Trump's Tariffs: Chaos, Confusion & Consequences

President Trump's chaotic rollout and partial rollback of tariffs has roiled financial markets and confused many allies, both domestically and internationally. Although he temporarily calmed bond markets by announcing a 90-day pause on his misleadingly labeled "reciprocal tariffs," the uncertainty he created continues. Meanwhile, China has responded to the 145% tariffs on their imported goods by imposing retaliatory tariffs on American products and halting exports of rare earth minerals. To help us makes sense of the mess, Kara talks to three experts: Raj Bhala is a professor at the University of Kansas School of Law and one of the foremost scholars on international trade law. He is also the author of Trade War: Causes, Conduct, and Consequences of Sino-American Confrontation. Bill Cohan is an M&A banker-turned-financial journalist and a co-founder of Puck. He’s the author of a number of books, including Power Failure: The Rise and Fall of an American Icon. Catherine Rampell is a nationally syndicated columnist at The Washington Post who specializes in economics, politics, and public policy. She’s a special correspondent for PBS Newshour and she will soon anchor and co-host of MSNBC’s The Weekend. This episode was recorded on Wednesday April 9th. Questions? Comments? Email us at [email protected] or find us on Instagram, TikTok, and Bluesky @onwithkaraswisher. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Speaker names marked ? are inferred from speaking time and the show’s known hosts — they are not voice-verified.

• 0:00Kara Swisher?

  It's my new studio, which I have no books behind me or anything. The red chair. Yes, it is. It's back.

• 0:16Kara Swisher?

  Hi, everyone. From New York Magazine and the Vox Media Podcast Network, this is On with Kara Swisher, and I'm Kara Swisher. For this episode, I've gathered three incredibly sharp thinkers from the worlds of trade, economics, and finance to talk about what else? President Trump's tariff blitz. In just a few days, Trump has managed to confuse almost everyone with a series of head-scratching pronouncements on tariffs that have made the markets seesaw. On April 2, Trump's so-called Liberation Day, which a lot of people have been calling Obliteration Day, he announced what he called reciprocal tariffs, and which were not, on about 90 countries. That included a 34% tariff on Chinese goods and caused a sell-off in the bond markets. On Wednesday, Trump paused his tariffs for 90 days but

• 0:59Kara Swisher?

  increased tariffs on Chinese imports by 125%. On Thursday, the White House clarified that those tariffs were on top of an existing 20% tariff, bringing the total tax on Chinese imports to 145%. And then on Friday, China announced it was slapping a tariff of 125% on American goods. It's a mess, all caused by Donald Trump. So we're now officially in a trade war, but luckily, we've got a great trio of experts to help us digest it all. Raj Bala is a professor at the University of Kansas School of Law and an expert in international trade law, and also the author of Trade War: Causes, Conduct, and Consequences of

• 1:41Kara Swisher?

  Sino-American Confrontation. Bill Cohen is a former M&A banker turned financial journalist and a co-founder of Puck. He's the author of a number of books, including Power Failure: The Rise and Fall of an American Icon About General Electric. And Catherine Rampell is an opinion columnist at The Washington Post who specializes in economics, politics, and public policy. She is also the soon-to-be anchor and co-host of MSNBC's The Weekend. Our question today comes from Orin Cass, founder and chief economist at American Compass. We recorded this episode on Wednesday, April 9th, in the afternoon just after Trump announced his pause and the 125% tariffs on Chinese goods. This is a panel that I hope will help you understand

• 2:26Kara Swisher?

  all this nonsensical behavior on the part of the Trump administration, so stick around.

• 2:40Speaker 01

  Black Friday is around the corner. Your biggest chance to grow sales this year, don't wait. Realize is Taboola's advertising platform for businesses, letting you launch campaigns on top premium websites beyond search and social. Add Realize to your media mix and scale this Q4. And as an exclusive offer for podcast listeners, new customers get $700 credit back. Just search Realize Podcast on Google or use the promo code PODCAST26. Don't miss out on this limited time offer. Terms apply.

• 3:16Speaker 02

  Support for the show comes from Engine. Running a small business means every dollar has to work hard, but if your team is still booking travel the old way, it's costing you more than you think. Engine is the fastest growing travel and spend platform in the country, built specifically for businesses like yours. Book a trip in as little as two and a half minutes, earn up to 10% back on hotels. And in 2025, Engine customers save more than $300 million on travel with zero booking fees, no contracts, and no BS. More than 1,000 businesses join Engine every month. Join them and get $500 when your business signs up and starts traveling at engine.com/box.

• 4:01Speaker 03

  Support for the show comes from TikTok. There is a scientifically documented correlation between listening to podcasts and curiosity. So since you're here, you probably enjoy discovering new things. One great place to indulge your curiosity is TikTok. Whether it's how to forecast volcanic eruptions, strange phenomena that the James Webb Space Telescope picked up near the beginning of time, or a literal deep dive on the ocean's deepest reefs. TikTok has a wealth of fascinating videos just waiting to be discovered. Your next discovery is waiting on TikTok. Learn more at tiktok.com/discovermore.

• 4:46Kara Swisher?

  Catherine, Bill, and Raj, welcome. Thanks for being on ON.

• 4:49Speaker 04

  Great to join you.

• 4:50Speaker 05

  Yes, great to be here.

• 4:51Speaker 06

  Thanks for having me.

• 4:51Kara Swisher?

  What have you guys been doing? You been busy? Is there something happening in this country? Oh, right, transfencers. If I was watching Fox News, there's a real issue with transfencers this week.

• 5:01Speaker 04

  They're the real reasons stock markets have gone down.

• 5:04Kara Swisher?

  It's a heinous situation with the fencers. Anyway, we're talking a week after President Trump's tariff announcement, which has sent markets, businesses, and governments around the world to a tailspin. We all know this. It's obviously the only story right now. Literally minutes before we started speaking, Trump announced a 90-day pause on what he's calling reciprocal tariffs, except for China. So let's just back up a little bit. What word would you use to describe what's been going on since Liberation Day? Catherine, you start, then Bill, then Raj.

