Skip to Content

Why Trade Wars Never Work

An old nemesis has returned to the United States and other nations around the planet: protectionism. These leaders, and the voters who bought their snake oil, falsely believe protecting their borders by building walls, taxing imports, claiming currency manipulation and threatening to dissolve trade agreements will bring jobs back home. They’re wrong.

What these well-intentioned people forget are the lessons of history. They forget about The Tariff Act of 1930, also known as the Smoot-Hawley Tariff, the one piece of legislation that hastened, accelerated and prolonged The Great Depression. People forget about the jobs created that did not exist before due to current trade agreements and the lower prices consumers paid for goods and services.

The misguided perception that jobs will be created for nations with trade deficits by preventing trade does not work. And we are dangerously close to poking the sleeping giant again. Once a trade war begins it is hard to stop the cascading effects. The damage is swift and painful with few options available less painful. Best to leave the sleeping beast where she is. But politicians sometimes have an agenda we all pay the price for.

But why do trade barriers cause job loss? If the U.S. has a massive trade imbalance, curtailing imports should bring the jobs home to create those products, right? It’s not that simple. Today we will explore why curtailing trade destroys jobs in all countries involved. Open trade is beneficial to everyone.

The Truth of Trade Wars

Conventional wisdom says if you deny products from entering your market, local businesses will begin producing those products to meet demand. If conventional wisdom were correct, countries with trade surpluses would suffer the most in a trade war and countries with trade deficits would actually benefit from restricted trade.

But history is clear this is not what happens. Restricted trade hurts all economies involved. The 1930 tariff in the U.S. hurt domestic businesses and foreign. Foreign nations instituted their own trade barriers to protect their local markets. It didn’t work. Even countries with trade surpluses suffered economic decline and significant job losses. It took World War II to really kick production back into high gear. Unwinding the devastating trade barriers were too difficult for any nation to handle unilaterally. Voters demanded trade barriers decline in tandem or that the other guy go first. The fear open trade would do additional harm to local economies froze everyone in their tracks. The lesson is clear: It is easy to set up barriers through unfounded fear and nearly impossible to tear down the barriers once erected.

Open trade took decades to develop. Large numbers of trade agreements fueled economic growth, jobs, and lower prices over the preceding decades. Decades of work with all the accompanying advantages are now threatened. Decades of work can be undone in a few months or even days, requiring additional decades to return to previous levels.

What is so amazing is how Americans cheered President Regan when he said, “Mister Gorbachev, tear down that wall.” are the same people cheering as America plans to build its own wall on her southern border. The same political party screaming FREE TRADE 30 years ago is the same party screaming PROTECTIONISM today. It is a dangerous time.

#trade wars #tariffs #trade #freetrade #deficit | trade wars | free trade | tariffsWhy Restricted Trade Never Creates Jobs

The logic jobs will come home if trade is restricted is wrong-headed. The reason production went to another location is due to costs or other considerations. Restricted trade reduces competition, thus increasing prices as supply is reduced or eliminated.

Think of it this way. Suppose Japan was sick of paying for imported oil. They decide to slap a massive tariff on oil imports or restrict foreign oil entering their market. What would happen? Would the oil industry expand in Japan? It might. But Japan is oil poor and no amount of investment will bring much additional domestic oil to their market. Alternatives would be explored. Solar, wind and nuclear could make up for some of the losses.

Still, with any amount of investment, Japan would struggle to bring additional energy supply to their market to offset the trade barrier losses. Even if Japan reached energy parity it would takes year, or more likely, decades, to replace the losses and at significantly higher costs. All Japanese products would suffer a competitive disadvantage as higher input costs would make all Japanese products more costly. Japan, in our example, would put an end to the trade deficit they have in the oil trade, but at a massive cost to the local economy. Higher energy costs would reduce demand for goods domestically and for export. Jobs would be lost from the trade barrier even though they eliminated the huge oil trade imbalance.

I use Japan as an extreme example. It is easy to see how Japan would have a hard time offsetting self-imposed oil import restrictions. It is easy to see how jobs domestically would be lost by such a strategy.

The same applies in other industries in other nations. The idea restricting trade with Mexico would bolster the U.S. economy is idiotic. Don Quixote had more sanity when he chased windmills.

What will happen if the North American Trade Agreement were scraped and trade between the U.S. and Mexico curtailed? Production of automotive parts and accessories would be brought home. But the reasons (efficiencies) for outsourcing the production would be lost. Price would be higher and it would take time to build the production facilities so the production jobs would be at minimum temporarily lost. Higher prices would shrink demand. That is the simple law of supply and demand. Higher prices, even if consumers demand more, will reduce demand consumers can actually afford. Their pocketbook will run dry before the same number of items is purchases. Therefore, fewer jobs are neded.

Worse, Mexico will now have fewer jobs and fewer resources to buy goods and services from the U.S. Even with a trade imbalance, the country with the surplus will suffer job losses and economic decline! The market for all parties involved is smaller since they are limited to their local market which is smaller than the world market.

Fewer domestic jobs slows the economy. Fewer foreign jobs due to reduced trade will reduce international trade, which means less demand, which must lead to fewer jobs and a declining economy. The idea of a trade barrier to protect a domestic industry will do exactly the opposite.

Fair Trade

The problem starts when one country feels as if trade between them is unfair. Regardless the care taken to create a trade agreement, one side will have an advantage, even if slight. In most trade agreements there are multiple areas of trade that favor one side and other areas of trade favoring the other side. As time goes on and economies evolve, disparities can become acute.

