Trump Throws Small Businesses Under The Stroller
Yesterday, the NBC show Meet The Press aired an interview that host Kristen Welker had held with Donald Trump two days earlier. It generated a lot of news, since it's one of the few interviews he has given as president to a news organization that doesn't inhabit the rightwing echo chamber. It generated a lot of headline quotes, including Trump answering: "I don't know" to the question: "Don't you need to uphold the Constitution of the United States as president?"
The other big headline-generators were his responses on the economy. Trump responded in classic Trump fashion (which should surprise exactly no one) when asked whether we were now in "the Trump economy" or not: "I think the good parts are the Trump economy and the bad parts are the Biden economy." Because of course that's what he thinks. When asked if it was "okay in the short term to have a recession," Trump answered: "Yeah. Everything's okay."
But there were other things Trump said that deserved to get a lot more attention than they have. Trump's answers on the economy -- specifically, whether his 145 percent tariffs on China are hurting consumers or any businesses (especially small businesses) in the United States -- seemed pretty newsworthy, since Trump's answer was essentially: "I don't care."
If you read the entire transcript of the interview (which seems much more complete and unedited than what actually aired), Trump shows dismissal or even contempt for anyone who does not think the economy is currently about as wonderful as it can get.
A lot of this stems from Trump's obsessive monomania with trade deficit figures. As far as Trump is concerned, that's the one metric everyone should look at to judge how the economy is doing. The problem (for all of us) is that Trump just fundamentally does not understand either what a trade deficit is or how tariffs work. He just doesn't get either concept -- his view of them is just utterly wrong at its heart.
A trade deficit is when one country sells more to another country than they buy of the other country's goods. This isn't inherently a bad thing -- I personally run a massive trade deficit with my local supermarket, since I give them lots of money and they never buy anything from me. But that simplistic viewpoint overlooks the fact that I get all the food I need to survive from the supermarket in exchange for all that money I give them. I benefit, the supermarket benefits, and everyone's happy (or happy enough).
In Trump's view, I am "subsidizing" the supermarket. I am just handing them tons of cash and getting nothing in return. That truly is how Trump sees it. Here he is, very early in the interview, explaining his mistaken view of this basic concept:
We lost five to six billion dollars a day with [Joe] Biden. Five to six billion. And I've got that down to a great number right now in a very -- in a record time. You know, we're talking about 100 days. But just think of what that is. Five billion dollars a day we're losing on trade. And we were very tough with China, as you know. We put 145 percent tariff on. Nobody's ever heard of such a thing. And we've essentially cut off trade relationships by putting that much of a tariff on. And that's okay. We've gone cold turkey. That means that we're not losing. You know, we lost a trillion dollars to China. A trillion dollars. That means we're not losing a trillion dollars when we go cold turkey because we're not doing business with them right now. And they want to make a deal. They want to make a deal very badly. We'll see how that all turns out, but it's got to be a fair deal. But think of it. We were losing a trillion dollars. And that was a big part of the five million [sic] dollars a day.
Trump returned to this concept when asked how long the current "transition" period is going to last.
I can't tell you that. I can tell you that we're making a lot of money. We're doing great. Again, we were losing more than $5 billion a day. $5 billion a day. You don't talk about that. And right now, we're going to be at a point very soon where we're making money every day. Look... we were losing hundreds of billions of dollars with China. Now we're essentially not doing business with China. Therefore, we're saving hundreds of billions of dollars. Very simple.
Got that? As long as there is no trade deficit, everything's going to be fine and everyone's going to get rich -- no matter what. Even if the fact that there's no trade deficit is because there is no trade, period. He thinks it's great we have gone "cold turkey" with China. Elsewhere he explicitly says so: "The tariffs are going to make us rich. We're going to be a very rich country."
Trump also deploys a familiar tactic at several points in the interview, by just flat-out lying about numbers he doesn't like. The most obvious example is the price of gasoline. He's been using a figure for the past couple of weeks that he just made up out of whole cloth because he thought it sounded good. Here he is, from the interview:
Did you see oil prices? Did you see gasoline is now below, in many cases, in many states, below two dollars a gallon? $1.98, $1.99, $1.97?