• 5:33Speaker 04

  Insanity.

• 5:34Kara Swisher?

  Insanity Day. Okay. All right. Bill?

• 5:38Speaker 05

  Grift Day. Ultimate Grift Day.

• 5:40Speaker 06

  I'd call it incarceration day, that he's incarcerating the American economy and the population in a xenophobic, autarkic economy.

• 5:50Kara Swisher?

  Wow, those are some big words. Okay, Bill, explain your grifter day.

• 5:53Speaker 05

  Yeah, Carol, I get a lot of stuff on a daily basis from traders, where actually like on the floor in the options market, and they cannot believe...

• 6:05Speaker 05

  The timing of various options trades that are netting the people who make them hundreds of millions of dollars based on the volatility. And obviously, I mean, the volatility has been out of control for the last week. And if you know what he's going to say, either on the upside or the downside, you can make options bets based on that and make a ton of money. So I think it's the ultimate grift.

• 6:31Speaker 04

  And the SEC is supposed to enforce these things.

• 6:34Speaker 05

  Right, well, the SEC is supposed to. You'll notice that the SEC chairman has been incredibly silent since this administration began. Hasn't said a word.

• 6:43Speaker 04

  All right, Catherine? I will say that if anything, the government seems kind of pro-defrauding people right now. They've basically announced that they'll stop enforcing crypto fraud amongst other things, but that's a separate issue. It's just like, it's so dumb. It's all so dumb. And I feel like the people around Donald Trump have to know how idiotic this multi-front trade war is and how much poorer Trump is making, not just his voters, but the entire world. And roughly the only way I can explain it is that we're dealing with the madness of King George type moment.

• 7:26Speaker 04

  Maybe Trump is trading on the volatility and certainly there's a lot of money to be made if you know what he's going to do from one minute to the next, which only he seems to know. But all of his explanations for what he is trying to do are completely incoherent and self-contradictory and come back to, well, he's just like tariffs for a really long time. Yeah, exactly. He doesn't have to have any real objectives. He doesn't have to have any game plan. He doesn't have to have any way out of this. He's just doing what he wants to do.

• 8:01Kara Swisher?

  All right, let's start how we got here. Trump declared that the trade deficit and the supposed flow of drugs constitute a national emergency. This is something he's been talking about a long time. It's not just hyperbolic language, it's his defense for being able to enact them under what is known as the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. That move is already being contested. Raj, can you explain what I E E P A is and whether bilateral trade deficits are the reason for using it?

• 8:25Speaker 06

  Sure. And the answer to the second part of that question is no. The 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a President Carter-era law, was designed to fill a gap in our nation's national security laws. The Trading with the Enemy Act dated from 1917 but required a declaration of war, and of course, we haven't seen that since the Second World War, for the president to take sanctions or other measures against enemy countries. So Congress gave President Carter and subsequent presidents the authority to act against a problem, and the problem in the statutory language is very particular.

• 9:06Speaker 06

  It's got to be an unusual and extraordinary threat, both, it's conjunctive, unusual and extraordinary threat, to the foreign policy, economy, or national security of the United States. Now, the unusual and extraordinary threats that subsequent presidents, including Carter, have used have been cases like Iran, Saddam Hussein's Iraq, I think General Noriega in Panama. It's never been used to impose trade sanctions, not on issues of fentanyl or immigration, and certainly not on bilateral trade deficits. And to argue that bilateral trade deficits are a national security threat, when in fact

• 9:46Speaker 06

  they are the product of many macroeconomic factors, including very high consumption and very low savings rates in the United States, is folly, and it's also an abuse of the statute. And Congress would do well to reject the unitary executive theory of presidential authority and reassert its constitutional duty under the Foreign Commerce Clause and under the I E E P A to say, no, this is not an unusual and extraordinary threat, you cannot use the statute this way.

• 10:17Kara Swisher?

  Catherine, one of the big criticisms from economists has been the math the administration has used to arrive at these, again, I'm putting reciprocal in quotes.

• 10:24Speaker 04

  It's a propaganda term.

• 10:26Kara Swisher?

  It's a propaganda term. What's the word you would use?

• 10:30Speaker 04

  I don't know. I would just say his tariffs.

• 10:33Kara Swisher?

  Tariffs, okay. For countries whom we've had trade deficits, even conservative think tanks are calling them unserious. You've been looking into the genesis of this calculation. Talk a little bit about what you've learned.

• 10:43Speaker 04

  Right. So this equation makes no sense in that it has nothing to do with reciprocating what other trade barriers countries are imposing on US products. They came up with this formula that is essentially the trade deficit with the country divided by the imports from that country. And then they threw in a bunch of other Greek letters to make it look like it was fancy econometrics, you know, to give it some like sort of pseudo statistical justification. But that's all it is. And the goal of it seems to be what tariff rate would we need to set to zero out the trade deficit with that country? The formula won't even do that. But let's say that was what it did.

• 11:29Speaker 04

  That should not be our objective anyway. There are plenty of countries that we need to buy stuff from that don't need our stuff because like they might be the only place that makes vanilla. Like Madagascar produces the lion's share of vanilla in the world. We're not going to become farmers of vanilla beans anytime soon. The same thing with countries that produce coffee that are tend to be in climates with lots of jungles and things like that.

• 11:53Kara Swisher?

  And they don't buy stuff from them. They don't necessarily want anything we have to sell them.

• 11:57Speaker 04

  Right. And they may be too poor to afford the things that we're good at producing.

• 12:02Kara Swisher?

  They don't want to buy our cloud services at this moment.

• 12:03Speaker 04

  Yes. Or one of our big exports, by the way, is higher education. We have historically had a lot of international students. That counts as an export. It's a very important service in the United States that produces in and of itself a trade surplus, but we're killing that too. In any event, this is not a worthy goal to try to zero out the trade deficit.

• 12:25Kara Swisher?

