Following President Trump’s 2025 proposals for high tariffs—including a potential 60% tariff on Chinese goods and a 10% universal baseline—many economists have focused on the high risks, such as inflation and trade wars. For a political analyst, however, this policy should be understood differently: it is one of the most effective political messaging tools in modern American politics.
The tariff strategy is not designed to win debates at the Peterson Institute for International Economics; it is designed to win votes in specific counties in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin.
This “economic nationalism” is a direct, unfiltered appeal to a very specific and electorally crucial demographic: blue-collar, non-college-educated, and union-household voters in the post-industrial “Rust Belt.” These are the voters who swung the 2016 election and remain the most contested bloc in American politics.
The political genius of the tariff argument lies in its simplicity. It bypasses complex economic theory and creates a powerful, populist narrative:
It defines a clear villain: “Globalist” elites and foreign competitors (especially China) who “stole” American manufacturing jobs.
It presents a clear hero: A protectionist leader (“I am a tariff man”) willing to fight back on behalf of the “forgotten” American worker.
It offers a clear solution: The tariff itself, a tangible “wall” to protect American industry.
Whether this narrative is economically sound is, politically, almost irrelevant. The message itself—”I am fighting for your job”—is what resonates in communities in Lackawanna County, PA, or Macomb County, MI, which have seen industries decline for decades.
This strategy also places the Democratic party in a difficult political bind. Opposing tariffs allows them to be painted as “pro-China” or part of the “globalist elite” who don’t care about American jobs. This forces them to walk a difficult tightrope, often trying to argue for “smarter” trade enforcement rather than rejecting protectionism outright—a message that lacks the simple, emotional clarity of a high tariff.
Ultimately, the high-tariff policy is a masterclass in political signaling. Its success is not measured in GDP or trade deficits, but in its ability to solidify a candidate’s bond with a critical voting bloc in the handful of states that decide the Electoral College. It is a policy that functions, first and foremost, as a ballot.
在國際政治與經濟交織的角力中，一場由美國掀起的關稅戰爭，正悄悄改變世界格局。這次，我們邀請到現任美國奧克拉荷馬中央大學（University of Central Oklahoma, UCO）經濟學教授 Glenn（Kuang-Chung Hsu），帶領我們從經濟學的視角，深入解析貿易赤字、國債危機與全球供應鏈重組的脈絡。這場訪談，我們試著理解表象之下的真相，也試圖釐清，面對這波波動，應該如何思考。
🎧 完整訪談也可在 Podcast 收聽： EP67｜川普的關稅政策錯了嗎？美國經濟學教授從學術角度聊貿易戰 ft. Glenn
這並不是美國第一次以強硬手段解決貿易問題。1985 年，美日貿易緊張之際，美國主導簽訂「廣場協議 Plaza Accord」，迫使日圓升值以降低美國對日貿易逆差。短期內，美國逆差確實收斂，但日本隨後陷入資產泡沫崩潰，經濟停滯長達十年，被稱為「失落的十年」。教授認為，川普的作法幾乎是歷史翻版，卻忽視了當年結局的教訓。
Glenn（Kuang-Chung Hsu） 為美國奧克拉荷馬中央大學（University of Central Oklahoma）經濟學教授，專長領域包括國際貿易、勞動經濟學與能源產業分析。他的研究著重探討全球經濟問題、企業佈局與政府政策間的互動，並著重外包、工資結構與貿易衝突對勞動市場與宏觀經濟的長期影響。Glenn 教授曾多次發表於《Reviews of International Economics, The journal of international trade and economic development, Empirical Economics 、《Applied Economics》、《Energy Economics》等國際期刊。畢業於台灣大學農業經濟碩士，並於德州農工大學（Texas A&M University）取得經濟學博士學位。
《聖經》記載，耶穌在受難週的週四晚上與門徒共進最後的晚餐（就是達文西名畫《最後的晚餐》的場景）。他當時已預知自己將被出賣，而那位出賣他的門徒就是猶大。13 號星期五的由來也跟《最後的晚餐》有關，猶大是第十三位入席的門徒，也因此「13」成了不吉利的數字。 隔天星期五，耶穌被釘上十字架，這天被稱為「受難日」也就是 Good Friday，而三天後星期日，耶穌復活了。
On its surface, Florida’s Amendment 3 is a straightforward ballot initiative to legalize recreational marijuana. The policy debate is clear, and so is the high legal threshold: it requires 60% support to pass. For an elections analyst, however, the real story is not the policy itself, but its potent, structural impact on the 2024 election.
