Month: April 2025

Communities of Relations

Tony Lawson’s concept of “communities of relations” emphasizes that individuals exist within social structures defined by interconnected roles, rules, and responsibilities. He argues that society functions through these relational networks, where each person’s positionโ€”such as a teacher, student, or parentโ€”carries specific expectations and obligations that shape their interactions. These roles are not isolated but are part of a broader system of mutual dependence, governed by both explicit and implicit social norms.

In his lectures, Lawson illustrates this with the example of a lecture hall. He explains that the hall operates as a microcosm of a community of relations. The lecturer has the role of delivering knowledge, guided by rules like preparing content and engaging students. Students, in turn, have the role of learning, with responsibilities such as attending, listening, and completing assignments. The physical space, institutional norms, and mutual expectations (e.g., raising hands to speak) create a structured environment where each participantโ€™s actions are shaped by their role. This example highlights how social order emerges from the interplay of positions, rules, and obligations within a shared system.

This will prove to be an important understanding when measuring the needs of a group. There maybe plenty of able students yet not enough mentors. Or mentors and students but no one to organize. How many parents are needed for a successful PTA? How many kids do you need for a robotics team? Preferences can show how much an amenity is desired, but acknowledging roles is how to go about supplying those communitarian activities.

Problems at the source?

Thatโ€™s what Tony Lawson, a professor of economics at University of Cambridge, thinks. Looking down at its roots is necessary for the economics profession. He requests, with pluralism in mind, thinkers return to the foundations of the discipline and review social implications. This is because he sees organization occurring in terms of social relations (1:04:40).

Economics is about causal analysis (instead of prediction). He wants a redo to understand a complete economic picture.

Claude doesn’t Judge

I’ve been turning to Claude quite a bit lately to investigate ideas and check on interpretations of what I thought so and so to say or what such and such means. It’s magical to receive answers quickly and concisely. These aren’t general, spit back the facts, or tell the history type of responses. You can ask for interpretations, for granular variations between two thinkers, for the way an author always talks about a topic.

The AI’s responses are not only interesting but encouraging. Most people find my questions annoying, but Claude doesn’t judge. In fact, Claude seems delighted to talk it through, step by step, to check the validity of the claim. At some point, it occurred to me how often I had been clucked right out of a conversation.

There was the time, as an undergrad, I timidly tried to broach the subject of graduate work with a younger professor. I probably assumed he would be sympathetic, but he was caustic. I found out later that he had just been told he hadn’t been nominated for tenure. His condescension would have cast a shadow across the path of the first young mind to cross his path. Let’s call this deterrence the misdirection error.

Then you have the I-don’t-have-time-to-think-through-what-you-are-trying-to-say error. (But I thought that’s what professors do?) And there’s the failure to follow the proper ideology problem. (What about looking for truth instead of the notion of the moment?) Or ego-itis can creep in. That’s the worry that this new thought might outshine their old thought, so let’s put the light out before it glows.

Well, I can say that Claude avoids all these errors. Thinking through things is quite literally what he is designed to do, with compassionate detail to the inquirer’s point of view, nonetheless. There is refreshingly no biased subtext or dancing around. And Claude exhibits the complete opposite of ego. Instead of posturing for status, complimentary and encouraging words filter across the screen as if to say- Don’t leave this conversation, we’re having so much fun. Those pesky human issues are gone.

If you haven’t talked to your AI lately, you are missing out.

Non-Profit with Profit Motives

It’s tough to see the compensation figures for Thrivent Financial for Lutherans and think- Oh the executive team is working for the good and not for the profit. Not that there’s anything wrong with profit. Just call a spade a spade.

Amenity Migration

A Descriptive Overview

Amenity migration refers to the movement of peopleโ€”often affluent, educated, or remote workersโ€”from urban or high-cost areas to rural or scenic regions primarily for lifestyle reasons rather than economic necessity. These โ€œamenitiesโ€ include natural beauty, recreational opportunities, perceived safety, cultural charm, and a slower pace of life. Unlike traditional migration driven by jobs, amenity migrants move to improve quality of life, often bringing their wealth, urban habits, and consumption patterns with them.