  The premise in the first place.

• 12:27Speaker 04

  The premise in the first place is wrong. The way to achieve that objective, you know, the numbers themselves, they're wrong too. And it's very interesting because nobody in this administration wants to take credit or rather blame.

• 12:40Kara Swisher?

  Who did it? Who did this?

• 12:42Speaker 04

  What I have heard is it's probably Peter Navarro, who's like the only PhD holding economist in the world who is, who hates trade as far as I can tell. And it seems likely that he's the one who came up with it. He produced, for example, the Project 2025 chapter on trade. So it's probably him, but he went on TV and said it wasn't. He said it was the Council of Economic Advisers. The Council of Economic Advisers chair said, nope, not me. The Treasury Secretary said, nope, not me. Everybody knows this is a huge embarrassment. So of course.

• 13:15Kara Swisher?

  Nobody wants to.

• 13:16Speaker 04

  Nobody wants ownership of it.

• 13:17Kara Swisher?

  Let's hand it to Navarro. Anyway, Bill, the world's 10 richest people are upset about this math happening. They're pretty good at math, actually. They reportedly lost a combined $172 billion in the first three days. Warren Buffett was up on top this year, though, because he had moved everything into cash and decried the trade deficits coming. Business leaders now close to Trump are rallying publicly against these tariffs. Bill Ackman is warning about an economic nuclear winter. Elon is calling Trump's top trade adviser, Peter Navarro, bad names, including, oh, I'm not going to repeat it. Moron is the one I will use, which I agree with. But Trump and his team have been telegraphing these new tariffs. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick has been trying to sell the business leaders on this America First agenda for months. Why are they acting now like this is shocking?

• 14:02Speaker 05

  The idea that this wasn't to be anticipated if Trump returned to the White House is completely disingenuous. So, you know, while I applaud, I mean, I don't know if I applaud, but I mean, I'm amused by Bill Ackman's volte facile here, if that's how you pronounce that word. And now he's critical of the economic agenda, and he's the one that was pushing the 90-day pause. But the idea that this wasn't anticipated is completely factious and ridiculous. And for these business leaders to suddenly say, as it's affecting their pocketbooks, as it's affecting their stock prices, it's affecting their hedge fund positions, as it's

• 14:46Speaker 05

  affecting their liquidity in the debt markets, which is the real problem here, Kara, big time. The backup in 10-year Treasuries, the backup in the junk bond market, as always, the big problems occur in the bond market, not the stock market, even though the stock market gets all the headlines. But the The fact that they're now retracing their steps and calling for a pause, calling for reversal. This was entirely anticipated. When you bring this guy back, this is the one thing that he was talking about through the campaign. Unlike his attack on law firms or letting criminals out of jail by giving them pardons or, you know, wiping out the federal government workforce. I mean, this is something he was talking about.

• 15:30Speaker 05

  So to pretend that now you are shocked, shocked that there's tariffs going on here is, you know, awful.

• 15:39Kara Swisher?

  So are they getting what they want? I mean, Lutnik's been trying to sell them on this.

• 15:43Speaker 05

  No.

• 15:44Kara Swisher?

  You know, and obviously Elon and others have lost an enormous amount of money.

• 15:49Speaker 05

  Yeah, well, you know, we both know that Elon's going to be just fine, even having lost a lot of money. Scott Besson's going to be just fine, having lost a lot of money. Howard Lutnick's going to be fine, having lost a lot of money. Even Donald Trump, whose DJT stock has, you know, plummeted.

• 16:05Speaker 04

  I will say though, even though there, as of our time recording this, markets have, have had a bit of a rally. Even if people are ultimately made whole for like a week or two, anyway, for the 90 days that these tariffs are paused in their, in terms of their 401ks, there will still be a lot of real economy damage, right? So it's not just about the hit to people's savings. It's also that when these, some of these tariffs have already gone into place, that will raise prices for consumers. They will become poorer as a result of that. Beyond that, even if companies don't like start laying off workers entirely yet because they're pausing, they're still pausing.

• 16:50Kara Swisher?

  They're pausing and not spending as much.

• 16:51Speaker 04

  They're not spending, they're not hiring. That's bad for workers too.

• 16:54Speaker 06

  Um, Kara, there's a, there's a carelessness to this. Um, at the end of The Great Gatsby, F. Scott Fitzgerald talks about careless people expecting the rest of us to pick up their mess. And without sounding ad hominem, there's a lot of carelessness in the, and sloppiness in the trade policy. There's a carelessness, for example, that not all trade. Non-tariff barriers are alike. Some are legitimate expressions of the sovereign rights under international law, the EU, to not want beef hormones. Some are more problematic, but then there's a carelessness in the failure to use the tools that the United States set up ever since the founding of the GATT in 1947 to

• 17:38Speaker 06

  use the tools that the GATT treaty and other WTO treaties allow. And there's also a carelessness in not using what President Kennedy set up to help workers, people who I grew up with in Milwaukee in the late 70s, who are dislocated from trade, and that's trade adjustment assistance. To fund trade adjustment assistance to help these dislocated workers is not something that the administration is even thinking about.

• 18:03Kara Swisher?

  So it also is unclear what the goal of these tariffs are. On one hand, Trump keeps saying he wanted to make countries make a deal. It's his strange, you know, real estate guy and bankrupting casino voice, essentially. Navarro has been saying this is not a negotiation. Carolyn Levitt, the White House Press Secretary, said the tariff level will be brought down to a universal 10%. These mixed signals are problematic at best. Is there wanting to make a deal? Because, you know, someone at one point, Chris Murph, he was saying this is to ruin democracy. He's purposely crashing the economy so he can be king, which seems a little too planned for him. Let's start with you, Raj. What happens with mixed signals, especially when things had been so organized? And then Catherine and Bill.

• 18:48Speaker 06

  In studying the executive orders and dating back to the first Trump administration, all those executive orders, and then the America First inauguration day memo, the common thread I see is despite all the different explanations that are given.

