Finally, Some “Plain Talk” — From Paul — On Trump “Losing The Trade War”, With China.

It doesn’t fully appear until Paul responds to a commenter — in the comment boxes, but I will take it. See the quote below in blue.

But before we get to that, I do want to mention one other fairly new and strident view from Mirengoff: earlier in the post proper, Paul directly called Trump a liar about the existence of negotiations with China to reduce the tariff levels on both sides. That was courageous, but it was obvious to anyone with working forebrain. [Paul — and many WSJ reading Americans — are very angry at the economic damage Trump is willfully doing now.]

When China immediately denied the existence of talks, we all knew that once again, Trump had been caught in a lie. And in the big picture — that lie matters very little except that it increases the probability that China knows it has the upper hand and can therefore beat Trump like a drum.

So as Paul’s retirement savings in his tax-deferred accounts dwindle — due to Trump‘s utter stupidity – suddenly he finds his “big boy” voice. But as I say, I will take it!

…Thanks for your comment and question.

I think the U.S. will have lost if Trump ends up backing down (while speciously declaring victory, presumably). In that event, Trump will have looked silly and China will believe (as I think it suspects) that he’s relatively weak — a big talker who can’t live up to his talk when faced with a strong adversary.

In addition, if China is taking unfair advantage of the U.S. as Trump says… it is, then we will have lost the trade war if Trump backs down because he will have failed to reverse the imbalances that led him to start the war.…

And all of that is before we get to the very simple economic point that Trump is wrong about trade imbalances. Specifically — comparative advantage is what one looks for in a trading relationship, willing to pay up for someone who has a comparative advantage in order to get their implied discount, whether it be labor, raw materials, or engineering capability transferred to the trading nation at least in part— while the trading nation hands over valuable goods or services for which it possesses a comparative advantage. That is how we get to 1+1 = 3.

But Trump was never good at math.

It is tragic that Hinderaker and his boys still won’t say out loud what we all can see. But gratifying to see Paul admit the above.

Out.