He started using this made-up figure a few weeks ago, sometimes saying it is happening in "two" or "three" states, sometimes just saying "many." On one occasion, he even made his fake made-up number even better: "Gasoline prices just hit $1.88 a gallon in three states. Can you believe it?"
Well... no. No, I can't believe it, because it is not true. CNN recently took the time to explain the reality of the situation:
The national average on Thursday was about $3.19 per gallon, according to AAA. The lowest Thursday average in any state was about $2.66 per gallon in Mississippi.
And GasBuddy, a company that tracks gas prices at tens of thousands of stations around the country, did not find a single station offering gas for under $2 per gallon.... At no point since Trump started making these claims in mid-April has GasBuddy found a single gas station offering gas for the sub-$2 price Trump claimed some states had just hit.
Got that? Out of tens of thousands of American gas stations, not a single one was selling gas for the price Trump has been bragging about. He is (if you will excuse the pun) gaslighting us. Or trying to, at any rate. Even on his own pet social media site -- where most people who have an account are already strong Trump supporters -- there was pushback on Trump's claim, from people saying some version of: "Not happening where I live." The reality of the situation: gas prices right now are almost exactly where they were on the day Trump took office (they're actually up a few cents).
Trump has three "go-to" ways of dealing with negative facts. The first is to just deny they exist ("Fake news!") and lie about them. The second is to brush them off as unimportant. And the third is to blame someone (anyone) else for them. Gas is below $2 a gallon, because who are you going to believe, Trump -- or your lyin' eyes? Everything wrong with the economy is Joe Biden's fault. But it's that middle one that Trump truly dug into during the interview, which hasn't yet gotten much attention.
Last week, in a cabinet meeting, Trump tried to brush off the prospect of American consumers facing empty shelves. Welker brought this up, reading back to Trump what he had said: "Maybe the children will have two dolls instead of 30 dolls. And maybe the two dolls will cost a couple of bucks more than they would normally." This was stunning both for the fact that Trump was actually admitting that prices would be going up, and for the fact that he just does not care about Americans not being able to buy what they want to buy. Welker got Trump to expound on this:
[PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP:] I don't think that a beautiful baby girl needs -- that's 11 years old -- needs to have 30 dolls. I think they can have three dolls or four dolls because what we were doing with China was just unbelievable. We had a trade deficit of hundreds of billions of dollars with China.
[KRISTEN WELKER:] When you say, "They could have three dolls instead of 30 dolls," are you saying you're --
[TRUMP:] I'm saying they don't need to have 30 dolls --
[Q:] -- that Americans could see empty store shelves?
[TRUMP:] No. No, I'm not saying that. I'm just saying they don't need to have 30 dolls. They can have three. They don't need to have 250 pencils. They can have five.
[Q:] But you're basically saying there could be some supply shortages --
[TRUMP:] I'm basically saying --
[Q:] -- because of the tariffs.
[TRUMP:] -- we don't have to waste money on a trade deficit with China for things we don't need, for junk that we don't need.
Sorry, Suzie and Johnny... the Dear Leader has determined the correct amount of Christmas presents and back-to-school supplies that you require, so wanting any more would be downright un-American. Because it is "junk" that you just "don't need," period.
Welker then noted that "prices are already going up on some popular items," which caused Trump to attack her as a "dishonest" interviewer. Then he just spewed more lies on prices (which are not down for groceries, by the way -- grocery prices have continued to go up since he took office):
Prices are down on groceries. Prices are down for oil. Prices are down for all energy. Prices are down at tremendous numbers for gasoline. And let me tell you, when you have -- the big thing, what [Joe Biden] did, he spent like a stupid person, which he was. But he spent like a very stupid person. And that was bad for inflation. But what really killed us with inflation was the price of energy. It went up to $3.90, even $4. And in California, $5 and $6. Right? Okay. I have it down to $1.98 in many states right now. When you go that much lower on energy -- which is ahead of my prediction because I really thought I could get it down into the $2.50s -- we have it down at $1.98 in numerous places. But when you say costs are going up, even mortgage rates are going down. You know, we have mortgage rates --
So Welker tried again:
[Q:] But let me give you some examples. These are -- I mean, these are actual examples. So you're saying the prices that are going down. Some prices are going up. Tires, strollers, some clothing in the wake of your tariffs --
[TRUMP:] Excuse me. That's peanuts compared to --
[Q:] Well --
[TRUMP:] -- energy. Energy is 60 percent of the cost.