• 19:08Speaker 06

  I find it a xenophobic, autarkic goal. And what I mean by that is there's a complete distrust of foreigners, foreign countries. And you see that in the consistent and sometimes, if I may say racially charged rhetoric, that foreigners and foreign countries are cheats.

• 19:29Kara Swisher?

  Ripping us off.

• 19:30Speaker 06

  Ripping us off. Right. When in fact.

• 19:32Kara Swisher?

  Navarro and Trump talk a lot about the international trade system is broken. I think Navarro wrote that in his op ed.

• 19:39Speaker 06

  And I would give that op ed, not in an ad hominem sense, an F in my international trade law class because it's so filled with falsehoods, mistruths, and a failure to give the whole picture. And the autarky part means not autocracy, but A U T A R K Y, a desire for an economy that has almost no trade, that is self-reliant. And history does not treat xenophobics or autarchics very well. And if you want a modern day analog, you've got North Korea. So I think that's really the goal, to onshore everything. We can't trust anyone with our national security.

• 20:23Kara Swisher?

  Bill, how do you look at these messages? Because one of the, one of the things is Navarro talks Vietnam, for example, is offered to lower its tariffs to zero as example of non-tariff cheating, which is related to China in some way. Talk about the messages that are happening here.

• 20:38Speaker 05

  Kara, I think it's, he needs to win over other nations. He's created these false dichotomy of somehow that everybody's taking advantage of us and picking our pocket. It's just called trade. You know, in a trade, both parties find a way to win or else they don't do it.

• 20:55Kara Swisher?

  So Catherine, you read about this a lot, this idea of Trump's mentality. Can you?

• 21:00Speaker 04

  Maybe he's just lonely. I don't know. He seems so excited that all these foreign leaders are calling him and. And wanting to talk with him, although apparently, according to Politico, the White House is not answering the calls. And then the foreign leaders don't even know what to offer because Trump can't articulate what concessions he's demanding. But that's a separate issue. Remember, he was like, "Everybody wants to be my friend now." I think it was right after the inauguration. He was saying, "Oh, all these CEOs who used to criticize me, now they want to be my friend." So I don't know. But the central issue is, he does not know what he wants. Sometimes, as you point out, Kara, this is a negotiating tactic. But it's not even clear what he's hoping to get out of these negotiations, right?

• 21:44Speaker 04

  He has not articulated what the objective is. As you point out, there are countries that have said, "Okay, we'll bring our tariffs to zero. How about that? You know, tit for tat, zero for zero." And he shot that down. And then there are other people in the administration, including Trump himself sometimes, who have said, "We need these things to be permanent because we need the revenue. We need all of this beautiful tariff revenue to help offset the cost of our tax cuts," which will be a legislative thing that will be a big fight later this year. So maybe it's about that. Maybe it's about creating this manufacturing renaissance in the United States. And so that also requires permanent tariffs. I don't think that would happen for a whole bunch of reasons, including the fact that

• 22:28Speaker 04

  we're tariffing the inputs that American manufacturers need to produce their stuff, whether it's auto parts or steel or anything else. But it's really unclear what the objective is. And it becomes very difficult for other countries to negotiate with someone who does not know what he wants.

• 22:48Kara Swisher?

  We'll be back in a minute.

• 22:57Speaker 02

  Support for the show comes from Engine. Running a small business means every dollar has to work hard. But if your team is still booking travel the old way, it's costing you more than you think. Engine is the fastest growing travel and spend platform in the country, built specifically for businesses like yours. Book a trip in as little as two and a half minutes, earn up to 10% back on hotels. And in 2025, Engine customers save more than $300 million on travel with zero booking fees, no contracts, and no BS. More than 1,000 businesses join Engine every month. Join them and get $500 when your business signs up and starts traveling at engine.com/box.

• 23:42Kara Swisher?

  Support for this show comes from Delete Me. Have you ever Googled yourself and found your home address, phone number, or the name of a family member? It's unsettling. Here's what you do to clean up your online data footprint. Go to joindelete.me/kara and enter the code Kara. You get 20% off Delete Me. Delete Me removes your personal information that's being sold online. Delete Me was named the top pick for data removal services by Wirecutter, so you know you're in good hands. I really like Delete Me. I use it all the time. It's always surprising how much data people have about me. I am very privacy forward, and I still find so much stuff of mine online, some of which is incorrect, some of which is compiled in a really disturbing way. And you have to sort of control it like weeds.

• 24:25Kara Swisher?

  Take control of your data and keep your private life private by signing up for Delete Me. Now, at a special discount for our listeners, get 20% off your Delete Me plan when you go to joindelete.me/kara and use the promo code Kara at checkout. The only way to get 20% off is to go to joindelete.me/kara and enter the code Kara at checkout. That's joindelete.me/kara code Kara.

• 24:55Kara Swisher?

  Support for this show comes from Hers. Losing weight on your own can often feel like a fight you never win. Luckily, weight loss by Hers offers access to the FDA-approved Wegovy pill and the Wegovy pen. Wegovy is the first-ever GLP-1 weight loss medication available in a pill, but also comes as a pen, so you've got options. With Wegovy, you can lose up to 20% of your body weight. People lost an average of 14% body weight at 64 weeks in a clinical trial of Wegovy alongside diet and exercise. To get started with Wegovy, just go to forhers.com and complete an online consultation with a licensed provider who will determine if your prescription is appropriate. And Hers doesn't stop there. Nutrition and lifestyle guidance are part of the plan, along with access to 24/7 messaging

• 25:40Kara Swisher?

  with your care team, so support is always in reach. Ready to reach your goals? Visit forhers.com/cara to access personalized, affordable care for weight loss, hair, menopause, and more. That's forhers.com/cara. Individual results may vary, and stopping treatment may result in weight regain.

• 26:01Kara Swisher?

