The Ukraine War in a Nutshell

By Dan McLaughlin, National Review, March 12, 2025 - .... 

What is Ukraine fighting for? 

Its survival as a sovereign state. Sure, there is a laundry list of other things important to the Ukrainians. They’d very much like all their land back. They’d like to join the EU, an economic window to the West. They’d like to join NATO, which would greatly increase their defensive security. But none of those things is essential, and as the record of the early peace negotiations between Ukraine and Russia in spring 2022 appears to illustrate, all of them were negotiable to Ukraine at the outset of the war. One thing was a deal-breaker, and should be a deal-breaker: any settlement must preserve not just Ukraine’s survival at the end of this war but also its capacity to deter or repel future Russian invasions aimed at extinguishing it.

What is Russia fighting for? 

No just cause. Of course, Vladimir Putin wants to reclaim as much of the old Soviet lands in Ukraine as he can, with particular attention to ethnically Russian enclaves and a secure route to Crimea and the Black Sea. It’s true that Ukraine’s borders and the distribution of its ethnic population are artificial products of the Soviet empire rather than organic historical developments, but it’s not as if Russia can complain that it had nothing to do with the many crimes committed against Ukraine by the Soviet Union. ... 

As for the idea that Putin is justified in going to war because he fears having a NATO member on his doorstep, he already has Estonia and Latvia on his border (and Poland and Turkey not far away), and this war has pushed Finland into NATO. ...  The notion that NATO presents an aggressive threat to Russian security of the sort posed by an expansionist tyrant is fanciful.

Why do Americans care? 

.... we care because an international order in which states do not invade one another for territory or conquest — and, if they try, pay a price imposed by a large segment of the world’s economic and military powers — is in America’s interests to preserve. So is an international order in which democratic states (even those with systems far less liberal and democratic than our own) know that the United States and its allies have their back if these states find themselves on the receiving end of aggression by tyrants and terrorists. Our capacity to rally allies for any number of causes is enhanced when we uphold this principle, not because it is a moral principle but because it is a rule of common interests in the same way that every member of a community benefits from the punishment of crimes and the maintenance of public order. This is the kind of neighborhood in which we prosper.

How should this end? 

.... We should want lasting peace, not a prelude to more war. (read the much longer article)

Top Stories

Egg Watch: Week Seven of the Trump Administration and Egg Prices Rise Again!

 

Price of Eggs March 13, 2005

Price of Eggs Jan. 25, 2025

Price of Eggs, Feb. 17, 2025

by Rod Williams, March 15, 2025 - President Trump has been in office seven weeks and look at the price of eggs! 

In August 2024, Donald Trump held a press conference surrounded by packaged foods, milk and eggs, and said: “When I win, I will immediately bring prices down, starting on Day One.” 

He didn't start bringing prices down on day one. He has been in office almost seven weeks and prices of eggs continue to rise. 

To be fair, a president has very little to do with the price of eggs. Also, often there is lag time between an adoption of any economic policy and the effect of that policy. Often presidents get the blame or the credit for policies enacted by their predecessor.   Also, the bird flu has resulted in the need to kill a bunch of chickens, and that is hardly Trump's fault. Nevertheless, the price of eggs was a major concern of people and the believe that Trump would lower the price of eggs was a reason many people voted for him. Trump acted as if he could control the price of eggs. He said he would do it. Let us hold him to that.

It will not be surprising if at some points egg prices do drop. Due to bird flu, some flocks had to be killed. As that recedes into the background and new chicks began producing, prices should drop. However, Trump will not deserve the credit for that no more than the previous administration deserved the blame for high egg prices. Of course, while egg producers recover from the effect of the bird flu other events occur. One can't hold the other factors constant.  Due to Trump's mishandling of the economy, I expect egg prices and grocery prices in general to go higher. Firing a bunch of agriculture health inspectors, deporting farm laborers, and imposing tariffs will all contribute to higher prices. 