[Q:] But, sir, you campaigned --
[TRUMP:] Energy is a big --
[Q:] -- on a promise to bring prices down on day one.
[TRUMP:] Well, I don't know, when you say strollers are going up, what kind of a thing? I'm saying that gasoline is going down. Gasoline is thousands of times more important than a stroller or some place?
. . .
[Q:] But you said dolls -- even dolls could cost a couple bucks more.
[TRUMP:] Maybe they might. But you don't need to have, as I said, 35 dolls. You can have two, three, four, and save a lot of money. We don't need to feed the beast.
Welker tried to steer Trump back to her basic point, which is much larger than just dolls or pencils: "So small businesses say they are being hurt by the Chinese tariffs. And some could be forced to shut down." Trump responded with: "And many businesses are being helped." Welker asked if Trump was considering tariff relief for small businesses. Trump responded with a pivot:
Why do you always mention that. You know, you pick up a couple of little businesses. What about the car business? They're going to make a fortune because of the tariffs.... So why don't you mention the big car industry instead of mentioning somebody that's doing strollers?
As long as the Big Three car companies are happy, then every business owner should be happy, as far as Trump is concerned. Welker tried again: "Well, I'm just asking you about small businesses. Are there any discussions about giving any relief to small businesses?" Trump rejected the idea completely: "They're not going to need it."
Further on in the interview, Trump twice brought the subject up again, unprompted:
It's very hard because the media's so fake, including, like, even the way you ask questions. Every question is asked in a negative vein. "There's a toy company that took a toddler's you know whatever." But you don't talk about the fact that gasoline is down at numbers that nobody believes possible. You know why they're down, by the way? Drill baby, drill. We're drilling like crazy right now.
And:
You should ask some positive things, like, "Sir, it's amazing what you've done with gasoline." Because you know what? Gasoline's big business. A stroller is not big business.
Which is really precisely the point of the question, actually. Welker was specifically trying to ask about small businesses, not big ones. Because it is the small businesses that won't just be hurting if the Chinese tariff rates continue for much longer -- they will be forced to go out of business. The Chamber of Commerce recently sent a letter to the Trump White House begging for an automatic exclusion from the tariffs for small businesses. In it, they said:
[W]e have heard from a historic number of small businesses who have made it clear: they need immediate relief from tariffs. As each day goes by, small businesses are increasingly endangered by higher costs and interrupted supply chains that will cause irreparable harm.
Trump, pretty obviously, didn't read that letter. Because as far as he's concerned, if the Big Three automakers are doing well and if the price of gas (in the fantasy in his own mind) is way down, then that's all he needs to concern himself with. Elsewhere in the interview, Trump was asked about CEOs expressing uncertainty about the future. Trump responded: "See, I don't think there is uncertainty." When asked at a different point how Trump deals with the CEOs, his response was: "China is eating the tariffs right now." Once again, Trump displays a staggering amount of ignorance about how tariffs actually work (they are not paid by the Chinese government or Chinese companies, they are instead paid by the Americans who buy their products).
Trump, pretty obviously, doesn't care. He doesn't care that American consumers will soon be faced with much higher prices (or even empty shelves). His advice to them is "buy less stuff... it's all junk anyway." That's even his advice to parents who are shopping for a stroller. Strollers are not "big business," therefore if their price goes up, it's no big deal. To Trump, that is. And the small businesses who sell such things just aren't important to Trump at all, so if they go out of business as a result of his trade war, well, that's just tough. He won't be coming to their rescue with a bailout, since they don't produce millions of automobiles (or farm products).
None of all of this generated any big headlines, since the interview aired. But it should have, because Trump's naked contempt for American consumers and small business owners is pretty breathtaking. He truly does believe that things are better because America is going "cold turkey" on Chinese goods. He doesn't care if prices go up, shelves are bare, or small businesses have to close their doors forever. Because if there's no trade with China at all, then there is also no trade deficit -- and that's the only thing that matters to Trump, period.