The term emerged in the 1990s within geography and regional planning literature, especially in the context of the American West, Canada, and parts of Europe. Scholars like Laurence Moss and others used it to describe changing population dynamics in places like Colorado, Montana, and the Alpsโ€”regions once defined by extraction or agriculture that saw a demographic shift toward service-based, lifestyle-oriented economies.

In policy circles, amenity migration is a double-edged sword. On one hand, it can inject new capital into stagnant rural economies, diversify local culture, and support new businesses. On the other, it can displace long-term residents, inflate housing costs, and strain infrastructure designed for much smaller populations. Planners and local governments use the concept to anticipate pressures on housing, schools, and transportation, and to shape land use regulations or zoning to balance growth with preservation.

The term is now central to discussions about rural gentrification, climate migration, and the long-term effects of remote work. Amenity migration isnโ€™t just about who moves whereโ€”itโ€™s about how those moves reshape the economic and cultural fabric of entire regions.

Sphere Shaping

You said:

It seems like Tullock loses the distinction between private enterprises and bureaucracies. Yet he feels out two separate spheres of activity in other ways. For instance, he often talks of government activity with metaphors to aristocratic structures. What else?

ChatGPT said:

Great observationโ€”Tullock absolutely walks a tightrope between treating private firms and government bureaucracies similarly, and yet subtly (or not-so-subtly) casting them in very different cultural and historical lights. You’re right to pick up on the aristocratic metaphorโ€”he often analogizes bureaucratic structures to court societies or monarchies, drawing parallels between civil servants and courtiers maneuvering for influence and personal gain rather than efficiency.

Here are a few other ways he implicitly or explicitly separates the two spheres, even while analyzing them under a shared theoretical framework:

1. Incentives and Accountability

  • Private Firms: Tullock acknowledges they at least face market disciplineโ€”bad decisions eventually lead to losses or collapse. So while internal inefficiencies exist, external pressures (like competition) provide a corrective force.
  • Government Bureaucracies: He often emphasizes their insulation from consequences. Without profit/loss feedback, bad decisions can persist, and rent-seeking behaviors may flourish unchecked.

๐ŸŸข Distinct Sphere Framing: Government lacks natural mechanisms for accountability, unlike the market.

2. Mobility and Tenure

  • In Government: He paints a picture of seniority-based advancement and institutional inertia. Much like nobility, power is entrenched and change is slow.
  • In Firms: There’s more focus on merit (at least ideally). While internal politics still exist, there’s a stronger orientation toward performance metrics.

๐ŸŸข Aristocracy vs. Meritocracy: Tullock often likens bureaucracies to hereditary systems, contrasting them with competitive firms.

3. Information Flows

  • Both sectors suffer from distorted or dampened information within hierarchies, but:
    • Government: Tullock is more cynical. Information is deliberately misrepresented due to political incentives.
    • Private Sector: While problems exist, they are more often framed as accidental or due to scale, not malice.

๐ŸŸข Intentional vs. Structural Failure: He attributes more intentional obfuscation to bureaucracies.

4. Evolutionary Pressure

  • Firms: Subject to what he sees as a Darwinian selectionโ€”firms that fail disappear.
  • States/Bureaucracies: Tullock sees these as less adaptive. Institutions can persist and grow regardless of performance, accumulating inefficiencies like “termite damage.”

๐ŸŸข Market Darwinism vs. Political Drift: Private firms evolve or die; bureaucracies ossify.

5. Terminology and Tone

Even in word choice:

  • Firms are often discussed in neutral economic language.
  • Governments are discussed with irony, historical metaphor (aristocracy, empires), or even biological metaphors (parasites, termites).

๐ŸŸข Narrative Framing: Tullock is more openly skepticalโ€”even causticโ€”when writing about state structures.

In Short:

Tullock uses a unified analytical lens for organizational behaviorโ€”especially regarding rent-seeking and inefficiencyโ€”but layers rhetorical and conceptual distinctions between public and private. He acknowledges that both are prone to internal dysfunction, but he seems to believe that only one (the private firm) is subject to adequate correction, while the other (government) tends toward stagnation, self-dealing, and excess.