The above pic is from the Audi's here in Nashville and are grade A large eggs. Eggs will cost more at Publix's or Kroger's. Also, it you buy brown eggs, or cage free, or free range, or happy eggs, expect to pay more. 

Top Stories

Trump, defying his Own Logic, does not Want Canadians to Take our Stuff and Gives us their Money.

by Rod Williams, March 13, 2025- Trump has tightened restrictions on Canadians visiting America. Canadians staying in America for over 30 days must now register with the federal government and all Canadians over 14 years old must now be fingerprinted. Canadians were exempt from these rules. This will discourage Canadians from coming to American and spending money. 

This defies logic. Defying logic is nothing new for Trump, but this defies his own internal logic. When a visitor comes to Nashville and spends money, this is the equivalent of a US company selling a good in Canada. We get a Canadian's money, and they get some of our stuff. We sell them an experience, entertainment, lodging, and food and beverages, and gas for their car and probably a pair of cowboy boots and a cowboy hat. 

There are a lot of Canadians who spend their winters in Florida. It is estimated that 1 million Canadian 'snowbirds' travel to America annually. These snowbirds escape harsh Canadian winters and enjoy sunny Florida. They get out sun and beaches and food and lodging and we get their money.  That is an export. This helps our balance of trade with Canada.  Does Trump not know this, or is he so petty and immature that he just wants to inconvenient Canadians because Canada has fought back in the trade war he started?

Top Stories

Get Your Free Copy of “Trickle Down” Theory and “Tax Cuts for the Rich”

 

Dear Rod,   I hear from people all the time that Thomas Sowell is one of their heroes. For those people—and you may be among them—I’m thrilled to share a digital copy of one of his commentaries with you, absolutely free: “Trickle Down” Theory and “Tax Cuts for the Rich.” “Tax cuts for the rich” is a favorite argument of those who oppose lower tax rates. But does imposing higher tax rates on wealthy Americans actually increase revenue to the federal government? Hoover Institution Senior Fellow Thomas Sowell takes an empirical approach in his commentary, “Trickle Down” Theory and “Tax Cuts for the Rich.” Sowell separates fact from fiction when it comes to tax rates and uses real-life data and examples. His evidence shows that lower tax rates for all can result in increased government revenue. With over 153,000 downloads of this ebook, you don’t want to miss out on the opportunity to learn from one of the brightest economic minds in our history. Click here to get your free copy of “Trickle Down” Theory and “Tax Cuts for the Rich” now.   Greg   Greg Stamps | Online Development Hoover Institution | Stanford University

Top Stories

Harwood Salons: Has Market Liberalism Failed?

 

The debate over economic freedom has never been more urgent. As protectionism and industrial policy gain traction, what lessons can we learn from history - and how can we chart a better path forward?

Join us on Wednesday, March 19, at 6:00 p.m. for an engaging discussion with Dr. Samuel Gregg, AIER's Friedrich Hayek Chair in Economics and Economic History. He'll explore what has worked, what hasn't, and how we can revive the case for free markets in today's policy landscape.

This is a great opportunity for you to connect with like-minded individuals in your community and gain key insights on the future of economic freedom.

Spots are filling up fast — register now to secure yours!

Registration required. REGISTER HERE

Harwood Salons - Nashville is made possible through the generosity of supporters like you. We encourage you to become a member or make a donation to support the American Institute for Economic Research and ensure the continuation of these important events. All donations are tax-deductible and directly contribute to sustaining Harwood Salons - Nashville.

Top Stories

David Frum on Donald Trump’s Betrayal of Ukraine

David Frum is editor of The Atlantic and was a speech writer for President George W Bush. 

Top Stories

Recommended Readings on Free Trade Versus Protectionism

Everything You Need to Know About Open Markets, Comparative Advantage, and Globalization

by Williamson M. Evers, Independent Institute, January 24, 2025 -

Introduction

Economists, going back to Adam Smith and David Ricardo, are virtually unanimous that free trade benefits consumers and the overall economy. But there exist special interests who would gain in the short run from protectionist barriers. And there is a large segment of the public that doesn’t understand the arguments for free trade. Not surprisingly, there are politicians who are all too willing to gain votes by catering to protectionist interests.

