Wall St. off rails on tariffs

EVERY once in a while, Wall Street has a fit. Sometimes it is warranted, many times it is not. The tariff tantrum falls under into the latter category.

Late Thursday night, President Trump upped the ante in the tariff game, proposing a review of an additional $100 billion of potential tariffs.

So the US and China, the two largest economies, jostle over a tiny percentage of their multitrilliondollar GDPs to make a point — and to score points.

But Wall Street uses its finest calculus, egged on by Trump-bashing media personalities dressed up as “journalists,” to extrapolate that we are in an “all-out trade war.”

What is so baffling about the tariff tantrum is that it was an issue on which the president campaigned.

There’s not an economist with a shred of credibility who thinks the US gets treated fairly by China, especially when it comes to intellectual property.

Wall Street is chock-full of pseudo-intellectuals who went to good schools and got good grades. But the vast majority lack the ability to think critically, especially at critical moments.

Remember when the markets were going to go to hell if Gary Cohn ever left the White House? Well, Cohn had a disagreement with the president and resigned over the proposed tariffs, and the markets were just fine.

The second-biggest overhyped myth on the planet is that “China could sell our bonds.” Please do, China, and rip that Band-Aid off quickly.

China’s stake is one day of trading volume. That’s it.

I get that many journalists have a different political persuasion than Trump, but numerous presidents have had trade disputes. President Obama slapped a 35 percent tariff on Chinese automobile and light truck tires.

He wasn’t vilified, he was “sticking up for the worker.”

So in essence, Trump put the proposed tariffs out there to bring a negotiating partner to the table to make the playing field more even.