Ezra Klein

But if what you have in your head is is a targeted idea of reshoring specific industries or near shoring or French ring or whatever, which is kind of what I'm hearing from from a number of people on this call, then it seems like you would want targeted policies. And what we have is not targeted policies. It's broad based policies.

But if what you have in your head is is a targeted idea of reshoring specific industries or near shoring or French ring or whatever, which is kind of what I'm hearing from from a number of people on this call, then it seems like you would want targeted policies. And what we have is not targeted policies. It's broad based policies.

So a 90 day pause on larger broad based policies and a huge trade war with China.

So a 90 day pause on larger broad based policies and a huge trade war with China.

I think there's a useful analogy to draw here. I think a lot about an article Mark Danner wrote in the New York Review of Books many years ago about the Iraq War. And it's an article that has stuck in my mind forever because what he says about it is that one of the difficulties of the politics of the Iraq war is there was no one war.

I think there's a useful analogy to draw here. I think a lot about an article Mark Danner wrote in the New York Review of Books many years ago about the Iraq War. And it's an article that has stuck in my mind forever because what he says about it is that one of the difficulties of the politics of the Iraq war is there was no one war.

There was everybody's private war that they were projecting on to the Bush administration. You have the liberal humanitarian vision of why we were going to war and what that war would look like. You had a realist vision for it. You had a vision that was more about weapons of mass destruction and keeping the homeland safe from terrorism. You had people believe there was an Iraq-Al-Qaeda connection.

There was everybody's private war that they were projecting on to the Bush administration. You have the liberal humanitarian vision of why we were going to war and what that war would look like. You had a realist vision for it. You had a vision that was more about weapons of mass destruction and keeping the homeland safe from terrorism. You had people believe there was an Iraq-Al-Qaeda connection.

There were really dozens of these, which is how you got as broad a coalition behind as bad a policy as that together. Because everybody said, you know, they're being a little bit vague about what's really going on here and why we're really doing this. But I bet you, if you go into their heart of hearts, what they want...

There were really dozens of these, which is how you got as broad a coalition behind as bad a policy as that together. Because everybody said, you know, they're being a little bit vague about what's really going on here and why we're really doing this. But I bet you, if you go into their heart of hearts, what they want...

is the thing I want, even though the policy doesn't quite match what policy you would get from starting from my premises. And that's really what I hear here. I hear it on this show, but I hear it in general in the discussion around this. that there are a lot of different objectives being projected onto Donald Trump and his trade war. The objectives do not fit the policies we're seeing.

is the thing I want, even though the policy doesn't quite match what policy you would get from starting from my premises. And that's really what I hear here. I hear it on this show, but I hear it in general in the discussion around this. that there are a lot of different objectives being projected onto Donald Trump and his trade war. The objectives do not fit the policies we're seeing.

The objectives are not stably articulated by Donald Trump or the people around him, nor is any specific objective being articulated in a stable way without contradicting objectives also being articulated at the same time. And look, maybe in the end, and this is why I want to push you all on metrics, you get something you like out of this.

The objectives are not stably articulated by Donald Trump or the people around him, nor is any specific objective being articulated in a stable way without contradicting objectives also being articulated at the same time. And look, maybe in the end, and this is why I want to push you all on metrics, you get something you like out of this.

But you're giving away a lot of clarity just on the trust that what is happening is people are keeping a good hand of cards with a good strategy of poker hidden from you, as opposed to what's happening is what we seem to be seeing in public, which is Donald Trump is a chaotic and erratic person. They are making policy in a chaotic and erratic way.

But you're giving away a lot of clarity just on the trust that what is happening is people are keeping a good hand of cards with a good strategy of poker hidden from you, as opposed to what's happening is what we seem to be seeing in public, which is Donald Trump is a chaotic and erratic person. They are making policy in a chaotic and erratic way.

That policy is having chaotic and erratic consequences. And then they are operating and moving on the fly in chaotic and erratic fashion. Sachs, you heard Ezra.

That policy is having chaotic and erratic consequences. And then they are operating and moving on the fly in chaotic and erratic fashion. Sachs, you heard Ezra.

And Ezra, let me finish, let me finish. You keep saying I've offered a process objection when I'm objecting to the absence of clear goals. Can I finish?

And Ezra, let me finish, let me finish. You keep saying I've offered a process objection when I'm objecting to the absence of clear goals. Can I finish?