-- Chris Weigant
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
Thanks for the excellent, if depressing, bath in Trump's thought processes [sic] about the economy and his policies' impact on it. Talk about gibberish, ignorance, and hostile projection. Oh right -- the usual.
I did question your light-hearted aside that you yourself have a 'trade deficit' with your supermarket because you don't sell any groceries to them! But as far as I understand these things, that is just not a relevant or useful comparison. Trade deficits relate to trade between countries with different currencies; since the currencies are different, only goods of comparable worth can really establish a balance of trade; a dollar, in China, buys nothing; ditto for the yuan in the U.S. And of course that means the dollars, in a deficit situation like ours with China, are returned to us in the form of investment in U.S. bonds to help finance our economy.
If you were really running a trade deficit with your supermarket, it would be like you were trying to pay for your groceries with Euros, which the supermarket didn't accept, and you would be running up a considerable debt to them in the dollars they were asking for. Since you don't issue Eurobonds, you would be in real trouble pretty quickly.
In fact, of course, they accept your dollars because you and they share the US currency. You have no "trade deficit" at all with your grocery store because you buy groceries from them, and they buy dollars from you, of equivalent value.
OK, I am going to dig through comments now... sigh...
had to start by posting a response to LizM from last Friday (4/25), comment [137]
http://www.chrisweigant.com/2025/04/25/friday-talking-points-the-honeymoon-is-over/#comment-219110
What you say about A440Hz...
interesting trivia (don't know where I learned this) is that the entire scale has been moving slightly sharper through the centuries.
A didn't used to be 440Hz, it used to be a bit lower...
They know this because pipe organs rely on the length of the pipe (basic physics) to provide one pure note. And A used to be a few cycles lower. Pipe organs throughout the centuries show that A moved ever-so-slightly higher, until modern methods could set a measurement to it. It's now 440Hz but will never continue moving upwards, since it's now a numerical standard.
But that didn't used to be the case... like I said, just some trivia...
-CW
Also to Liz M (reading the comments backwards):
First artist I knew was using lip-synching was Ian Anderson of Jethro Tull... his voice deteriorated and got worse, but it was ok-ish for most of their songs. Except one, which starts a cappella with a harmony of their voices -- "Songs From The Wood".
The rest of the concert was rocky, but SFTW was *perfect*... a little *TOO* perfect, if you know what I mean...
I stopped seeing Tull after that. Which was a shame, I used to go see them every time they toured, I love the band!
-CW
From the same column (I think I'm just going to answer everything here... lazy, sorry...)
Kick [128] -
OK, I like #OAF (opinions aren't facts)... that's kinda catchy...
:-)
-CW
LizM -
Gotta agree, pitch-tuning classic albums is just as much of mortal sin as colorizing old B/W movies (the first time this basic debate cropped up, decades ago). I totally agree with you that it's basically sacrilege.
-CW
OK, I couldn't stomach the rest of it... moving forward to last Monday...
-CW
OK, Monday... taxes article...
Michale [13] -
I never thought I would live to see the day when CW would put out a PRO PRESIDENT Trump '"atta boy, PRESIDENT TRUMP!!!" type commentary...
I am VERY pleased with this commentary and have absolutely NOTHING to add to it!! :D
A day off on my day off!!! Who would have thunked it!!!??? :D
see, I was wondering if you'd notice that. You challenged me to write something nice about Trump, so there you go... well, 2/3rds of it at any rate.
Will be looking forward to you writing some things Trump has done wrong now (but not exactly holding my breath...)
-CW
sorry, link to that:
http://www.chrisweigant.com/2025/04/28/three-tax-ideas/#comment-218965
hey, an aside here...
MtnCaddy -
You checked your (probably very old) email address?
You got a web designer friend for me or not?
Lemme know!
-CW
The problem (for all of us) is that Trump just fundamentally does not understand either what a trade deficit is or how tariffs work. He just doesn't get either concept -- his view of them is just utterly wrong at its heart.
Donny Two Dolls learned everything he knows about trade deficits and tariffs at FU.
