Donald Trump and Republicans must creat a plan about economic growth and end the TTTT: Trump TerribleTariffs Tradwar

Free Trade’s Bounty Went to the Rich. Trump’s Sloppy Tariffs Won’t Fix That.  Echo opinion published by The New York Times editorial board: 

🚀"TTT" Trump Tariffs Tradewar❗

Presidents who make big changes in government policy usually lay their plans with care. They game out what might happen next. They sweat the little things. 

• Richard Nixon did not just decide one morning to fly to China.
• Ronald Reagan’s tax cuts were the better part of a decade in the making. 
• Details of President Barack Obama’s expansion of health insurance emerged from countless public debates.

Trump prefers to shoot before aiming. Declaring that he intends to reboot America’s relations with the rest of the world, he has imposed tariffs on imports with abandon, demonstrating a disregard for the details or the collateral damage. His careless conduct of the public’s business has roiled stock and bond markets, threatened to cause a recession and damaged America’s global standing. The president’s decision-making has been so erratic that at one point this week, the administration’s top trade official was interrupted in the middle of testimony before Congress because the president had just changed the policy the official was defending.

The original version of Trump’s plan, which he paused on Wednesday, imposed tariffs on foreign nations at rates that bore no apparent connection to America’s national interests. 

The highest tariff rate, 50 percent, applied to Lesotho, a tiny and impoverished nation in southern Africa❗

The latest version isn’t much better. Trump is imposing a 10 percent tariff on imports from most nations, along with higher rates on imports from America’s three largest trading partners: Canada , Mexico and China. 

In fact, the average tax on imports will rise to the highest level in more than a century, raising the prices on many consumer goods. The 145 percent maximum rate on Chinese imports is intended to isolate that nation economically, but the simultaneous tariffs on everyone else will undermine that goal. And while the stated purpose of all the tariffs is to expand American manufacturing, putting them in place immediately doesn’t give companies time to build factories. It will cause pain without any benefit💢❗

Nevertheless, we want to emphasize that Trump has a point about the pain caused by free trade. The decades in which the United States threw open its doors to imports from other countries left many Americans without jobs and decimated the nation’s industrial heartland.

Washington’s naïveté about China’s rise, accomplished partly through its own trade barriers and theft of intellectual property, is particularly regrettable.

A revival of American manufacturing is a worthy goal. It would not heal past wounds, but it could provide a basis for future generations of Americans to build lives and to rebuild communities that are more prosperous and more secure.

That is the tragedy of Trump’s trade war. Instead of addressing the ills he diagnosed, he instead embarked on a reckless campaign that threatens to discard the benefits of trade without delivering a meaningful economic revival.

From the end of World War II until the beginning of  Trump’s first term in office, American leaders of both political parties sought to expand trade, believing that it would increase the nation’s prosperity and help to maintain peace among nations.

The benefits of their efforts have been substantial. Globalization has lifted billions of people from poverty in Africa, Asia and Latin America. It has also enriched the United States, spurring innovation by increasing both competition and the rewards for success. Wall Street, Hollywood and Silicon Valley have all reaped the benefits of global markets. So have American farmers, weapons makers and pharmaceutical companies. Nine of the world’s 10 most valuable companies today are American, in part because of this country’s openness to trade.

But, the benefits accrued disproportionately to the affluent. In theory, the government could have redistributed those benefits more equitably; in practice, it did not. For many Americans, especially those who lost factory jobs, the availability of cheap goods at Walmart was an inadequate recompense.

A widely cited academic paper by the economists David Autor, David Dorn and Gordon Hanson estimated that expanded trade with China alone resulted in the loss of 2.4 million American jobs between 1999, and 2011. Many of the communities hit hardest by those job losses still have not recovered. Many former factory workers never returned to work.

Tariffs could be deployed as part of a broader strategy to expand the nation’s manufacturing base and create more inclusive growth. Taxing imports protects domestic manufacturers from foreign competition at the expense of domestic consumers, who must pay higher prices as a consequence. That trade-off is sometimes worth it.

There is a good case for imposing tariffs on carefully defined categories of products, including those that are necessary to maintain the nation’s security. Tariffs can also protect American industry from unfair competition, as when other countries are subsidizing exports. And tariffs can be effective as a shield for emerging industries, like electric vehicle manufacturing. Under President Joe Biden, the United States sought to expand manufacturing of green energy technologies by combining targeted tariffs with funding for research, investment in infrastructure and incentives for consumers. The result was an increase in factory building.