Trade agreements work. This is not the time to scrap free trade policies; it is time to review trade agreements and make modest changes so all parties win. And trade is like that. Everyone can win! Yes, some industries will see job losses, but more jobs (usually better paying) will develop. Guarding your job like a mouse defending his stash is short-sighted and self-defeating.

Of course, you can always buy domestically produced goods and services whenever possible. It’s not always possible. But do you really want to do every darn thing yourself? I personally find no issue with Mexicans (in Mexico) producing auto parts or legal immigrants working in the U.S. I love doing many things myself, but I also have no problem with non-white middle aged men doing the work. My eye doctor is black and he is darn good at what he does. I’m not changing doctors due to his skin color. Are you nuts? Racism hurts the racist most of all.

We need to be careful our desire to erect borders is not really jealousy somebody else might be improving their life and their skin color, or religion, or gender, et cetera, et cetera is not the same as ours.

These are dangerous times. We need to tread carefully and think before we step. This is NOT an “us versus them” situation. Trade agreements do need adjustment. Immigration is an important issue for many countries. Planning is needed.

We can make our world, our nation and our local community a better place if we think as we move forward. Building walls are an unproductive use of resources. Regardless your nationality or political affiliation, President Regan was right, “. . . tear down that wall.”


More Wealth Building Resources

Personal Capital is an incredible tool to manage all your investments in one place. You can watch your net worth grow as you reach toward financial independence and beyond. Did I mention Personal Capital is free?

Medi-Share is a low cost way to manage health care costs. As health insurance premiums continue to sky rocket, there is an alternative preserving the wealth of families all over America. Here is my review of Medi-Share and additional resources to bring health care under control in your household.

QuickBooks is a daily part of life in my office. Managing a business requires accurate books without wasting time. Quickbooks is an excellent tool for managing your business, rental properties, side hustle and personal finances.

A cost segregation study can save $100,000 for income property owners. Here is my review of how cost segregation studies work and how to get one yourself.

Amazon is a good way to control costs by comparison shopping. The cost of a product includes travel to the store. When you start a shopping trip to Amazon here it also supports this blog. Thank you.


David Castelli

Sunday 21st of January 2024

Hi Keith. Great article. Importmant points explained clearly. And while I agree with you on almost everything, this one comment troubles me and I am not saying I have the answer either, but to me warrants further discussion. Under Fair Trade, you said, "Yes some industries will see job losses, but more jobs(usually better paying) will develop" My question is , why, where, how and when are there better paying jobs because of fair or free trade? I just have a hard to seeing that. And that does not make everything else you said wrong and I agree, the net benefits outweight the net losses. It just seems like everyone that writes about free, open or fair trade or whatever we want to call it throw that sentence in . Now this may fall under its time to review trade policies as you mention. This is a great site, I love your articles and give and take with your members. Thank you

David Castelli

Monday 22nd of January 2024

@Keith Taxguy, EA, I do.....And like I said, I agree with you...Its just there are people out there that cannot make that transition into the higher paying jobs. And yeah maybe thats more or all on them but it still stings and I do worry about those folks. Be well

Keith Taxguy, EA

Sunday 21st of January 2024

David, free trade allows nations (or any geographic area) to focus their efforts in areas where they have a natural advantage. This allows for greater economies of scale, leading to higher profit margins. These economies of scale means more people in certain areas specialize, creating ever greater product and service quality, leading to higher wages and living standard.

Think of it this way. Florida is known for oranges and Wisconsin for dairy. Why? Because there is a natural advantage under this model. Flip it around and nobody wins. Oranges don't grow in WI and FL is terrible for dairy, thought they have a minor amount. Free trade between WI and FL makes sense. WI will never grow oranges as cheaply or in quality in greenhouses as FL can grow the fruit and ship it to WI. The reverse is true for dairy. Under free trade everyone wins.

Another way of thinking about this is as such: the U.S. wants textiles, but textile mills are labor intensive and low wages. Moving textiles to China brings up wages for Chinese workers while providing clothing for Americans. It is easy to see why free trade creates higher wages here. If the U.S. forces textiles in the U.S. Americans will have more low paying jobs or less clothing options. But in China those are high paying wages. Both sides win and wages worldwide go up.

I could go on but I think you understand what I'm saying.

My Tax Plan If I Were President | The Wealthy Accountant

Friday 25th of January 2019

[…] is just plain stupid. Tariffs are a tax on your own people! I would open the door to trade with all tariffs eliminated. If other countries don’t follow suit, […]

The History of Polarized Politics and Money | The Wealthy Accountant

Monday 15th of October 2018

[…] are not going to hell in a hand basket. The economy may falter from tariffs, but before long we’ll scale even higher heights. It’s almost unbelievable and then it […]

Tariffs, Stagflation and Stock Market Risks | The Wealthy Accountant

Monday 5th of March 2018

[…] (and a few readers) started asking me what is so bad about a tariff. I pointed them to a post I previously published on the consequences of trade wars, but there are still more questions. I’ll do my best to clear up the issues about why tariffs are […]


Friday 17th of March 2017

Well said. I think part of the issue is that many former American factory workers whose jobs were replaced with higher paying ones did not take advantage of them and voted for the protectionists. I'm not sure of what the best solution for that would be (assistance with retraining, placement, etc)