People, farms, firms, and factories in America should be able to trade freely with people, farms, firms, and factories across international boundaries. You should, for example, be able to buy shoes made in Ethiopia. Economist William Niskanen stresses the moral case for free trade: Individuals have the right “to make consensual arrangements across national borders.” Without governmental interference, such voluntary interaction is harmonious and mutually beneficial. People don’t trade unless they believe they will be better off afterwards.

Much international trade can be explained by comparative advantage. Economist Donald J. Boudreaux explains that “the chief nontrivial insight” found in the idea of comparative advantage is that an economic concern’s “technical ability to produce a product” is, by itself, “irrelevant” for resolving whether “that entity should produce that product itself” or “acquire that product by first producing something else and then trading that something else” for the desired product.

Trade barriers are put in place by politicians and bureaucrats who use the machinery of government to disrupt voluntary trade and grant privileges to special interests at the expense of consumers and the general public. Jobs that are protected from the gales of competition are jobs in stagnant industries that are under no pressure to improve and innovate. Free trade provides the best deals for consumers and encourages the economy to grow.

These politicians and bureaucrats—who could be aligned with either Democrats or Republicans—cloak their bestowing of special privilege in the rhetoric of public benefit. They are sometimes successful because they are concentrating on getting their privileges, while much of the public’s attention is elsewhere.

What are some of the frequent rhetorical stratagems of the advocates of protectionist privilege?

They say that new-born industries need hot-house protection. They claim that their country needs to be strong or dominate in allegedly key industries. They claim to have special insight into what the national interest requires—and it turns out to require protecting these special interests. As James Bovard puts it, so-called “fair trade” means “subjugating” the wishes of consumers to those of government officials and the special interests they are helping.

They say that high tariffs will bring in an abundance of tax revenues—forgetting that a Laffer Curve exists for tariffs. As economic historian F. W. Taussig pointed out in 1888, if a government raises tariffs, thereby building up protected domestic businesses, then products of these domestic businesses will replace imports, and revenues from tariffs on those imports will fall.

Advocates of protection claim they worry about the “balance of trade.” Milton Friedman, Nobel Laureate in economics, clarified that a “favorable balance of trade” actually means “exporting more than we import,” sending “abroad goods of greater total value than the goods we get from abroad.” He asks, “In your private household,” wouldn’t you prefer “to pay less for more” rather than the other way around, yet that is what would be called an ‘unfavorable balance of payments.”

Yet despite rhetorical ploys like “balance of trade” and despite the special interests putting considerable time and money into obtaining privileges, we have enjoyed epochs of relative free trade.

Why have these free trade periods come about? It is because civically-active people have held—call it what you will—ideals, philosophies, or ideologies that support freedom of trade and acted on behalf of those ideals. (read more)

Top Stories

Bill to rename Nashville airport for Pres. Trump back in TN legislature

Bill to rename Nashville airport for Pres. Trump back in TN legislature

Top Stories

Ex-Sen. Brian Kelsey says he has received a Trump pardon

by Melissa Brown, The Tennessean, March 11, 2025 -  Key Points:

• Former state Sen. Brian Kelsey pleaded guilty in a campaign finance case. He received a 21-month sentence.
• Just 15 days after reporting to federal prison, Kelsey said he received a pardon from President Donald Trump.
• In a social media statement, Kelsey blamed his case on a "weaponized Biden DOJ." But the investigation against Kelsey began in 2019 during the first Trump administration.

... Kelsey, R-Germantown, reported to a federal prison facility in Kentucky in late February after exhausting a string of appeals and last-ditch legal efforts to either overturn his guilty plea or delay his prison reporting date.