It is a bitter irony that even as Trump raises tariffs, he is axing federal support for these technologies, which are among the most promising areas of domestic manufacturing. Some companies are already abandoning their building plans.

Trump’s use of tariffs is indiscriminate. He is imposing tariffs on goods that the United States does not and cannot produce, like manganese from Gabon, which American companies need to make steel. He is imposing tariffs on nations that buy more goods from the United States than they sell to the United States, like Australia, and on nations that have offered to remove all their tariffs on American goods, like Israel. Even after Trump paused some tariffs under pressure from investors and members of his party, the measures he has imposed have raised the average effective tax rate on imports to the United States to 27 percent, the highest since the early 20th century, according to Ernie Tedeschi, an economist at Yale University.

In addition to raising prices, tariffs are likely to slow economic growth. And another danger looms: There are warning signs that  Trump’s provocations are reducing demand for Treasuries, forcing the government to offer higher interest rates to investors. If that continues, the federal debt will become even harder to repay.

Trump and his advisers say that the pain caused by tariffs is necessary to revive domestic manufacturing. But factories take years to build, and companies have good reason to doubt that his successors will maintain his policies. Companies have little basis for confidence that Trump will keep his tariffs in place. 

Trump has made clear, in word and deed, that his commitments are at best negotiable and at worst fickle.

Trump, of course, could return to the drawing board at any time. But Congress and the nation cannot afford to wait. Trump's behavior makes clear that Congress has ceded too much authority over trade, as it has on so many issues, and it should act to correct his course and to curb his trade powers.

One sensible reform is a bill introduced by Senator Charles Grassley, Republican of Iowa, and Senator Maria Cantwell, Democrat of Washington, under which tariffs would expire if they did not receive congressional approval within 60 days. That would preserve a president’s ability to respond to emergencies while preventing a president from causing emergencies. Moreover, congressional approval would demonstrate the broad political support necessary to give companies the confidence to make long-term investments.

Trump extols tariffs as a miracle cure for a wide range of economic ailments. He still seems to believe his first-term declaration that “trade wars are good and easy to win.” The truth is that tariffs can help the United States or they can hurt the United States. Unless the president changes course or is forced to do so, these tariffs will hurt — and the pain is going to get worse.

Addressing world hunger during the pandemic and war

COVID-19 and the Ukraine war with Russia have put the world's food supply at risk of being unable to sustain the population health, especially in Africa.  In fact, Africa has the capacity to feed itself, but slow investment in agricultural technology has impeded progress for  developing food security.

Echo essay published in The Conversation*

Towards zero hunger in Africa: 5 steps to achieve food security.

By Edward Mabaya, Cornell University

Robert B. Richardson, Michigan State University and 

Thomas Jayne, Michigan State University.

Global food systems have been battered by overlapping crises in recent years. 

Key among these are the COVID-19 pandemic, the Russo-Ukraine war and extreme weather events resulting from climate change. These have resulted in forced migration, loss of employment, climate stress, loss of biodiversity, and economic instability.

In Africa, which is home to 1.5 billion people, these shocks and stressors have slowed – or even reversed – decades of progress in improving food security and nutrition. 

For example, 37 million people in the Greater Horn of Africa are facing acute hunger in one of the region’s worst droughts in decades.

These multiple crises have forced the world to recognise that improving nutrition and food security requires more resilient global and national food systems. Food systems are the sum of actors and interactions along the food value chain – from input supply and production to transport, processing, retailing, wholesaling, preparation, consumption and disposal.

As set out in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG2), the journey towards food and nutritional security for Africa has a clear destination – zero hunger. 

Access to safe, nutritious and sufficient food for all people is the target, by 2030.

The recently launched Africa Agriculture Status Report examines the continent’s progress towards food and nutritional security.

We co-edited the report, which has six key themes. It charts a roadmap to get to the goal faster while adapting to a changing environment. Our report coincided with World Food Day 2022, whose theme is safer food, better health.

Without transformative change like the Asian Green Revolution, African food systems will continue to impede human development. They will also continue to be overly dependent on food imports. Without a strong drive for sustainable agricultural practices, the continent’s food systems will worsen environmental destruction. Urgent action is needed to anticipate megatrends, rally political will, mobilise investments and strengthen capacity.
Five ways to transform African food systems

The need for true cost accounting

Development practitioners working in Africa need true cost accounting for our food systems. It should explicitly consider all the environmental, social and human health outcomes associated with the way food systems are organised. For example, 74% of agricultural production growth in sub-Saharan Africa since 2000 has been achieved through area expansion and only 26% from increased yields. This is far from ideal. Reliance on area expansion has converted forests and grasslands into cropland on a massive scale. The result has been substantial damage to the region’s stock of natural resources and ecosystem services.

