The #Ecarnomics of a Trump Presidency

I’d like to start this post off by saying that I fully intend to make this post as politically neutral as possible. There’s enough misunderstanding, vitriol and cruelty out on the Internet as it is, and I want to have no part in any of it.

The #Ecarnomics of a Trump Presidency

I’d like to start this post off by saying that I fully intend to make this post as politically neutral as possible. There’s enough misunderstanding, vitriol and cruelty out on the Internet as it is, and I want to have no part in any of it. All I am here to do is interpret the ramifications of Donald Trump’s economic policies in the light of car enthusiasts in a language that, hopefully, you will be able to easily understand. Here, I’ll discuss a few key points of Trump’s economic policy, and explain what they mean to petrolheads in America and the rest of the world.

The #Ecarnomics of a Trump Presidency

First, let’s look at the most controversial aspect of Trump’s plan. As Matt Kimberley wrote in this recent article, The Donald has made mention of eliminating all emissions regulations for passenger vehicles. While it is true that passenger vehicles are responsibility for a minor percentage of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions, repealing emissions regulations would basically undo 40 years worth of good work done by the EPA to take measures to ensure that our environment isn’t completely destroyed. Not to mention, it would make VAG furious after the United States handed them their arses on a silver platter for the Dieselgate scandal. I’d prefer not to have to go to a 7-11 and grab a can of pure, distilled Perri-air on my lunch break just so I can make it through the day (Spaceballs fans, you’re welcome). Of course, I am exaggerating, but the truth remains that, when our air is cleaner, everyone is a winner. Which, from an economic point of view, is the best possible outcome.

The #Ecarnomics of a Trump Presidency

Next, let’s look at Trump’s standpoint on international trade. It’s clear that Trump’s plan to “Make America Great Again” involves, in part, revitalizing the American manufacturing sector. And he’s right—it’s a shell of what it once was. Look at what’s left of Detroit, for example. “Motor City” is now a white elephant, emblematic of the collapse of working-class America. Worse still (from the point of American auto workers, anyway), General Motors has even resorted to building vehicles for the USDM in Korea and China. There’s a lot of desperation amongst blue-collar Americans, to the point that a vote for Donald Trump had become their final cry for help.

The #Ecarnomics of a Trump Presidency

While he has correctly identified the problem, his proposed solutions have no shortage of problems themselves. Let’s look at two of his proposed “solutions”: renegotiating the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA); and hitting China and Mexico with tariffs and countervailing duties on imported products. I’ll deal with the latter issue first, because it’s a fairly simple one. If the U.S. puts import tariffs on other countries, you can bet that they will respond in a hurry. The Chicken Tax (link to my article) is a simple example of how trade wars can get started. Should this happen, the U.S. auto manufacturing sector is bound to lose, regardless of how many jobs Trump thinks he can create. The immediate result, for petrolheads? Input costs will go up, pretty much guaranteeing that cars (and parts) will become a lot more expensive. And that’s not even taking American-made parts into consideration. Even with import penalties attached, those imported parts will likely still cost less than domestically-manufactured goods. The message is clear—protectionist trade policies simply do not work in this heavily-globalised economy. Every action will have a reaction that will hurt the United States in one way or the other.

Now let’s extend that intuition to The Donald’s planned renegotiation of free trade deals such as NAFTA and the TPP. Renegotiating a trade deal isn’t necessarily protectionist, but in the case of NAFTA, I’m not really sure how Trump thinks he’s going to come out on the winning end of a renegotiation. Mexico was pretty much strapped when they signed NAFTA, and now that they are back on their feet again, they’ve got a lot more bargaining power than the United States does with respect to Mexican manufacturing. Tearing up NAFTA would be a worst-case scenario that would no doubt raise the prices of Mexican-made vehicles, including the almighty Ram pickup truck. Trump has to know that businesses hate change, and that disturbing NAFTA will cause a lot of change. Predictably, this will mean that you and I will be paying a lot more for cars and car parts. In the case of the TPP, much of the same logic can be applied. In addition, blocking the TPP will not stop nations such as China or Korea from trying to take a bigger chunk of the American market. Globalization is not going to go away.