  So the new pause will not include China. Trump announced that he would raise tariffs in China to 125%. Beijing has ratcheted up its tariffs in retaliation. Let's talk about this. Bill, you spoke about investment advisor Jay Polowski about what he's calling a "tripolar world." First, you talk about China first, and then Raj, and then Catherine. What is going to happen here?

• 26:26Speaker 05

  I think Jay Polowski's theory of the case is, at least while the trade war was raging, was that we're now in a, quote, "tripolar world." Europe, the Americas, and Asia, and these trade wars, these tariff plan benefits China immensely, bolsters Asia on the New World Order, and we're just sort of shooting ourselves in the foot here. And Trump is sort of, has been the agent of that, was the agent of that in the first term, and is now acting as the agent of that in the second term.

• 27:03Kara Swisher?

  Well, he's certainly helping China.

• 27:04Speaker 05

  They're one of our largest creditors, so you're playing with fire here, kind of.

• 27:08Kara Swisher?

  Yeah, so Catherine, back in March, you posted on Blue Sky about China-Japan and South Korea agreement on promoting regional trade in response to the tariffs. Talk about this global realignment, essentially.

• 27:20Speaker 04

  Historically, those three countries, South Korea, Japan, and China, have not had warm and fuzzy feelings for each other. There's a long history of tension and resentment.

• 27:32Kara Swisher?

  Competition.

• 27:33Speaker 04

  Yep, among those three countries, much of which is not related to economic issues. And the fact that Trump was able to unite the three of them is really remarkable. It's impressive, in a way, that they hated Trump so much that they had their very first economic dialogue in, I think, five years and came up with this new trade pact. So, this is good for China, this is not good for us, and I think that one way to frame whatever reordering of world trade we are trying to achieve would be something like we're trying to alienate China and get more countries on side with the United States because

• 28:16Speaker 04

  of values unrelated to trade, but also values related to economics and trade. And we actually had a plan to do this. Under Barack Obama, he negotiated a multilateral trade deal, which everybody seems to have forgotten, called the Trans-Pacific Partnership. And the whole idea of this, as Obama said it at the time, was to make sure that China did not write the rules of the road. And what did Trump do as soon as he got into office? He tore up that trade deal. This was his first term. So now, if that is our objective, we have a game plan for doing it. We've thrown it out. Instead, we are doing virtually the opposite, which is alienating all of our closest friends,

• 28:55Speaker 04

  including South Korea and Japan, which have been important to us geopolitically and economically. We are driving them into China's arms. We are doing, I mean, yes, we are tariffing Chinese goods, and that will not be great in the near term for China's economy, but we have revealed ourselves to be such an unreliable friend or trading partner that the alternative is starting to look a lot more...

• 29:20Kara Swisher?

  And China was in economic distress, which helps them in this case.

• 29:25Speaker 04

  Yes, they could have sat back, you know, US politicians could have sat back and basically... Let the Chinese economy implode. They were having a lot of trouble until this. And again, the trade war with the United States will not be an unalloyed good for China. I don't mean to suggest otherwise. It will cause problems, but meanwhile, they're gaining lots of new friends.

• 29:45Kara Swisher?

  Raj, talk about that because it's not just the global climate, regional security and our national security, which this was supposed to be done to help our national emergency.

• 29:54Speaker 06

  Right. We had, as Catherine absolutely rightly puts, the best program in the Trans-Pacific Partnership to contain, for lack of a better word, China on national security matters. And it was a devastating mistake to our national security, as well as our economy, to pull out of TPP. Now, second point I think I would make here is India. We have been wooing this world's largest nation, the world's largest free market democracy, religiously pluralistic country, off of its Cold War mentality from the Indira Gandhi era

• 30:38Speaker 06

  that was very closely aligned with the former Soviet Union. And the Obama administration was fairly successful at doing that. India chose not to join the Chinese-driven ARCEP, Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership. They didn't come into TPP, but they started doing bilateral FTAs, including with some of our allies, like the UAE or Australia. But they were trying to do things that we wanted to see happen. And now, to hit them with the kind of tariffs that we're hitting. If you're thinking what's going on in South Block, the government area in Delhi, they're thinking, wow, the Americans really aren't reliable at all.

• 31:19Kara Swisher?

  Right. So in a lot of ways, this is a trade war, obviously, but it's also a war on globalism. Let's move into what this framework, what he's trying to do here, this new age of protectionism. Let's assume for a minute the goal here is to really rebuild American manufacturing, build up a working class, which seems... I don't believe them, but nonetheless, it seems to be in their heads in some movie fashion. Commerce Secretary Howard Luttnick, for example, says that the terrorists, I can't believe he said this, but that terrorists will lead to trillions of dollars of factories being built in America. Let's, let's listen to what he said on Face the Nation, even though he's a clown.

• 31:55Speaker 07

  Remember, the army of millions and millions of human beings screwing in little, little screws to make iPhones, that kind of thing is going to come to America, it's going to be automated, and great Americans, the tradecraft of America, is going to fix them, is going to work on them, there are going to be mechanics, there's going to be HVAC specialists, there's going to be electricians, the tradecraft of America are high school educated Americans. The core to our workforce is going to have the greatest resurgence of jobs in the history of America to work on these high-tech factories, which are all coming to America.

• 32:30Kara Swisher?

  Okay. Bill, please take this on. How likely is it going to be that companies are going to be able to completely change their business? They're just not coming to America. I don't even understand the screw thing, or the robots, I think they're, they might want to replace people with robots. Talk about this, this idea, and I'll take it at face value. Bring the companies back here.

• 32:49Speaker 05

  I think that little segment should pretty much be the end of Howard Luttnick in the second Trump administration. So you're, let me get this straight, you're deporting, you know, hundreds of thousands, millions of workers, people who came here, who are willing to take jobs that other Americans basically aren't willing to take, and at the same time that you're doing that, you're hoping that manufacturing jobs are going to come back, which, as we discussed before, companies just don't open plants because the president says, oh, it'd be a nice thing for you to do, to open a plant.

