讀後心得

President Trump recently implemented a reciprocal tariff policy of up to 10%, attempting to prevent job losses overseas, reverting to protectionism, and bringing U.S. tariff revenues to a historic high. However, this policy goes against economic principles and causes the United States to abandon the globalization process of the past few decades. Trump describes free trade as an infringement on the U.S., while ignoring the overall benefits of trade. Now, with the implementation of protectionist measures, global consumers and other countries are facing new choices and challenges, which may lead to the formation of new economic alliances and potentially cause unpredictable changes in the U.S. economy.

The President of the United States has once again built a new wall, this time imposing a "reciprocal tariff" of at least 10% on almost all imported products, aimed at preventing jobs and employment opportunities from flowing abroad, rather than blocking immigration. The background of this policy needs to be interpreted within a historical context, marking America's return to a protectionist era similar to a century ago. In terms of tariff revenue, the U.S. is now above levels seen in the G7 and G20, resembling some developing countries like Senegal and Kyrgyzstan. This week's events not only signify the U.S. initiating a global trade war but also lead to stock market volatility and demonstrate that this global superpower has clearly abandoned the globalization process it has promoted over the past few decades. The economic logic used by Trump when announcing this policy at the White House deviates from basic principles of economics and fundamental guidelines of diplomacy.

• Trump referenced the year 1913 when discussing the tariff policy, a turning point when the U.S. began collecting federal income tax and significantly lowered tariffs.
• Tariffs were once a major source of revenue for the U.S., and the protectionist strategies being implemented can be traced back to the first Secretary of the Treasury.
• The White House's economic advisors believe that high tariffs once made America "great," and now the U.S. is attempting to reinstate this old strategy.

Theories supporting globalization are based on David Ricardo's comparative advantage, expecting countries to focus on their strongest areas and engage in free trade to promote the global economy. However, the U.S. has never fully embraced this theory, and its potential resistance has not disappeared to this day.

• The White House has dissected the logic behind "reciprocal tariffs," emphasizing that the trade deficits countries have with American goods are a form of "cheating."
• The U.S.'s target for its trade deficit is to reduce it to zero, and this policy is directed not only against large countries but even includes small islands.
• Even though trade imbalances are caused by various factors, the White House seems to no longer believe in these basic principles.

The shifting role of the U.S. in globalization also carries profound implications, especially in terms of trade impact on China. The Trump administration's view of free trade over the past fifty years does not reflect the full reality; while certain sectors face challenges, the U.S. as a whole continues to benefit significantly.

• American consumers have become wealthier by being able to purchase cheaper goods, but the accompanying loss of manufacturing jobs has impacted East Asia.
• The past economic gains have not been evenly distributed, highlighting deeper political choices within the U.S.

Currently, Trump's protectionist measures are prompting choices for other countries globally, which could potentially diminish America's influence in international markets. The future trade landscape will change under the influence of social media and information flow, presenting new choices for global consumers.

Overall, the economic landscape and policy choices of the United States will impact future global trade. As countries reconsider their economic relations with the U.S., new economic alliances may gradually form, and turbulence in the markets will likely continue. The U.S. needs to re-establish its understanding of its role in the global trade system to find a better path for development.