He went on to imbue this exact same principle with Trump U.
Anybody still under the laughable illusion that Donald Trump ever gave a rat's ass about anyone not named Trump?
I am struck by a singular thought. Maybe this is what we all need.
And yes, I am fully aware that I am breaking this rule in a major way, before I even utter it, ok? so don't bother pointing it out.
Maybe for the next few weeks, we need a little "reset" button. Maybe we all ignore previous threads -- from last Friday all the way back to old grudges -- starting every Monday morning?
Maybe I'll just wake up tomorrow and erase any comments that deal with anything in the past. Maybe that's what we all need to refocus on what is going on right in front of us now, eh?
It's a thought...
(and yes I *know* how ironic it is, on the day I decide to be lazy and answer everything here, ok)
-CW
Because it is so ironic, I will give this article a pass. Maybe I'll wake up *Wednesday* morning and do that to *Tuesday's* article... hmmmm....
-CW
nypoet22 [4/28 -- 35]
I think the internet term trolling originated from the fishing definition, before it migrated to the creatures that live under bridges.
@jfc,
even in the same context, the verb and the noun have different definitions. trolling from time to time doesn't necessarily make one a troll.
I believe you are right. About the fishing thing. It got "nounized" at some point, which changed the meaning.
-CW
OK, Michale [4/28 -- 51]
(The one where you got the links right)
OK, I for one appreciate that, in the spirit is was given. And heck, I'm not even a dog person, I'm a cat person! But still, very neighborly to post that, just had to say...
http://www.chrisweigant.com/2025/04/28/three-tax-ideas/#comment-219064
-CW
Moving on to Tuesday...
ok, moving on...
JFC, comment on Part 2...
Just had to say, loved "Donny Two Dolls"... that could be a meme!
:-)
-CW
nypoet [4/30 -- 6]
"why are the police wearing masks?"
Why indeed...
-CW
oops, new day, should have provided a link:
http://www.chrisweigant.com/2025/04/30/a-real-horrorshow-part-2/#comment-219033
-CW
Kick [4/30 -- 9] -
Yeah, that Declaration quote was pretty classic, gotta admit. It was basically serving Britain with divorce papers, not a "declaration of unity and love and respect"... which he would know, if he had ever actually read the thing...
-CW
ok, new day... Thursday...
JFC [5/1 -- 1] -
Nice. Correct usage of "Flavor-Aid" instead of "Kool-Aid".
Points for that!
-CW
JFC [5/1 -- 6] -
Hadn't seen that Vietnam thing, thanks...
-CW
Michale [5/1 -- 10] -
Wow, what color is the sky on your planet?
(heh)
but seriously... Trump literally wrote THE ART OF THE DEAL...
um, no. he did not. It was ghost-written for him, sorry.
-CW
Michale [5/1 -- 13] -
One might ask you the same about Biden and 2020.. why were you so wrong?
heh. (oh and conspiracy theories don't count... sorry...)
-CW
CW,
OK, I for one appreciate that, in the spirit is was given. And heck, I'm not even a dog person, I'm a cat person! But still, very neighborly to post that, just had to say...
Thank you..
Before my triple bypass in 2019, I would have completely and unabashedly described myself (likely somewhat indignantly) as a 'dog person'..
After my surgery I found a stray little black kitten that couldn't have been more than 6 inches long. Fed her with an eye-dropper and Raven joined our family. A month or so later, my wife insisted that we get Raven a little friend.. Rajah joined our family a few days later..
So, I couldn't hide it any longer.. I am a cat person now.. :D
The rotties came a few years later. Both rottie rescues...
True story.. :D
nypoet [4/30 -- 6]
"why are the police wearing masks?"
Why indeed...
Are you kidding??
Given the propensity for Democrats and Drug Cartels and Terrorists to target Law Enforcement??
The better question would be, "Why should the police HAVE to wear masks???"
I am struck by a singular thought. Maybe this is what we all need.
And yes, I am fully aware that I am breaking this rule in a major way, before I even utter it, ok? so don't bother pointing it out.
Maybe for the next few weeks, we need a little "reset" button. Maybe we all ignore previous threads -- from last Friday all the way back to old grudges -- starting every Monday morning?