A true cost accounting framework sets out the costs of this approach. It would lead to the recognition that technical innovation is important to improve yields on existing farmland. It would show that this is a more sustainable approach to production growth, better health and improved nutrition.

Anticipate the megatrends

African governments must be prepared for the big demographic, economic, environmental, and social trends shaping the continent’s food systems. These include:

• rapid population growth
• associated land scarcity and rapidly rising land prices 
• rapidly growing demand for food, driven by rapidly growing urban areas
• rising incomes and purchasing power 
• more frequent and intense weather disruptions associated with climate change 
• global health crises, economic disruptions, and civil conflicts such as the Russo-Ukraine war technical innovation in 
• digital agriculture.

Africa’s food systems continue to evolve in response to these drivers. Food policies and investment strategies need to change too. We are chasing a moving target.

Role of leadership- Call to action

There’s an urgency to transforming African and global food systems to make them more resilient and sustainable. Failure is not an option.

Transformation will require a coordinated approach from governments, development partners, the private sector and civil society. It is time to put into action the carefully designed strategies, policy reforms and investment plans highlighted in the latest report.
Leadership is essential to harness collective effort, shared responsibility, stakeholder engagement and political will to transform food systems.


Political leaders can either push the accelerator or step on the brakes. The complex nature of our food systems requires that key actors, including national governments, international agencies, civil society, farmer organisations and the private sector, work together towards the common goal.

Governments and regional bodies are at the centre of food systems interventions.

Investment gap-  Financing is the fuel needed to accelerate transformation. Based on recent estimates from New Growth International, a network based management consulting firm, food systems transformation in Africa requires up to US$77 billion a year from the public sector and up to US$180 billion from the private sector.

Mobilising financing at scale requires African governments to:

• define priorities
• commit to financing priority actions
• enhance coordination between government and private sector
• ensure good governance and accountability.

Capacities and capabilities

Africa must invest in domestic human, institutional and system-wide capacities and capabilities. Capacity development efforts should be guided by seven core principles: country ownership and leadership; alignment with national needs and priorities; use of national systems and local expertise; no “one-size-fits-all” tactics; multi-level approaches; and mutual accountability.

We also note that even though agricultural research capacity has increased by 90% between 2000, and 2016, there has been a decline in public investment in agricultural research systems. This decline threatens Africa’s capacity to adapt the latest technologies to local conditions.

Call to action - There’s an urgency to transforming African and global food systems to make them more resilient and sustainable. Failure is not an option.

Transformation will require a coordinated approach from governments, development partners, the private sector and civil society. It is time to put into action the carefully designed strategies, policy reforms and investment plans highlighted in the latest report.

*The Conversation is a network of not-for-profit media outlets publishing news stories and research reports online, with accompanying expert opinion and analysis. Articles are written by academics and researchers under a free Creative Commons license, allowing reuse without modification.

Nurses are essential to protect the public health - Kaci Hickox is an example of one who should be praised

....the Judge thanked Hickox for her service caring for Ebola victims in Africa...

Public health policy requires careful consideration about how to examine outcomes and preventive measures to prevent the outbreak and spread of morbidity.   Science not fear!

Kaci Hickox is free to travel unrestricted after a Maine judge on Friday rejected the state's bid to limit her movements as a medical worker who has treated Ebola patients.

Judge Charles C. LaVerdiere ruled Hickox must continue daily monitoring and coordinate travel with state health officials to ensure continuity of monitoring. The judge said there's no need to restrict her movements because she's not infectious because she's showing no symptoms.

With the judge's ruling, a state police cruiser parked outside her home drove away.

The state went to court Thursday to impose restrictions on Hickox until the 21-day incubation period for Ebola ends on Nov. 10. Hickox, who treated Ebola patients in Sierra Leone, contended confinement at her home in northern Maine violated her rights.

There was no immediate comment from state officials.

The judge thanked Hickox for her service in Africa and acknowledged the gravity of restricting someone's constitutional rights without solid science to back it up.
"The court is fully aware of the misconceptions, misinformation, bad science and bad information being spread from shore to shore in our country with respect to Ebola," he wrote. "The court is fully aware that people are acting out of fear and that this fear is not entirely rational."