• 33:31Speaker 05

  They study it for years, they closed it for a reason, they moved it overseas for a reason. For them to open it back up, or to build a new plant de novo, is a like five to 10-year planning cycle, looking out over 30 years, doing spreadsheet analysis, net present value calculations, cost of capital, I mean...

• 33:58Speaker 05

  Everything goes into this. It does not happen overnight. So that's not going to happen anytime soon. I'm sorry. And then the idea that Americans are going, and there's been a lot of memes in my TL lately, Kara, you know, showing one in particular, a Jabba the Hutt like Donald Trump, you know, sewing some underwear in a sewing plant in, you know, Terre Haute or wherever, which I got a kick out of. I mean, Americans don't want to do these jobs and they haven't shown that they want to do these jobs. So what? The jobs they want to do is, you know, working at Google, working in the cloud, you know,

• 34:41Speaker 05

  service jobs, McKinsey, whatever it is, they don't want to be chipping away underground in a coal mine and, you know, so-called these, so-called manufacturing jobs that have left for a reason and are very unlikely to come back, certainly not in any timeframe that these tariffs are going to exist.

• 35:00Kara Swisher?

  So Catherine, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessin made it sound like he thought that fired federal civil servants could fire-

• 35:07Speaker 04

  I was just gonna make that-

• 35:08Kara Swisher?

  Yeah, talk about Bessin's idea that we're gonna take the federal workers they're firing and make them screw in Apple iPhone. I don't even understand.

• 35:17Speaker 04

  Oh, my God. This is dumb on so many levels. First of all, we are a services-based economy today. We are really good at services, whether we're talking about software services, higher education, science-

• 35:31Speaker 05

  Legal.

• 35:33Speaker 04

  Legal, finance, like insurance. We are really good at services. And yes, we used to have a lot-

• 35:41Kara Swisher?

  Which we have a surplus in, but go ahead.

• 35:43Speaker 04

  Yes, we used to have a lot of manufacturing jobs. We don't anymore. That was a really hard transition, particularly for the communities that were essentially factory towns. And there is this weird manufacturing fetish that is not unique to Donald Trump or to the Republican Party, by the way. Democrats are like obsessed with bringing back manufacturing and like tariffs themselves, which has complicated their messaging on all of this, which is a separate issue. But we're really like, we don't need to be making sneakers here. Right? We don't need to be making tube socks. I saw another Trump surrogate say like, "Oh, we'll just make the tube socks here and Americans will absorb the $1 more." First of all, it'll be a lot more than a dollar. Second of all, why do we want those jobs?

• 36:24Speaker 04

  But the federal workers thing is a really good case in point of all of this. The idea that cancer researchers, HIV researchers, air traffic controllers, nuclear inspectors, the idea that their skills would be more productively employed on a factory floor.

• 36:45Kara Swisher?

  Which they wanted robot put into robots, but go ahead, that's another.

• 36:49Speaker 04

  Right. Whether it's like overseeing the robots, screwing in the screws, as we heard Lutnik say at one point, or using their hands to stitch the Nike sneakers themselves, I don't know. It's such a ludicrous idea. And it just tells you how backward their entire vision of this economy is. We're not going to have zero trade deficits. We're not going to suddenly start making all of the stuff that we used to make here, nor should we want to. We should be thinking about how do we strengthen and make more competitive the things we are already good at, which is services, and it's particularly high skilled services.

• 37:28Kara Swisher?

  Raj, you're from Milwaukee. You grew up around factory workers. Is it realistic to think there could be some rebound? Would it benefit American workers?

• 37:35Speaker 06

  It depends on the factory, the sector. One good example of a success story was Harley-Davidson, which benefited from safeguard action under our Section 201 Escape Clause. It won relief behind tariff and non-tariff walls. And actually, it didn't even need the full span of the relief, three or four years. It needed only one or two to then revamp the famous American iconic hog against competition from Kawasaki. But in other instances where those kinds of remedies have been tried, bicycles, for example, textiles, shoes,

• 38:18Speaker 06

  the success story has not been there. In other words, the remedies- It's been very small. Let's think about how young people overseas, in India, or in China, or in you name it, other countries, are they actually aspiring to work in shoe factories? No, they also want to be management consultants, journalists, commentators, lawyers, teachers. And we're already ahead in that game. So it's wrong-headed to fail to appreciate the blessed position we're actually in and see that others want to be like us.

• 38:59Kara Swisher?

  All right. So every week we get a question from an outside expert. This week I got a doozy for you. I called conservative economist Orin Cass, who we had on the show a couple of months ago. He just wrote a piece in the New York Times essentially saying, "If only it had been different, it would have worked." So I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt here, and let's listen, and then you each get to answer his question.

• 39:20Speaker 08

  Hi, I'm Orin Cass, founder and chief economist at American Compass. And my question is about what you think the Trump administration should actually do. It seems to me a lot of people are criticizing Trump because they don't like tariffs, because they don't even think the US should re-industrialize. And so it's not surprising that the administration isn't really interested in their specific advice. But if you were to start from the same frame of reference, where the president clearly believes this is the correct direction to go and the correct set of goals, he obviously campaigned and won election on that message. He wants to move away from globalization, to rebalance trade, to rebuild manufacturing in America, and he wants to impose consequences on nations that are obstructing that and

• 40:04Speaker 08

  are free-riding on the United States. So what would you recommend? What would you actually like to see them do better in pursuit of their goals, as opposed to just wishing it was a different administration?

• 40:15Kara Swisher?

  To be fair, Orin was wishing it was too in that piece. I want you to answer this, if you could. Catherine, you can go first, then Raj and Bill. All right, you're sitting with Trump. What would you say to him? And you're listening to what he wants to have happen. Besides saying no, what would you say?

• 40:31Speaker 04

  I would say, if you want to compete with China...