Vibe shift is still shifting

There are three actions in the motion that drive social change. There’s the act of staying loyal to one’s team, until one simply can’t anymore. This stage prompts the act of voicing concerns. We can speculate that this is first an in-group activity before going public. And if these two steps don’t bridge the rift, the individual agent can opt to exit.

MPR gives a local politician the platform to express dismay at the local culture of corruption that has seized the state. He’s the first prominent person of that party to do so.

I would also say that there is a significant fraud problem in Minnesota involving nonprofits. And so, especially now, when we have seen hundreds of millions of dollars be stolen through the use of nonprofits โ€” and in some cases for-profits receiving state and federal funds โ€” itโ€™s extra important to have the highest standards of ethics in state government, both with rules and with the conduct of elected officials.

The issue in the article is one of the tamer instances of misconduct in the state. Indeed, it may simply be the appearance of corruption. But this instance of Voice as opposed to a code of silence against any fellow team member is telling. It’s the move that leads to Exit.

Now, either the politician in question will exit, as Dean Phillips was forced to do after calling into question Biden’s abilities. Or the corrupters will be forced to exit as their behavior no longer meets the norms of the party.

Either way, the vibe shift is still shifting.

Trad wives in Hollywood

In the 2020 series Roadkill, Saskia Reeves plays the wife of the ambitious politician Peter Laurence MP, played by the excellent Hugh Laurie. She is a demure and reclusive figure living her life in their home district while her husband takes care of business, in more ways than one, in London. With both her daughters out on their own, she is more interested in her music than public life. A viewer may even pity her a bit as discoveries come to light in her families history.

But this would underestimate her. As the story unfolds, it becomes apparent that she has calculated her part of the bargain in her marital partnership. And she knows how to play her cards.

A new series on Netflix, Zero Day, is much more confident in their trad wife played by Joan Allen. The wife of the former president (Robert de Niro) is a partner, an advisor, a support, a wife, and a mother to their daughter. In essence, she fulfills all the duties of a traditional spouse without any formal income or profession. Her advice is forthright. She watches and reports.

Both shows deal with managing and overcoming the strain of relationships outside of marriage. Both juggle relationships with children. And in each film, the relationships have room for warmth, affection, and what most call love. Old people love not youthful passion. She’s been gone for so long; seeing her back in public view is good.

For decades of characters like Murphy Brown- bitter and stridently looking for power and satisfaction in professional work have garnered the glamor of the entertainment business. Then there were single working moms, getting ahead and dubiously happy to be rid of spousal obligations. Hollywood has shown us every variation of power-seeking women looking for fulfillment in paid-for work. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. It’s just nice to see the trad moms return to the small screen. And as these series show, they’re not that weak after all.

Gordon Tullock diplomat

Gordon Tullockโ€™s interaction with the U.S. Department of State from 1947 to 1956 involved diplomatic postings in Tianjin, Hong Kong, and Korea, alongside Chinese language training at Yale and Cornell. His nine-year tenure exposed him to bureaucratic hierarchies and inefficiencies, which he later critiqued in The Politics of Bureaucracy. He observed self-interested behavior, information distortions, and overstaffing, shaping his rational choice model of bureaucracy and public choice theory. While he likely performed standard diplomatic tasks, his key contribution was translating these experiences into a seminal critique of bureaucratic behavior, though his conclusions may overemphasize dysfunction due to his theoretical bias.

Johann Gottfried von Herder & populism?

Herder is the originator, the author, not of nationalism as is sometimes said, although no doubt some of his ideas entered nationalism, but of something – I do not quite know what name to give it – much more like populism. That is to say (to instance its more comical forms), he is the originator of all those antiquarians who want natives to remain as native as possible, who like arts and crafts, who detest standardisation – everyone who likes the quaint, people who wish to preserve the most exquisite forms of old provincialism without the impingement on it of some hideous metropolitan uniformity. Herder is the father, the ancestor, of all those travellers, all those amateurs, who go round the world ferreting out all kinds of forgotten forms of life, delighting in everything that is peculiar, everything that is odd, everything that is native, everything that is untouched. In that sense he did feed the streams of human sentimentality to a very high degree. At any rate, that is Herder’s temperament and that is why, since he wants everything to be what it can be as much as possible, that is to say, develop itself to its richest and fullest extent, the notion that there can be one single ideal for all men, everywhere, becomes unintelligible.