The #Ecarnomics of a Trump Presidency

So how else can the newly-elected Donald Trump affect petrolheads around the world? Well, he could approve the Keystone XL Pipeline, which would give the United States and Canada a competitive advantage in the world oil market. This could drive down gas prices for Americans while stimulating the economy on both sides of the border. While this wouldn’t directly impact most petrolheads around the world, the economic stimulation could give people on both sides more jobs, and therefore more money to be able to enjoy the expensive hobby of automobiles. Of course, there are environmental concerns associated with building the pipeline as well, which is why Barack Obama rejected the pipeline. But Trump has already said that he will approve the project, and I am confident that he will follow through on it.

The #Ecarnomics of a Trump Presidency

In conclusion, if the Trump presidency is going to do anything good for petrolheads, I don’t think it’s going to be significant. But, like any other problem in economics, it’s impossible to predict the future for certain. We just have to hope that all the cards fall in the right place. However, that’s not to say that there are no concerns. In fact, there are plenty. But nothing is set in stone, and hopefully Trump and the Republicans will do a good job of steering their policies in the right direction.

For more reading: Business Insider, The Balance

A Carmrades - the Blog post

Sponsored Posts

Comments

Anonymous

+1 Another brilliant article by Gary! I really hope he approves the Key Stone pipeline. No one knows how bad it is until you’ve visited Alberta. So many smart people being lazy bums sitting at home watching their property value drop like a rock. I could understand why Obama put a Vito on it though.

As the pipeline travels underneath the ground, if there were be a breakage in the pipe, it would take a ridiculously long time to find it and when it does get found the damage done would be substantial. But, if the engineers designed and built it properly the chances of that happening would decrease significantly. Overall, nice article gary!

11/12/2016 - 03:25 |
9 | 0
Kyle Ashdown

In reply to by Anonymous (not verified)

I can appreciate what you guys must be going through right now. I’ve talked to some friends in Estevan (right in the middle of the Bakken field) and they are starting to get desperate. I’m not a huge fan of pipelines, but it’s pretty clear that the Canadian economy would benefit a lot from it, and I hope that the likelihood of a pipeline leak is minimal. Glad you enjoyed reading it!

11/12/2016 - 03:29 |
7 | 0
Jack the Car Guy

In reply to by Anonymous (not verified)

VETO

11/12/2016 - 03:57 |
0 | 0
Anonymous

Can he really get rid of the EPA, that just sounds absurd in my mind. There have been discussions here on the implications for Australia if he succeeds in less imports from China, I just don’t see how he can do it. Because China basically ‘owns’ USA doesn’t it?

11/12/2016 - 03:32 |
7 | 0
Kyle Ashdown

In reply to by Anonymous (not verified)

He can’t get rid of the EPA, but he is trying to repeal the emissions laws (which IS absurd in my opinion). And, yes, China does pretty much own the U.S. and The Donald knows it.

11/12/2016 - 03:38 |
6 | 1
Anonymous

In reply to by Anonymous (not verified)

He’s also appointing a climate change skeptic to take charge of the EPA… so it’ll pretty much do nothing.

11/12/2016 - 03:41 |
9 | 0
Jonah Vick

In reply to by Anonymous (not verified)

He can’t just get rid of the EPA. The president can’t really do that, most things have to be voted on by the house and the senate.

11/12/2016 - 17:21 |
0 | 0

State emissions is a good point. It wasn’t America that started of emissions control, it was California. I believe I’m correct they were the first place to require a catalytic converter?

I need to research it, but I’m sure they pushed ahead because of the insane smog levels.

