Peter Navarro to CFR: America First Doesn’t Like You

Economic observers on all sides of the political spectrum will espouse on the advantages and drawbacks of allowing millions of illegal immigrants to cross the southern border. Others will pontificate on the pros and cons of a globalized marketplace. The experts will argue about whether the United States should be an industrial behemoth or a customer for the world’s manufacturers.

Is the world as black and white? Not necessarily – it is about making choices that may or may not benefit the country uniformly. Immigration is a perfect illustration of the common challenges modern-day advanced economies face.

The problem: Americans, Britons, Canadians, and Europeans are not having children, threatening the entitlement system and the broader economy.

The solution: Import millions of individuals, many of whom will have children, to fill the gap.

The consequence: The nation’s entire culture will be transformed, leaving local inhabitants feeling like strangers in their own country. Many of these foreigners may not even contribute to the economy, instead relying on the entitlement system that they were imported to fix.

In terms of what Peter Navarro is discussing, the American people have overwhelmingly shown support for the America First agenda, ranging from border closure to revitalizing the blue-collar population. But while this is what the nation wants, a possible long-term outcome is higher prices and labor shortages that could harm economic growth, social safety nets, and the federal budget.

Right or Wrong

The CFR is one of many organizations that suffer from a mindset that Sowell called the “vision of the anointed.” Academics, donors, and permanent members of the chattering class will dismiss empirical evidence for feelings and embrace the hivemind without any rigorous debate – anything to the contrary of government-managed globalism is viewed as the far-right or other asinine labels that crumble under a modicum of scrutiny.

President Trump’s tariff agenda is the long game, and, as such, will require time before it can receive a verdict as to whether it was beneficial for the United States or a plan that backfired.