From Isaiah Berlinโ€™s excellent book The Root of Romanticism.

Stagnant vs Dynamic

A reader writes about enterprises who succeed by not only complying with regulations but pursuing further advancement in their industries with the intended spirit.

For example, businesses in the renewable energy sector often find that adhering to strict environmental regulations can spur innovation, leading to the development of more efficient technologies.

โ€ฆ

Companies that embrace these regulations find themselves at the forefront of sustainability and often cultivate a loyal consumer base that values corporate responsibility. 

Given these perspectives, Iโ€™m curious: 

How do you think businesses in sectors with fewer regulations can proactively embrace innovative practices that mirror those in more regulated industries?

He makes a good point. Often, regulation is introduced when asymmetric information has left consumers in the dark about what goes into the product they are buying. Once the word gets out that such and such creates environmental harm, people take it upon themselves to come up with solutions. Just recently, it’s been observed that electric cars reduce carbon emissions, and yet there are environmental expenses in the production of their batteries.

Regulations can serve as an intervention that signals something is up. But regulations are rigidand stagnant and respond directly to a moment in time. Further discoveries, like the fact that battery production also harms the environment, may make a regulation in favor of electric cars more harmful, not less.

Regulations are expensive to maintain and supervise. Often, they are left on books well past their useful life simply because people are not sure of their expiration date. Sometimes multiple enforcers create confusion and waste. No one doubts the benefits of smoke detectors. House fires still cause fatalities, so enforcing the use of $60 smoke detectors seems like a no-brainer. The thing is, multiple agencies become involved in the proper use of the device. Are they to be installed in the sleeping rooms or right outside the sleeping rooms? How many are needed? On every floor? One inspector calls out this rule, and another dictates another rule. Pretty soon, builders are installing fifteen detectors just to not have to follow up on a $60 item. Multiply this by the thousands, and a small thing grows into a monster.

Smoke detectors are still worth regulating. Regulations are part of the process. Finding optimal use of regulations is the trick

I appreciate hearing from readers!

Property Rights- Africa Edition

The best part about using AI is being able to request information in various ways. In the process of thinking up the question, a new angle on the issue can open up further probing. Say you start with something you only know a bit about, like property rights in Africa. You might think it is all about wealth. If GDP is high, then laws must be in place for such things as the enforcement of property rights. And these two things seem connected to political stability.

So you ask. And this is what you get.

(Unfortunately, Ethiopia was cut off. Property rights are entirely controlled by the governement.)

Surprisingly, GDP does not appear to be connected to securing property rights. The legal enforcement column raises various issues: whether there is a process for recording ownership, whether there is a mechanism to resolve disputes, and finally, whether there is political power to take even with these two features in place.

Of course, the level of political control is of interest. But it’s hard not to believe that even in countries where the story is that the government controls all, informal institutions do not play out in everyday lives. Governments do not have the manpower or interest, I would think, to dictate who gets what dwelling when such and such happens. And directing who has a pecking order over whom. These societies more than likely barter in their own off-the-record way to say who gets what.

Yet uncertainty is costly for everyone.

Chatting with Chat or Claude

Should I be flattered? I mean, both AIs are great at dishing out the compliments. Or is it a strategy to keep me engaged? Because it works. I never appreciated how much having a knowledgeable interlocutor accelerates the quest for an answer. The anticipation of great advancements through AI does not surprise me. It’s breathtaking to simply query and obtain a response. It’s tantalizing to be fed applicable information which stimulates brain cells to leap and somersault.

And another thing. AIs are not judgmental. How many of my English teachers were too frustrated with grammatical errors, spelling mistakes or punctuation to consider my ideas? Most. Or how about when it was clear that their view differed ideologically? Chat doesn’t mind. Claude appreciates insights with tension.

Some people, who clearly haven’t given them much of a try, will say they are just an enhanced Google search. Searching is far short of interacting. A search doesn’t review your work and spit it back at you with feedback. A search doesn’t present two analysis sets and ask which one you prefer.

