Pick Your Poison
If something cannot go on forever, it will stop. Government spending has propped up the American economy for decades. Trump's tariffs are the beginning of the end. Let the pearl clutching begin.
Today’s uproar over President Trump’s announced tariffs has sent shockwaves through the public, with many fearing economic turmoil. Social media platforms and news outlets are abuzz with predictions of rising costs, trade wars, and job losses. Yet, beneath this panic lies a deeper truth that often goes unnoticed: the U.S. economy, regardless of who occupies the White House, relies heavily on government spending as its backbone. To fully grasp this, one need only look at the economic landscape under President Biden, where government expenditure wasn’t just a policy tool - it was the engine driving the entire system.
Trump’s tariffs, which aim to protect domestic industries by taxing imports, have sparked legitimate concerns. Critics argue they’ll increase prices for consumers and disrupt global supply chains. Supporters, meanwhile, claim they’ll revive American manufacturing and reduce reliance on foreign goods. But the intensity of the freakout obscures a critical reality: tariffs are just one piece of a much larger economic puzzle. The U.S. economy doesn’t hinge solely on trade policy - it’s been propped up for years by massive government spending, a fact that became especially clear during Biden’s tenure.
Under Biden, government spending reached unprecedented levels, fueled by ambitious legislative packages like the American Rescue Plan, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, and the Inflation Reduction Act. These initiatives pumped trillions of dollars into the economy, targeting everything from COVID-19 relief to green energy and transportation. In 2021 alone, the American Rescue Plan injected $1.9 trillion into circulation, providing direct payments to individuals, extending unemployment benefits, and bolstering state and local governments. The result? A rapid recovery from pandemic-induced stagnation, with GDP growth rebounding to 5.7% in 2021 after a 3.4% contraction in 2020.
But this recovery came at a cost. Government spending as a share of GDP soared, averaging around 40% in recent years - well above the historical norm of 30-35%. This wasn’t just a response to crisis; it was a deliberate strategy to sustain economic activity. Consumer spending, which drives roughly 70% of the economy, was artificially buoyed by stimulus checks and enhanced benefits. Businesses, particularly in construction and clean energy, thrived on federal contracts and subsidies. Even the labor market, with unemployment dropping to 3.7% by 2023, owed much of its strength to public-sector job creation and government-backed demand.
This reliance on government spending isn’t unique to Biden - it’s a feature of modern American economics. Trump’s administration, too, leaned on federal funds, with the CARES Act and other relief measures totaling over $2 trillion in 2020. What’s striking about Biden’s approach, though, is how it laid bare the extent of this dependency. Without those trillions, the post-pandemic economy might have faltered, exposing the fragility beneath the surface.
So why the hysteria over Trump’s tariffs?
Perhaps it’s because they threaten the illusion of a self-sustaining market. People fear change, but they rarely question the status quo - namely, that government spending has been quietly holding things together. Biden’s economy wasn’t a miracle of private enterprise; it was a testament to fiscal intervention. As Trump’s policies loom, the real question isn’t whether tariffs will tank the economy, but whether they’ll disrupt the government’s ability to keep spending its way out of trouble.
Until that is addressed, the panic is just noise atop a shaky foundation.



Back when I started on the bond desk, in the early Precambrian era, if I recall correctly, I read that you could divide countries into 3 main groups. Group one was countries where government was less than 33% of GDP. Back then, that was Hong Kong, Switzerland and the US. They had 3% unemployment and +5% growth. Group two was countries where government was over 66% of GDP, countries like the PIIGS, where growth was negligible and unemployment in double digits. Group three was in the middle.
It’s not rocket surgery. The ancient Greeks said the best government is that which governs least. Lao Tzu advised the Emperor of China: “Ruling a big country is like cooking a very small fish. If you poke it too much, you’ll ruin it.” It’s been pretty much nothing but poke poke poke ever since, everywhere.
On point !!