• 40:36Speaker 04

  If you are worried about this so-called Sputnik moment that we are facing in China, stop gutting our science and research institutions, stop defunding scientific research, whether we're talking about research done within the US government or outside of it through grants, which have also been frozen, and invest in tech, invest in basic research. Generally, I think that all of Trump's objectives with regard to trade are wrong. But if he wants to win the 21st century, maybe that's the one common ground that I would find with Donald Trump.

• 41:18Speaker 04

  The way to do it is not by waging trade wars with all of our friends, it's to get our friends together to try to reign in China and then to invest internally, again, in the high-skill services that we are good at, including science and research and technology, which have historically been America's golden goose.

• 41:39Speaker 06

  Raj? All right, I would first encourage a conceptual shift, and then I'll give five specific policy shifts. To the extent that the president is concerned about national security, I would encourage that the national security threat to the United States is and always has been poverty and marginalization in other countries. We saw that with 9/11 and who the foot soldiers of Al Qaeda and later ISIS were. And President George W. Bush understood that we can enhance peace and our security through greater trade.

• 42:19Speaker 06

  And in fact, George W. Bush had a famous quote after 9/11, "The surest path to greater wealth is greater trade." And so the national security threat is not the foreigner per se against the US, it's the poverty of the foreigner. Are we safer off living next to an impoverished neighborhood? I mean, it's a very simple real estate analogy. The five things that I would suggest, a point... The appellate body members to get the rule of law going again at the W T L. Rejoin the T P P. The original T P P eleven, us, we were the 12th, have been waiting for us to come back in, and the U K would certainly love to have us in.

• 43:01Speaker 06

  Third, make sure you renew the U S M C A in July 2026, when it comes up for renewal. Fourth, focus on the made in China 2025 industrial policy. That's the real threat to U S manufacturing, if you're really concerned about that. And finally, go back to what had been, again, President Kennedy or President Carter. Restore goodwill in the developing world. That's our biggest market. Eighty percent of the W T O members are developing countries. That's where a lot of purchasing power is or will be. India, case in point. If we have goodwill, if made in America, or Americans are well regarded as they once

• 43:45Speaker 06

  were, that will enhance our security.

• 43:47Kara Swisher?

  Okay, Bill?

• 43:49Speaker 05

  I really, as a history major, I really appreciate Raj's historical perspective throughout this conversation. That has been enlightening. First thing, I mean, I don't agree at all with the tariffs is the most beautiful word in the English language. So that's the first thing I would say to Trump is, let's move away from that. I would take this whole conversation offline. In other words, don't make it the biggest story in the world, day after day after day. Get it out of the headlines. If you really want to renegotiate these agreements, trade agreements with all these countries, 160 of them, however many there are, take it literally offline.

• 44:34Speaker 05

  Go into some conference room in some office building that's now got plenty of space in it in Washington and get your pointy-headed accountants and policy wonks to sit there with the foreign trade ministers of other countries and just hash it out day after day, grind, grind, grind, grind, grind. Stop politicizing it, stop moving markets. You really want to do this, then do it in the grind, good old fashioned way, and then you'll achieve it. And then, once you've achieved your great victories, Donald, then we can announce them.

• 45:08Kara Swisher?

  We'll be back in a minute.

• 45:19Speaker 09

  Support for this show comes from Indeed. When the pressure's on and you need to hire the right person for the job, Indeed Sponsored Jobs has got your back. Instead of forcing you to spend tons of time searching, Indeed Sponsored Jobs matches you with quality candidates fast. According to their data, sponsored jobs posted directly on Indeed are 95% more likely to report a hire than non-sponsored jobs. Join the 3.3 million employers worldwide that use Indeed to connect with quality talent that fits their needs. Spend less time searching and more time actually interviewing candidates who check all your boxes. Less stress, less time, more results. When you need the right person to cut through the chaos, this is the job for Indeed Sponsored Jobs. And listeners to the show will get a $75 sponsored job credit

• 46:04Speaker 09

  to help get your job the premium status it deserves at indeed.com/podcast. Just go to indeed.com/podcast right now and support our show by saying you heard about Indeed on this podcast. That's indeed.com/podcast. Terms and conditions apply. Need the right hire fast? Then this is the job for Indeed Sponsored Jobs.

• 46:30Speaker 03

  Support for this show comes from TikTok. There is a scientifically documented correlation between listening to podcasts and curiosity. So since you're here, you probably enjoy discovering new things. One great place to indulge your curiosity is TikTok. Whether it's how to forecast volcanic eruptions, strange phenomena that the James Webb Space Telescope picked up near the beginning of time, or a literal deep dive on the ocean's deepest reefs, TikTok has a wealth of fascinating videos just waiting to be discovered. Your next discovery is waiting on TikTok. Learn more at tiktok.com/discovermore.

• 47:13Speaker 10

  This podcast is supported by Anthropic, the public benefit corporation behind Claude. Everyone's got a hard question about AI. Anthropic was built to surface those questions and share what it finds along the way, because there's hope in hard questions. Ask yours at claude.ai/spotify and keep thinking. That's claude.ai/spotify.

• 47:40Kara Swisher?

  All right, a couple more questions before we go. Economic experts have said, again, he's talking about smashing the current economic and geopolitical order. Peter Navarro has said he thinks this will all result in the Dow bouncing back but topping 50,000. He's pointing not just to tariffs, but to a package of tax cuts. So Catherine, you've said this isn't just GOP math. You've called it Orwellian. I'd love you to talk about the sort of their plans on future because it is linked to the tax patches that Republicans are trying to push through that connects to the tariffs. And at the same time, they're starting their attacks on Jerome Powell. Now that Fed chair says the tariffs will lead to higher inflation, lower economic growth, he's made it clear he doesn't think it's time to cut the lower interest rates.

• 48:23Kara Swisher?

  Trump clearly disagreed, posting on Truth Social, this would be a perfect time. And then in caps, "Cut interest rates, Jerome, and stop playing politics." So I want each of you to take each of these words. Bill, you first.

