Dear Mr. Kudlow,
You have to know that since you accepted your White House position, folks like me have grown a bit perplexed. I was of course happy to hear that you were taking a top economist post within the current administration. As I know other like-minded folks agree, today’s White House is in need of someone who understands markets and international trade.
On occasion over the years when I tuned into your old CNBC talk show I found my self appreciating your mostly free market way of thinking
.Today I’m hoping you can shed some light on your recent change of heart.
You have to know that since you accepted your White House position, folks like me have grown a bit perplexed. I was of course happy to hear that you were taking a top economist post within the current administration. As I know other like-minded folks agree, today’s White House is in need of someone who understands markets and international trade.
Which brings me to my perplexity. You do not sound like your old self these days.
Here you are this week sounding instead like your run-of-the-mill partisan hack economist on tariffs.
“You know, if they’re targeted for good purpose, as per China, I think the answer is absolutely yes. That’s always been my view. Most free traders agree. China has not played by the rules. And the trading system is broken, largely because of them.”
Two things: One, absolutely not! Most true free traders disagree vehemently that tariffs are in any way shape or form a legitimate strategy for dealing with China’s alleged lack of playing by the rules! And two, I’m surprised to hear you say that “that’s always been your view.” That would not have been my observation of you over the years, and it flies directly in the face of the video you tweeted this March (below).
To defend present policies puts you in direct odds with the teachings of — among other good, unbiased, economists — Milton Friedman (a man whom I know you held in very high esteem).
Here you are, just a few months ago, tweeting a video of him calling out the mockery that is protectionism.
So what gives?
Sincerely,
Marty Mazorra