Monday Miscellany, 1/5/26

Secretary of State Mario Rubio issued a statement that gave the administration’s justification for the action:

“Maduro is NOT the President of Venezuela and his regime is not the legitimate government. Maduro is the head of the Cartel de Los Soles, a narco-terror organization that has taken control of the country. And he is under indictment for pushing drugs into the United States.”

Maduro is a socialist dictator who, according to election observers, was defeated in a 2024  election  but stayed in power. But that’s what dictators do.  There are lots of dictators in the world.  The questions remain, is there a legal basis for abducting heads of state? And, if so, is the United States going to act as the world’s policeman, even though President Trump ran against that idea? And if Maduro is just an individual criminal, what justifies bombing the inhabitants of the country?

One of the contributions of the Trump presidency is a recovery of the principle of national sovereignty.  The U.S. is a sovereign nation that should exercise its authority to protect its borders from “invasion” by illegal immigrants.  So is the United States the only country that gets to be sovereign?  Doesn’t Venezuela also have national sovereignty, with borders that need to be protected from invasion, which would include not being bombed and not having strike teams kidnapping our heads of state?  If the head of state has taken power illegally, isn’t that for the Venezuelans to deal with?

We are going to try Maduro in an American court.  Does everyone in the world have to follow America’s laws?  If they break the law in our country, sure, and if they are in international waters headed to our shores to smuggle drugs, maybe, but do we have jurisdiction over Venezuelans in their own country?

I thought of a “thought experiment” that shed light on the operation from the perspective of both opponents and defenders.  What if China’s President Xi ordered and carried out the abduction of Donald and Melania Trump for violating China’s trade laws.  Wouldn’t we be outraged, insisting that he had no right to do that?  But then I realized, a lot of Americans would not be outraged at all, but glad, since they consider Trump to be a dictator.

Does the end justify the means?  Should the USA feel free to do whatever we want on the world stage, regardless of the laws of nations, just because we are powerful enough? Is this American exceptionalism?

Yes, it does my heart good to think that Putin, Xi, Kim Jong Un, Khamenei, and maybe even Keir Starmer of the UK and Emmanuel Macron of France might be feeling a little nervous lest they be plucked from their palaces by Navy Seals. But that doesn’t make such incursions right.

Denmark Postal Service Ends Delivery of Letters

A sign of what I suspect will soon be in store for all of us, Denmark has announced that its postal service will no longer deliver letters.

Citing the “increasing digitalisation” of Danish society, the post office has already removed its postboxes and is offering refunds for stamps. Over the last 25 years, the number of letters has declined 90%.

This includes all physical mail–including bills, solicitations, and advertisements (what we call “junk mail”).  The postal service will, however, still deliver parcels (for items ordered online).

A private company, DAO, has stepped into the void.  So Danes can still send Christmas cards and other correspondence, which they will have to take to a DAO shop or sign up for pickup and delivery.  Whereas in its last days of mail delivery, the Danish post office charged the U.S. equivalent of $4.57 for a first-class stamp, DAO charges a still-expensive-but-much-less $3.61.

The U.S. postal service where I live in St. Louis has become almost comically unreliable, while the private parcel delivery companies–UPS and Prime–have come through in rain and snow and gloom of night throughout the busy holiday season.  I say, privatize it all!

On Tariffs, Both Trump and His Critics Were Wrong

President Trump declared April 2, 2025, when he announced a dramatic rise in tariffs, to be “Liberation Day.”  He claimed that the American economy would be liberated from the rest of the world, promising a Renaissance of American manufacturing, new jobs, and maybe even the elimination of the income tax.

Most economists from across the political spectrum, on the other hand, believed the tariffs would send inflation soaring, throttle American exports, and send the economy into a recession.

Well, so far, Trump’s tariffs seem to be one of those issues in which nobody is right!

So observes economics reporter Chao Deng in her article for the Wall Street Journal entitled Why Everyone Got Trump’s Tariffs Wrong.

Trump said the tariffs would bring back American manufacturing.  Manufacturing in the U.S. is actually down.

Trump said the tariffs would increase American employment.  The unemployment rate is up.

Trump said the tariffs would bring in so much revenue that the deficit would be reduced and we might even be able to get rid of the income tax.  The tariffs have brought in a lot of money–some $25 billion per month–but that’s nowhere near the $2.4 trillion that the IRS brings in or the nearly $2 trillion deficit.

Trump said the tariffs would end the trade imbalance.  But the U.S. is still importing far more than it is exporting.

The experts said that the tariffs would send inflation soaring.  Inflation is up, but nowhere near the level that was predicted.

The experts said that the tariffs would send the economy into a recession. Instead, the economy has grown 4.3% in the third quarter, the most in two years.

I would just say that the president’s tariff rates keep changing as deals with individual countries are struck.  Companies are reportedly eating some of the needed price increases and delaying developing new supply lines until they have greater certainty.  One shoe that has yet to drop is the impending Supreme Court decision about whether the president has the legal authority to impose the tariffs in the first place.

Also American companies like Apple and Nvidia and foreign companies like Toyota have announced plans to build big new manufacturing operations in the U.S., but those will take years to build and to have an economic impact.

When things settle down, assuming the tariffs survive and remain high, I expect that domestic manufacturing will increase AND that inflation will shoot up. In that case, both Trump and his critics will be right.