Politics.

Most Popular


Kamala Harris Runs for Queen

I’m going to let you in on a secret about the 2020 presidential contest: Unless unforeseen circumstances lead to a true wave election, the legislative stakes will be extremely low. The odds are heavily stacked against Democrats’ retaking the Senate, and that means that even if a Democrat wins the White House, ... Read More

What We’ve Learned about Jussie Smollett

It’s been a few weeks since March 26, when all charges against Jussie Smollett were dropped and the actor declared that his version of events had been proven correct. How’s that going? Smollett’s celebrity defenders have gone quiet. His publicists and lawyers are dodging reporters. The @StandwithJussie ... Read More
Energy & Environment

The Climate Trap for Democrats

The more the climate debate changes, the more it stays the same. Polls show that the public is worried about climate change, but that doesn’t mean that it is any more ready to bear any burden or pay any price to combat it. If President Donald Trump claws his way to victory again in Pennsylvania and the ... Read More
White House

Sarah Sanders to Resign at End of June

Sarah Huckabee Sanders will resign from her position as White House press secretary at the end of the month, President Trump announced on Twitter Thursday afternoon. Sanders, the daughter of former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, succeeded Sean ... Read More
Politics & Policy

But Why Is Guatemala Hungry?

I really, really don’t want to be on the “Nicolas Kristof Wrote Something Dumb” beat, but, Jiminy Cricket! Kristof has taken a trip to Guatemala, with a young woman from Arizona State University in tow. “My annual win-a-trip journey,” he writes. Reporting from Guatemala, he discovers that many ... Read More
Politics & Policy

On Painting Air Force One

And so it has come to this. Two oil tankers were just attacked in the Gulf of Oman, presumably by Iran. The United States and China are facing off in a confrontation that is about far more than trade. The southern border remains anarchic and uncontrolled. And Congress is asking: “Can I get the icon in ... Read More