11/12/2016 - 06:51 |
1 | 0
Anonymous

Another good article, man. Just want to say that recently there have been pipeline failure that have dumped thousands of gallons of oil into rivers, and natural gas pipelines that have killed quite a few people.

11/12/2016 - 03:43 |
6 | 0
Anonymous

Read until Spaceballs reference, stopped and upvoted. 10/10 would not-finish again

11/12/2016 - 03:56 |
2 | 0
Anonymous

In reply to by Anonymous (not verified)

YEAH

11/13/2016 - 20:51 |
1 | 0
Carter (FirebirdSquad)

The EPA does more bad than good

11/12/2016 - 04:00 |
2 | 2

They are there for a reason. Getting rid of them would be foolish.

11/12/2016 - 04:02 |
2 | 2
Anonymous

Hopefully he doesn’t get rid of the EPA, and only lowers the regulations set by the Obama administration by just a little

11/12/2016 - 04:36 |
39 | 3
Kyle Ashdown

In reply to by Anonymous (not verified)

To be honest, I hope he does a little bit of work to tweak diesel emissions regulations, but VW would probably be furious as I mentioned before.

11/12/2016 - 04:42 |
18 | 0
StuttgartMadness

In reply to by Anonymous (not verified)

Even though the EPA does somego stuff, they are part of the executive branch, so they should not be legislating like they frequently do. I’m in favor of getting rid of them and moving it back to congress.

11/12/2016 - 06:43 |
6 | 1
Ben Conover

In reply to by Anonymous (not verified)

Yeah. Without the EPA, factories will just start dumping toxic waste in lakes. I grew up near a lake like that and it’s still unsafe to swim in…

11/12/2016 - 08:34 |
8 | 1
Anonymous

In reply to by Anonymous (not verified)

[DELETED]

11/12/2016 - 11:09 |
0 | 4
Anonymous

In reply to by Anonymous (not verified)

[DELETED]

11/12/2016 - 14:12 |
0 | 0
Bill A_92

Brilliant article and very insightful, thankyou.
Do emissions laws differ from state to state, or is it just the enforcement of them post-manufacture (ie consumer modifications?)
I’m not really up to speed with the state and federal legislative boundaries over there 😊

11/12/2016 - 04:37 |
3 | 0

I am not an expert on American law, but I think that there is a general standard set by the federal government as far as emissions levels on newly-produced vehicles, and state-by-state levels as well. That’s why California has way stricter emissions testing I think. Glad you liked the article!

11/12/2016 - 04:40 |
4 | 0

Where I’m at, we aren’t required to pass emissions tests and whatnot, whereas in Atlanta, the case is the opposite. So emissions laws can differ not only from state to state, but from city to city, too!

11/12/2016 - 04:55 |
2 | 0
Black Phillip

Although I understand why you chose to stay neutral in the article I myself openly voice my opposition to the ideals of that racist, sexist, idiotic narcissist of a man. You simply cannot not care about the environment in this modern age or value any human as lesser than yourself and if you do then you are a selfish, bad person and I have zero tolerance for sexists and racists and the like.

I will never support Trump or his supporters regardless if the economy does somehow benefit from his presidency. #dumptrump

11/12/2016 - 04:51 |
8 | 6

Not gonna lie, I am worried about Trump for the same reasons you are. I think that’s a fair statement that can be made without being political.

However, I’m not so quick to judge his voters. It’s dangerous logic that doesn’t necessarily follow. That would be like calling Hillary supporters dishonest and corrupt. In both cases, is the generalization true? Perhaps. But it’s exactly that—a generalization—and one that tends to fuel a lot of hatred on both sides.

11/12/2016 - 04:56 |
7 | 0
Anonymous

The issues addressed in this article couldn’t have been more better explained. It does me good to know that there are others who see these things as I. Ironically, Trump, the man who is arguably the least qualified politician we’ve seen in recent years, is getting me to care more about politics. What an age we live in.

11/12/2016 - 04:52 |
2 | 0