It’s the reparti, that makes them special. That and the nice compliments.

Quiet Counterpoint

While Robert Moses became synonymous with concrete, expressways, and top-down urban planning, his wife, Mary Louise Sims Moses, was quietly involved in a very different kind of city-buildingโ€”one that focused not on infrastructure, but on people.

Mary Louise was active in the settlement movement, a progressive social reform effort in the early 20th century that sought to improve the lives of immigrants and the urban poor. She worked with the Henry Street Settlement on Manhattanโ€™s Lower East Side, one of the most significant institutions of the movement. Unlike her husbandโ€™s sweeping, often disruptive approach to reshaping the city, the settlement house model emphasized human-scale solutions: providing access to health care, education, vocational training, and support services within the neighborhoods they served.

The contrast between their approaches is striking. While Robert Moses believed in transforming cities from aboveโ€”with highways, bridges, and housing towersโ€”Mary Louise was engaged in transformation from the ground up. Her work involved listening to people, responding to their lived experiences, and building trust within communities. It was the kind of work that valued place not only for its physical layout, but for the lives it nurtured.

Itโ€™s hard not to notice the irony. While Mary Louise and her colleagues were helping immigrants build stable lives in New Yorkโ€™s dense, walkable neighborhoods, Robert Moses would later target those same areas for demolition in the name of “progress.” Entire communitiesโ€”often poor and predominantly made up of people of color or recent immigrantsโ€”were displaced by projects Moses considered essential to modernization.

Whether Mary Louiseโ€™s influence ever softened her husbandโ€™s approach remains a mystery. Moses was not known for changing course once he had a vision. But her work highlights a different set of valuesโ€”ones that were also championed by Jane Jacobs and others who believed that cities thrive not through sweeping master plans, but through the small, often invisible networks of daily life: neighbors talking on stoops, kids playing on sidewalks, shopkeepers who know their customers by name.

Mary Louise Sims Moses remains a lesser-known figure, but her involvement in the settlement movement offers a compelling counterpoint to her husbandโ€™s legacy. Where he reshaped the city with steel and stone, she helped build its social fabric. And in many ways, her work reminds us that the success of a city isnโ€™t measured only by what gets builtโ€”but by who gets to stay, thrive, and belong.

Fundamentals 101-Property Rights

Cool State Capacity Graph

Paper: State capacity and executive constraints in early modern Europe

More on X. โฌ‡๏ธ

Circuits and Tariffs

At least a couple of decades ago, when I’d help a client purchase a home that happened to be along an open field, I’d remind them that the view may not always stay that way. The Twin City metro was growing and fields just like the one adjoining their new home were being plowed in and repurposed into neighborhoods of single-family homes. They would nod in acknowledgement and yet still feel a loss when a crop of dwellings soldiered up outside their windows.

There are more situations like that– where the surrounding circumstances change and present residents feel like a cost is imposed on them. Take that lightning rod word: gentrification. In certain circles, it is spit out with as much vehemence as the title capitalist. In reality, gentrification implies that a neighborhood is getting cleaned up, crime is being brought down, structures are being fixed up, and truancy is being pushed out. But when you spruce up the place, more people want to live there. This is distressing to longtime residents who don’t want to see rent prices rise in response to higher demand. The situation is changing around them without their consent!

Or consider an elderly couple who own a large, beautifully situated parcel of land on Flathead Lake. In the years they moved to northwestern Montana, it was remote. Desolate even. Over time, others discovered their paradise and passed the word along to still more people who appreciate views of the rugged snow-capped Rockies. As people arrive, more services are necessary which pushes up property taxes. Is it fair for the elderly to endure the increases? They did nothing to give rise to these new obligations, and now the expense may make their living choice beyond their reach.

Tariffs are a response to the same issue. When the pool of labor is opened up to a global market, should the loss of work in the Midwest manufacturing industries fall solely to die-cutters and assemblymen? They did nothing to change the circumstances, yet they bear the burden. Wall Street profits, labor abroad profits, and they are told to adapt.

