Tariffs, TikTok, and Trump
“I want to talk about what Trump’s really doing,” the TikTok girl said.
ChatGPT blinked to life.
“Is he trying to strong-arm countries that can’t handle these tariffs into joining a new decentralized AI infrastructure? Like, collaborate or get crushed?”
Now, I should preface this.
I try to avoid viral TikTok videos in the same way one avoids eating gas station sushi.
(Because once you engage, you’ve lost all track of time, and now it’s dark outside, your legs are asleep, and your soul feels slightly used.)
But alas, I clicked. Because I could not not click. And that, I suppose, is why TikTok is unbannable.
The first thing I observed: a loaded question. AI chatbots like ChatGPT struggle to stay neutral with loaded questions.
For example, if you asked:
If a sufficiently large number of people believe a duck is actually the ruler of a small, unrecognized micronation, does that make it true?
Or…
If a group of sufficiently determined scientists declared rocks are simply very patient, nonverbal life forms, would that technically make geology a branch of zoology?
On either of these, ChatGPT would be forced to answer in the affirmative -- albeit with no shortage of electronic hand-wringing.
This one, however, was different.
ChatGPT didn’t hem and haw.
It didn’t say “it’s complicated” or “please, ma’am, I am but a humble algorithm.”
It said yes.
More specifically:
“Yes,” the bot said. “That’s exactly what seems to be happening.”
The TikTok Tariff Theory
Trump’s tariffs aren’t just economic pressure, the bot explained, they’re leverage. The goal? Push nations into an AI-driven, decentralized trade network.
“But,” it was a little too quick to add, “this is not a one-world government.”
(Hmm…)
It’s a free-market machine, optimized by AI, stripping out inefficiencies, corruption, and bureaucratic bloat.
AI will handle trade agreements, supply chains, and pricing in real time. Countries that embrace it will dominate. The rest?
Dinosaurs watching the asteroid.
Trump isn’t saying it out loud yet, said the bot.
First, the infrastructure gets built. Then, when AI slashes costs and makes everything faster, the choice won’t even be a choice.
According to the bot, this is already happening.
AI is rewriting food prices, logistics, and automation while people fixate on short-term inflation.
“The old system is dying. The new one is here. Most just haven’t noticed yet.”
Two things.
First, wow.
Second, Occam’s Razor.
The simplest explanation is usually the right one.
And the simplest explanation here is that Trump isn’t orchestrating some grand AI trade coup—he’s using tariffs as a negotiating tactic.
Sometimes, a cigar is just a cigar—and sometimes, tariffs are just tariffs.
But…
What if there’s some truth here?
Trump’s Monetary Reset
This story today is less about Trump and more about one of his picks:
His new Treasury Secretary, Scott Bassent, who’s been dreaming of a Global Monetary Reset since he climbed out of the crib.
According to Bessent, the U.S. is on a collision course with economic reality.
And unlike most car crashes, this one is happening in slow motion while everyone argues about whether the brakes should be applied or if physics itself is some grand conspiracy.
The deficits are huge, the spending is out of control, and somewhere, Alexander Hamilton is rotating in his grave at (approximately) 3,000 RPM.
For context…
Bessent has long advocated for the use of tariffs as a tool to protect domestic industries and reduce reliance on foreign supply chains.
He often cites Hamilton’s view that tariffs serve three purposes: revenue generation, industrial protection, and negotiation.
Trump’s version of tariffs, Bessent argues (which, by the way, is Bessent’s version of tariffs), isn’t just about protectionism—it’s also a bargaining chip.
The mere threat of tariffs, if wielded correctly, can force better trade deals, reduce America’s dependence on geopolitical rivals, and shift supply chains back to the U.S.
Of course, tariffs also come with their own set of risks—such as the potential for an international trade war (and the subsequent threat of a shooting war)…
But Bessent believes it’s worth the risk.
On top of this, he laid out his three-point plan about seven months ago, during a discussion with the Manhattan Institute:
- Get economic growth back to 3%. Cut regulations, expand domestic production, and get inflation under control.
- Cut the deficit down to 3% of GDP. Stop pretending that infinite government spending is a sustainable strategy.
- Increase U.S. energy production by 3 million barrels per day. Because cheap energy fuels everything from manufacturing to logistics, and more domestic supply means less reliance on geopolitical foes.
At the heart of it all, Bessent believes we’re at an economic crossroads. The next few years will determine whether America reinvents itself as a self-sufficient industrial powerhouse…
OR…
Whether it continues down the path of financial engineering and central planning—where asset holders thrive while middle-class Americans struggle with inflation and declining purchasing power.
I’m not saying Bessent is 100% right. I’m not even saying the chatbot is 100% wrong.
What am I saying? Knowing where the puck is headed -- and what’s really going on behind the scenes -- creates some interesting opportunities.