"God used Donald Trump to save me from the weaponized Biden DOJ," Kelsey said in a social media post on Tuesday evening. (Read it all)

Top Stories

Comrade Trump: Is Trump a Russian Asset?

by Rod Williams, March 12, 2025- As we have watched America side with Russia in the war in Ukraine and adopt the Russian talking points; cut off the sharing of intelligence with Ukraine thus giving Russia a battlefield advantage; vote with Russia, North Korea, Syria and a few other authoritarian governments in the UN against a UN resolution condemning Russia's aggression against Ukraine; suggest Russian be welcomed back into the G-7; and move to weaken the NATO alliance, one must wonder, why? Could it be that Trump is a Russian asset? While this was being spoken about only on some smaller podcast and blogs, now more and more serious sources are asking the questions. It is a reasonable question to ask.

In this video, DW host Brent Goff examines the considerable volume of evidence that suggest Trump is a Russian asset and interviews journalist and New York Times bestselling author Craig Unger who says that Donald Trump is indeed a Russian asset. DW is a respected international news service funded by the German government and broadcasting in 32 languages. 

Top Stories

Congress Can Stop This Tariff Madness Right Now

 By Charles C. W. Cooke, National Review, March 4, 2025 - ...  Congress can stop this right now. Literally right now. Today. This morning. Before lunch. In a matter of hours. The Constitution gives absolute control over tariffs to Congress. As such, any power that the president enjoys must be delegated. With one bill — passed by veto-proof majorities — Congress could take back some (or all) of that power.

The law that President Trump is using to cause such havoc is known as IEEPA. It’s supposed to be for emergencies, but, given that it gives the president free rein to determine when an emergency is in force, it’s effectively a non-justiciable enabling act. Congress can repeal it, amend it, or pass a separate law that supersedes it, and there’s nothing that anybody can do to stop it. Such a law could exempt Canada and Mexico from its provisions, or make clear that other tariff deals involving those countries (like the one Trump signed in 2019) have precedence, or do anything else that Congress wants it to do, because — again! — Congress has plenary power over tariffs. Heck, if Congress passed a law that simply read, “All delegation of the legislature’s Article I, Section 8 tariff powers is hereby rescinded,” that would immediately be the law of the land.

I understand that Congress does not want to do this because, despite their protestations when their guy is out of power, both parties like the imperial presidency. (read it all)

Rod's Comment: It is unfortunate and shameful that Republicans in Congress are in such fear of the President and their own voters that they will not stand up to Trump on this issue. What is baffling is that none of them will do so.  One would think that there would be a few brave souls who would challenge Trump on this. 

Free trade has been a foundational plank in conservative ideology since at least the end of World War II.  Free trade was preached by the scholars of the conservative movement. Not only has it been a conservative principle, but the benefits of free trade have been accepted as an economic truth. It is hard to find an economist of any strip who does not tout the benefits of free trade. Not only has free trade been a Republican believe and not only is free trade accepted as beneficial by almost all economist, but there has pretty much been a free trade consensus. If anything, when any politician advocated tariffs, it was more likely to be a Democrat attempting to placate union supporters who would do so, but the majority of Democrat politicians believed in free trade also. There has been a wide bi-partisan consensus on the benefits of free trade pretty much since the Great Depression.

While I find Republicans failure to stand up to the President on this issue unfortunate and shameful, I fine the Democrats refusal to do so simply baffling.  Democrats have been playing dead. Democrats have nothing to lose by pushing back against this economic insanity.  If Democrats would introduce a bill to restrict the President's authority to set tariffs, maybe they would find a few brave Republicans who have not completely abandoned their believes who would join them. If not, Democrats could at least say, "we tried." They could voice an opposition and let people know that this is nuts. They could at least push back and make the case instead of just acting like they have no say in the matter. If Democrats are picking their battles and keeping their powder dry, now is the time to engage. This is the issue when the nation needs to see push back against Trump madness. 

Top Stories

Trump’s Pivot to Putin. Former U.S. Ambassador EXPOSES Why The Shift Is So Horrifying

 

Top Stories