E.J. Antoni

A deregulation would have a tremendous impact. And we actually saw that during the first Trump administration. There was an interesting gathering where he asked several hundred business leaders from everything from small to large businesses, what did you love most about my first term? By the way, you got to appreciate how the president always phrases these things. What did you love most about me?

A deregulation would have a tremendous impact. And we actually saw that during the first Trump administration. There was an interesting gathering where he asked several hundred business leaders from everything from small to large businesses, what did you love most about my first term? By the way, you got to appreciate how the president always phrases these things. What did you love most about me?

But he gave them a choice. What was better, the tax cuts or the deregulation? Every single one of them said it was the deregulation. That provided much more benefit. And it not only provides benefits to those business leaders and to those businesses, but also to the broader economy. The reason being that when the government taxes you,

But he gave them a choice. What was better, the tax cuts or the deregulation? Every single one of them said it was the deregulation. That provided much more benefit. And it not only provides benefits to those business leaders and to those businesses, but also to the broader economy. The reason being that when the government taxes you,

They take money from you, but that money is going to get spent somewhere else. So it may be less efficient, but it's not a complete subtraction from the economy. Regulation, however, is exactly that. It is a complete subtraction. It represents a loss of economic activity that's not being transferred from one person to another. It just vanishes.

They take money from you, but that money is going to get spent somewhere else. So it may be less efficient, but it's not a complete subtraction from the economy. Regulation, however, is exactly that. It is a complete subtraction. It represents a loss of economic activity that's not being transferred from one person to another. It just vanishes.

And so that deregulation can have a tremendous impact on increasing economic activity, on increasing profits for businesses, and on increasing take-home pay for workers. Again, all of which we saw during the first Trump administration. And it looks like they're really willing to go whole hog during their second term. So that's a reason to be very, very bullish.

And so that deregulation can have a tremendous impact on increasing economic activity, on increasing profits for businesses, and on increasing take-home pay for workers. Again, all of which we saw during the first Trump administration. And it looks like they're really willing to go whole hog during their second term. So that's a reason to be very, very bullish.

Manufacturing is a big one. People don't realize that there is a tremendous regulatory burden on the manufacturing sector in this country. And it's a key reason why so much of our manufacturing has been shifted overseas, why there has been so much corporate inversion of our heavy industry.

Manufacturing is a big one. People don't realize that there is a tremendous regulatory burden on the manufacturing sector in this country. And it's a key reason why so much of our manufacturing has been shifted overseas, why there has been so much corporate inversion of our heavy industry.

For a typical manufacturing worker, let's say they're making about $50,000 a year, it's not uncommon for the regulatory burden attached to that worker that the factory owner, let's say, is effectively paying, that that regulatory burden would be $60,000. In other words, it's even more than the person's wages.

For a typical manufacturing worker, let's say they're making about $50,000 a year, it's not uncommon for the regulatory burden attached to that worker that the factory owner, let's say, is effectively paying, that that regulatory burden would be $60,000. In other words, it's even more than the person's wages.

Now, you throw on a benefits package, let's say, of another $40,000 or $50,000 for that worker, and all of a sudden, what looks like a $50,000 worker is to the rest of the world is actually about $150,000 in terms of total compensation costs for that factory owner. Conversely, you can send that job overseas and avoid most of that regulatory burden, avoid a lot of that benefits package, let's say.

Now, you throw on a benefits package, let's say, of another $40,000 or $50,000 for that worker, and all of a sudden, what looks like a $50,000 worker is to the rest of the world is actually about $150,000 in terms of total compensation costs for that factory owner. Conversely, you can send that job overseas and avoid most of that regulatory burden, avoid a lot of that benefits package, let's say.

And you throw on top of that the fact that we tax manufactured goods at a lower rate when they come in from overseas than when they're made here at home. And all of a sudden, it's a no-brainer to send those jobs overseas. burden would be a tremendous boon for the American economy and for the American worker.

And you throw on top of that the fact that we tax manufactured goods at a lower rate when they come in from overseas than when they're made here at home. And all of a sudden, it's a no-brainer to send those jobs overseas. burden would be a tremendous boon for the American economy and for the American worker.

I think so. It's very much a carrot and stick approach at the same time. We saw it in more distant history as well, and it produced exactly the same results. We forget that during America's golden age, when we saw our fastest rates of sustained economic growth, we didn't even have an income tax. The federal government fueled itself entirely basically based on tariff revenue.

I think so. It's very much a carrot and stick approach at the same time. We saw it in more distant history as well, and it produced exactly the same results. We forget that during America's golden age, when we saw our fastest rates of sustained economic growth, we didn't even have an income tax. The federal government fueled itself entirely basically based on tariff revenue.

And so this idea that somehow increasing tariffs or relatively high rates of taxes on imported goods is somehow going to crash the economy or cause runaway inflation, I'm sorry, nothing could be further from the truth. Again, America's golden age had exactly those circumstances, high tariffs, except we didn't have high inflation.

And so this idea that somehow increasing tariffs or relatively high rates of taxes on imported goods is somehow going to crash the economy or cause runaway inflation, I'm sorry, nothing could be further from the truth. Again, America's golden age had exactly those circumstances, high tariffs, except we didn't have high inflation.