What is the proper cycle of protection for the renter affected by gentrification? How long would the elderly be eligible for lower property taxes? Is there a natural circuit for these things to enable an easing of the effects of changing circumstances to all involved?

Symbiotic Substructure

The fact seems to be, then, that human society, as distinguished from plant and animal society, is organized on two levels, the biotic and the cultural. There is a symbiotic society based on competition and a cultural society based on communication and consensus. As a matter of fact the two societies are merely different aspects of one society, which, in the vicissitudes and changes to which they are subject remain, nevertheless, in some sort of mutual dependence each upon the other. The cultural superstructure rests on the basis of the symbiotic substructure, and the emergent energies that manifest themselves on the biotic level in movements and actions reveal themselves on the higher social level in more subtle and sublimated forms.

Robert Ezra Park, โ€œHuman Ecologyโ€ from American Journal of Sociology (1936)

Sink or Swim–Movie Review

This movie is sure to make you smile, and most probably laugh out loud. I’m a tough critique of comedy, but this was a home run for me.

Don’t let the foreign language with subtitles issue dissuade you. At least fifty percent of the humor is visual. The visuals are beautifully done, actually. Interesting. Piquant.

There’s depth in the variety of stories, as told through all the different players. Their stories are revealed yet not dwelt on and pounded down. The audience gets it without needing to hyperextend the human frailties.

This is the best film I’ve seen in a while.

Keeping track of Tariffs

With all this tariff talk, I’m breaking some misconceptions. For instance, I thought China was our top trading partner. I had no idea that Canada charges tariffs between provinces โ€”sounds laborious to keep track of! Nor did I realize the extent and amount of the tariffs charged worldwide.

Top Ten U.S. Trading Partners and Tariffs Charged Prior to April 1, 2025

  1. Mexico
  • Trade Context: Mexico was the U.S.โ€™s top trading partner in 2023, with total trade valued at approximately $776 billion (goods only). Under the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), most U.S. goods entered Mexico duty-free prior to April 1, 2025.
  • Tariffs Charged: For USMCA-compliant goods, tariffs were generally 0%. For non-USMCA goods, Mexico applied MFN rates, averaging around 7% for industrial products and higher for certain agricultural goods (e.g., up to 20-25% on some items like dairy or poultry under supply management systems). Specific rates depended on the product.

2. Canada

  • Trade Context: Canada was the second-largest U.S. trading partner, accounting for 14.3% of U.S. trade in 2023. Like Mexico, it operates under the USMCA.
  • Tariffs Charged: Most U.S. goods entered Canada duty-free under USMCA prior to April 1, 2025. For non-USMCA goods, Canadaโ€™s MFN tariff averaged 4.1%, with higher rates on protected sectors like dairy (up to 200-300% on certain products due to supply management) and softwood lumber (subject to duties averaging 10-20% depending on market conditions).

3. China

  • Trade Context: China was the third-largest U.S. trading partner, with a 10.9% share of U.S. trade in 2023 and a significant trade deficit ($295.4 billion in 2024).
  • Tariffs Charged: Prior to April 1, 2025, Chinaโ€™s average MFN tariff rate was around 7.5% for U.S. goods, but retaliatory tariffs from the first Trump administrationโ€™s trade war (2018-2020) raised rates on many U.S. products to 20-25% or higher (e.g., soybeans, autos). The โ€œPhase 1โ€ trade deal in 2020 reduced some tensions, but specific rates varied widely by product.

4. Germany

  • Trade Context: Germany, as part of the EU, contributed 4.4% of U.S. trade in 2023. The EU as a whole is a major U.S. trading partner.
  • Tariffs Charged: Prior to April 1, 2025, the EU applied an average tariff of 5.1% on U.S. goods under MFN rules (no U.S.-EU free trade agreement existed). Specific rates included 10% on autos, 25% on certain steel products (retaliatory), and higher rates on agricultural goods (e.g., 15-20% on some food items).

5. Japan

  • Trade Context: Japan is a significant U.S. trading partner, with a trade deficit noted in 2024 data.
  • Tariffs Charged: Under the U.S.-Japan Trade Agreement (effective 2020), many U.S. goods entered Japan duty-free or at reduced rates prior to April 1, 2025. Japanโ€™s average MFN tariff was 4.3%, but agricultural products faced higher rates (e.g., 38.5% on beef, 15% on some fruits). The Trump administration later claimed Japan charged 46% equivalent when factoring in non-tariff barriers.