Maybe I'll just wake up tomorrow and erase any comments that deal with anything in the past. Maybe that's what we all need to refocus on what is going on right in front of us now, eh?
It's a thought...
I like that idea.. Let's start with a clean slate.. All past transgressions on all sides are forgotten and forgiven...
I think it's a grand idea... Count me in....
Michale [5/1 -- 24] -
None of the comments I have made since then had absolutely NO "jerk" in them whatsoever..
You realize that's a double-negative, don't you?
heh.
as for the crux of the matter, yeah, you have been pretty jerky. You haven't crossed the line into being a TOTAL jerk quite yet, but comment [17] was pretty damn close, ok?
[10] was just you with your TDS (Deification) problem, but [17] was just apropos of nothing.
-CW
JFC [5/1 -- 26] -
Good catch on the "Old Turkish proverb" thing, just had to say that...
-CW
ok, it's past 11:00 at night... I can't face Friday... will just quickly scan tonight to see if there's anything that needs answering... promise to do Friday's comments tomorrow, ok?
-CW
CW,
Michale [5/1 -- 10] -
Wow, what color is the sky on your planet?
(heh)
but seriously... Trump literally wrote THE ART OF THE DEAL...
um, no. he did not. It was ghost-written for him, sorry.
Fair enough..
PRESIDENT Trump literally co-authored THE ART OF THE DEAL.. :D
One might ask you the same about Biden and 2020.. why were you so wrong?
Yes, one might.. :D And many did...
But, considering all that was going on at the time, PLUS the actual real factual and documented instances of hinky-ness (an old word I just made up :D) I honestly don't feel it's a legitimate comparison... I would understand why you would feel differently...
But, in the interests of your comment #11 I'll simply put down my official response as...... "Yea OK. Ya got me on that one... "
:D
On an un-related note...
I think it's been a decade or more since we were in Weigantia at the same time... :D
CW,
as for the crux of the matter, yeah, you have been pretty jerky. You haven't crossed the line into being a TOTAL jerk quite yet, but comment [17] was pretty damn close, ok?
[10] was just you with your TDS (Deification) problem, but [17] was just apropos of nothing.
"Thank you for the attitude adjustment, Chief Earle. Info assimilated."
-Lenina Huxley, DEMOLITION MAN
:D
Michale [25] -
After my surgery I found a stray little black kitten that couldn't have been more than 6 inches long. Fed her with an eye-dropper and Raven joined our family. A month or so later, my wife insisted that we get Raven a little friend.. Rajah joined our family a few days later..
So, I couldn't hide it any longer.. I am a cat person now.. :D
ok, now I did not see *THAT* one coming! I gotta admit...
posting a photo of your cats would go a long way towards your rehabilitation... just a suggestion...
:-)
-CW
MAJOR SCIENTIFIC BREAKTHROUGH...
Scientists have recorded the sound of two helium atoms laughing..
"Hehe"..
:D
CW,
I will, I promise.. But I have to head to the gym now..
It's my Friday, so look for them tonight or (more likely) tomorrow..
[16] Credit where credit is due - as far as I know, Donny Two Dolls originated with Lawrence O'Donnell. It's funny, but I still prefer Fat Donny as his mobster name.
[27] Credit where credit is due - that was JMCT with the Turkish proverb, not JFC.
Chris Weigant
27
JFC [5/1 -- 26]
Good catch on the "Old Turkish proverb" thing, just had to say that...
-CW
That "Old Turkish proverb thing" was actually John (not to be confused with the other John). *grins*
John From Censornati
34
Credit where credit is due - as far as I know, Donny Two Dolls originated with Lawrence O'Donnell.
Yes, sir. He said he was giving Trump his Sopranos name with the blessing of David Chase.
It's funny, but I still prefer Fat Donny as his mobster name.
Me too! I came up with my own mobster name for "Fat Donny" only to discover it had already been bestowed upon one Salvatore Bonpensiero who started out in the "waste management" business as a cat burglar and ended up becoming a CI swimming with the fishes. ;)
Big Pussy!
So you're saying you've heard of him!?
Fits Trump to a "T"... the likes of which nobody has ever seen before.