Hickox, 33, stepped into the media glare when she returned from treating Ebola patients in Sierra Leone to become subject to a mandatory quarantine in New Jersey. After being released from a hospital there, she returned to this small town, where she was placed under what Maine authorities called a voluntary quarantine.

She said she is following the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommendation of daily monitoring for fever and other signs of the disease.

"I'm not willing to stand here and let my civil rights be violated when it's not science-based," she said earlier in the week.

The legal action is shaping up as the nation's biggest test case yet in the struggle to balance public health and fear of Ebola against personal freedom.

In a court filing, the director of the Maine Center for Disease Control and Prevention backed away from the state's original request for an in-home quarantine and called for restrictions that fall in line with federal guidelines.

Hickox remains at risk of being infected with Ebola until the end of a 21-day incubation period, Dr. Sheila Pinette.

"It is my opinion that the respondent should be subjected to an appropriate public health order for mandatory direct active monitoring and restrictions on movement as soon as possible and until the end of the incubation period ... to protect the public health and safety," she wrote.

A World at War With Itself

There's no  such thing as "traditional warfare" anymore.  

Battle lines are now "sleeper cells" or "networks".  

Although joyous events like the birth of the Baby Prince of Cambridge dominates the media this week, the flip side of world news is anything but pleasant.  Quite the contrary.  In fact, civil war fueled by world terrorism is reigning fear and early death for militants and civilians in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria.  

Risks of terrorist attacks exist practically everywhere.  Enemy terrorists don't wear uniforms, so we obviously can't identify them as a threat.  Witness the Tsarnaev brothers, who perpetrated the April 2013, Boston Marathon bombings. In retrospect, we now know they were the face of modern terrorism.  They blended with Americans while they were clearly at war with their Cambridge, MA neighbors and harbored a misunderstood US policy towards Muslims. In other words, they were at war with us.

First, the good news: 22 JULY 2013 HRH Kate Middleton, Duchess of Cambridge and HRH Prince William, Duke of Cambridge welcomed a baby boy. "We could not be happier," said the Duke, who was at his wife's side when she gave birth. The beautiful boy, who is third in line to the English throne, was delivered at 4:24pm on Monday afternoon at St Mary's Hospital in Paddington.  Royal baby news was greeted by huge cheers from onlookers who gathered outside the hospital and Buckingham Palace.

"Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Cambridge was safely delivered of a son at 4.24pm," said a statement from Kensington Palace. "The baby weighs 8lb 6oz."

Congratulations to the expanding Royal Family.  

But, here's the flip side:  Thousands of children were born in the world on the same day as the new English Royal baby, but many of them are born into poverty that will negatively determine their life expectancy.  

Moreover, civil war and revolution fueled by terrorism are reigning fear and early death for militants, and civilians in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria.  Egypt might as well be in a civil war as rival groups vie for political and religious power.  Israel is constantly on alert to prevent attacks from clerics with Hezbollah and Arab extremists from Iran.  Rape has reduced war to unbridled attacks on innocent women in African countries where civil strife is under reported.  There's hardly ever prosecutions against gang rapes in Africa. Women are victimized simply by being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Perpetrators of rape and human rights violations, like selling girls into sex slavery, are seldom, if ever, prosecuted.  It seems like, if there weren't bad news about Africa reported in the media, there wouldn't be any news at all from the huge continent.

It seems the world is living in a war with ourselves.  There are no battle lines or victory parades.  Rather, we seem to live under the dome of terrorism, where everyone, even the terrorists, are victims of serendipitous circumstances and corrupt political systems.

Maybe, the prevailing "doom and gloom" is the reason the world is hugely smitten by news of the birth of Baby Prince of Cambridge.  A new baby clearly symbolizes renewal at a time when the world desperately needs hope.  A baby boy, born to be a world leader, might live long enough to change the world (...maybe).

Hope spring eternal when we consider the potential for the newborn HRH baby, who has the potential to become a peacemaker. Although Baby Prince must enjoy a joyous childhood, his future adulthood has the potential (given the opportunity) to follow in the footsteps of transcendent people like Mahatma Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King, Mother Theresa of Calcutta and the Dalai Lama of Tibet.

We must find a way to create world peace, especially considering the ominous alternative of a world escalating in war after war, within itself.  

Let's hope the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge are as excellent at parenting as they are demonstrating their prowess as heirs to the British Throne.

A world in need of hope can pray for a time when someone will lead us into peace and out of a world at war with itself.