The initiative’s primary political function is not necessarily legalization, but mobilization.
Florida has trended Republican in recent cycles, making it a difficult state for Democrats at the top of the ticket. The party’s challenge often lies in energizing its base and, crucially, turning out low-propensity voters. Amendment 3 is a powerful tool to solve this exact problem. Support for marijuana legalization polls exceptionally high among Gen Z, Millennials, and progressive-leaning Independents—demographic cohorts that are notoriously difficult to get to the polls.
This creates the critical “spillover effect.” A 22-year-old voter in Miami or Orlando, who might otherwise have skipped the election, may be highly motivated to vote “Yes” on Amendment 3. Once they have their ballot, the political calculus is whether they will also vote “down-ballot” for other Democratic candidates.
While this increased turnout might not be enough to flip the state for Kamala Harris in the presidential race, its true impact will likely be felt in Florida’s closely contested U.S. House races. In an environment where control of the House of Representatives is decided by just a handful of seats, the mobilization of even a few thousand new, left-leaning voters in a key district could be the decisive factor. This transforms the initiative from a policy question into a strategic political weapon.
The 60% threshold makes passage a significant challenge. Governor DeSantis and state Republicans are actively campaigning against it, meaning the measure could very well fail.
Analytically, however, this almost doesn’t matter. Even if Amendment 3 fails to pass (for example, receiving 58% of the vote), it may have already succeeded in its political mission. By being on the ballot, it forces Republicans to spend resources fighting it, and it successfully draws thousands of younger, progressive voters to the polls—voters who likely would have stayed home otherwise.
Ultimately, Amendment 3 is a powerful case study in modern political strategy, demonstrating how ballot initiatives can be used to bypass a legislature and, more importantly, reshape the electorate for a specific election. This is a tactic that will undoubtedly be refined and redeployed in future election cycles.
美國南北內戰 1861 年到 1865 年，當時北邊州主張解放黑奴，組織了北方合眾國 United States of America，合力往南邊打，南邊州的聯盟國稱為 Confederate States of America，當時成為總統林肯（Abraham Lincoln）於 1862 年 9 月 22 日宣布了《解放奴隸宣言》（Emancipation Proclamation）1863 年生效，雖然南方蓄奴州並不歸聯邦政府管轄，也開始陸續投降，然而德州地理位置獨立，並沒有成為戰場，許多人帶著他們的奴隸從東部各州移民到德州來逃避戰爭。德州則成為最後一個向北方合眾國（United States of America）投降的南部州，也是美國黑奴最後獲得自由的地方。
Happy Friday! TGIF! 我們有一堆詞彙一堆開心興奮的情緒在星期五，因為這是迎接周末來臨的一天。但是，有一個星期五常常令人擔心害怕，尤其在歐美地區更是迷信這件事，這個星期五就是13號星期五（Friday the 13th），英文也稱 Black Friday 黑色星期五， 此黑非購物黑，是不幸運的黑。
最後，我來介紹這個有趣的超長單字 paraskevidekatriaphobia 源於希臘文，我們可以把他拆開解釋，paraskevi-deka-tria-phobia，paraskeví 是禮拜五的意思，dekatre是13（deka就是10，tris就是3），恐懼症就是phobia，維基百科解釋 a phobia is a type of anxiety disorder，恐懼症就是一種焦慮症。