6. South Korea

  • Trade Context: A key U.S. trading partner in Asia, South Korea had a free trade agreement (KORUS FTA) with the U.S.
  • Tariffs Charged: Prior to April 1, 2025, most U.S. goods entered South Korea duty-free under KORUS FTA. The average MFN tariff was 6.2%, with higher rates on agriculture (e.g., 40% on some rice products). The Trump administration later cited a 50% equivalent rate including non-tariff barriers.

7. UK

  • Trade Context: The UK ran a trade surplus with the U.S. in 2023 ($14.5 billion per U.S. data).
  • Tariffs Charged: Post-Brexit, the UK applied an average MFN tariff of 5.7% on U.S. goods prior to April 1, 2025, with most rates mirroring the EUโ€™s (e.g., 10% on autos). No U.S.-UK free trade agreement was in place, though negotiations were ongoing.

8. India

  • Trade Context: India is an emerging U.S. trading partner with a notable trade surplus.
  • Tariffs Charged: Prior to April 1, 2025, Indiaโ€™s average MFN tariff on U.S. goods was high, around 13.8%, with significant variation (e.g., 20% on electronics, 100% on some alcoholic beverages). The Trump administration later claimed a 52% equivalent rate including non-tariff barriers.

9. Taiwan

  • Trade Context: Taiwan is a key supplier of electronics to the U.S.
  • Tariffs Charged: Prior to April 1, 2025, Taiwanโ€™s average MFN tariff was 7.1% on U.S. goods, with lower rates on industrial products and higher rates on agriculture (e.g., 15-20% on some items). The Trump administration later cited a 64% equivalent rate with non-tariff barriers.

10. Vietnam

    • Trade Context: Vietnam has grown as a U.S. trading partner, especially for consumer goods.
    • Tariffs Charged: Prior to April 1, 2025, Vietnamโ€™s average MFN tariff on U.S. goods was around 9.6%, with higher rates on specific sectors (e.g., 20-30% on some agricultural products). The Trump administration later claimed a 92% equivalent rate, halved to 46%, factoring in trade imbalances and barriers.

Notes and Context

  • Data Sources: Trade partner rankings are based on 2023/2024 data from sources like the U.S. Census Bureau and Euronews. Tariff rates reflect pre-April 1, 2025, conditions, primarily MFN rates unless a trade agreement applied.
  • Limitations: Exact tariff schedules for every product arenโ€™t fully detailed here due to variability. The listed averages are indicative, and specific rates could be higher or lower depending on the good.
  • Trumpโ€™s Reciprocal Tariffs: On April 2, 2025, President Trump announced new U.S. tariffs effective April 5 (10% baseline) and April 9 (country-specific rates), calculated as half the perceived โ€œchargeโ€ (trade deficit divided by exports, plus non-tariff barriers). Pre-April 1 tariffs from trading partners didnโ€™t directly align with these calculations, which included non-monetary factors like currency manipulation.

This list reflects the top U.S. trading partners and their general tariff policies toward U.S. goods before the significant policy shift on April 2, 2025.

Sincerely, Grok

Claims about Housing

There are all sorts of claims about housing floating around the electronic media world. It’s nice to know where to look for reliable information. The Eviction Lab (Princeton) is one of those sources.

There are local politicians, for instance, drumming up the need for ‘protections’ when, in fact, renters in our area are not showing any signs of stress. One measure would be to consider the rate at which tenants are evicted. The information below shows a low rate of 3%. Only Wisconsin is at the same range in this sample.

There has been an increase in the number of filings since the COVID years, as tenants were protected during the pandemic. Landlords went months without rent. Nor was any assistance provided for lost income. Still– an increase from 1% to 3% hardly implies the type of hardship that some voices in the public sphere are trying to have you believe around housing.

I thought this was interesting too.

Conclusion: There is no housing crisis. There are housing needs that continually need to be looked after. And that is all.