• 48:33Speaker 05

  Well, I hear a lot about the Sotovoche agenda behind all of this, which is to try to give cover between generating, as Besant said, $600 billion of revenue from the tariffs. And between that and your friend Elon's trillions of dollars of expense cuts out of the budget will create a trillion and a half dollars to give us air cover to extend the Trump tax cuts, which are so important for the billionaires who are really laboring in this environment and are struggling to put food on the table every day and need this tax cut.

• 49:17Speaker 05

  So that's giving them the political air cover to do that. And then This idea that we talked about a little bit of all of these treasury bonds that need to be refinanced, and so if you can make it seem like the economy is going into a recession, then the 10-year treasury bonds will, the yield will lower, which is what happened, but it's completely reversed now, completely reversed, and it's a total disaster. So that plan isn't working, and I don't think the first plan is working either. So, all of which is to say, I defer to Raj and Catherine on some of these macro issues, but it's not working.

• 49:58Kara Swisher?

  So Catherine, talk about Navarro saying the Dow will bounce back to top 50,000, and how these tax cuts figure in, in this big, beautiful budget bill.

• 50:08Speaker 04

  I think it is always dangerous to make predictions about where the stock market is headed, but this seems particularly dangerous, given that virtually all the things that Trump is doing will be bad for the economy, not just the trade wars, but fighting with Jay Powell. The tax cuts will, you know, if they reduce corporate taxes, that will return value to shareholders, which should increase stock prices. But we kind of already saw that factored in shortly after Trump won the election. So it may be the case that at least we'll recover some of the ground that has been lost since then. I don't know. I think the bigger issue is, in the long run, it'll be really bad for the economy

• 50:52Speaker 04

  in the sense that debt is already on an unsustainable path. These tax cuts will cost a lot of money. You referenced a piece that I wrote recently about the Orwellian nature of how they're trying to get these tax cuts through. That was about essentially Republicans declaring that they can rewrite the rules of arithmetic. Historically, there were like these neutral referees, the Congressional Budget Office, the Joint Committee on Taxation, the Senate parliamentarian institutions that Americans generally don't think about, maybe they're not even aware of, but they were there to make sure the math added up, essentially. And Senator Lindsey Graham, who is the Senate Budget Committee Chairman,

• 51:35Speaker 04

  recently said, "None of that matters. Basically, the tax bill will say what I, will cost what I say it costs." So I was referring to this famous George Orwell line in 1984, that if the party declares 2 plus 2 equals 5... You know, then you just have to believe it is so, something along those lines. And that's effectively what they've done. They've said these tax cuts will cost nothing, when in fact, they will cost a lot of money. They will worsen our debt, and in the long run, that will crowd out private investment and be very bad for the economy.

• 52:06Kara Swisher?

  All right. So Raj, will you talk about this idea of the interest rates and what impacted it?

• 52:12Speaker 06

  Absolutely. I mean, first, as someone who was privileged to work at the Federal Reserve in New York as a lawyer, I never saw this kind of encroachment on Federal Reserve autonomy. This is pretty much unprecedented. And it raises a long-term problem in terms of the full faith and credit of the US and the sense of trust in the Federal Reserve. On the interest rate, I see three possible effects. I mean, higher interest rates are of course attractive to foreign investors. Secondly, the higher interest rates are, result in a diminished incentive for debt financing for corporates.

• 52:56Speaker 06

  And then, third, consumers, to the extent they are invested in interest-denominated assets for their retirement, they rely on, you know, at least not a tanking in interest rates. So they're somewhat cross-purposes. But this is for the Federal Reserve to decide. And there's a deeper point here. That is, the real focus of the Fed should be on monetary policy. And the President is inverting a discussion that we had solved back in October 1979 when Paul Volcker was Fed Chair, that we weren't going to do interest rate targeting, we were going to focus on monetary policy. So I'm a little perplexed by that.

• 53:37Speaker 06

  And a final point I'd make on it was this more fiscal policy is... The administration is headed to reducing its the policy space it's going to need for what may be Keynesian deficit spending if we're in a recession. And already, we're seeing the possible need for a bailout for farmers. Well, how does that bailout happen? It happens through funding through the commodity credit corporation of the Department of Agriculture. It's distributed through the now eviscerated USAID. So I'm not sure where that budget bill is headed in relation to these misguided tariff policies that we've been talking about.

• 54:21Kara Swisher?

  All right. One last question for Bill. We've seen the impact on the stock market. But what do they expect on the business front now? Will it help or hurt mergers and acquisitions? What if you are running a what happens to all the mergers acquisitions that were supposed to return? You and I have talked about it. They hadn't returned. Now are they really not going to really not return?

• 54:39Speaker 05

  Yeah, I mean, as you know, Kara, Wall Street was gearing up for the return of investment banking business.

• 54:47Kara Swisher?

  Go, go.

• 54:48Speaker 05

  Whether it's IPOs, debt and equity underwritings.

• 54:52Kara Swisher?

  Green light from Trump. Green light from Trump.

• 54:53Speaker 05

  Green light from Trump. Throw out those jerks in the Biden administration who are blocking all of our great deals. And now it's just going to be go to the races. Well, that is, you know, we saw in the first quarter, it's continuing now in multitudes. I mean, it's it's dead, dead, dead, dead. There's going to be a bloodbath on Wall Street in terms of layoffs if this continues. And, you know, as one very senior, very well respected M and A banker said the other day, it would be irresponsible for him to allow his CEO clients to do big deals now, given how uncertain the economy is, how roiled the financial

• 55:38Speaker 05

  markets are. You just can't do anything.

• 55:40Kara Swisher?

  Same thing with IPOs. Same thing with IPOs.

• 55:42Speaker 05

  You can't do IPOs. You can't do debt and equity underwritings. You can't do M and A deals. You can't price. You can't. You can't do anything in this turmoil. You know, whether the 90 day pause will somehow give him the off ramp so that maybe things can calm down and the volatility can be tempered, then that's potentially some saving grace for Wall Street bankers.

• 56:10Kara Swisher?

  But he's made a pointless mess in any case.

• 56:13Speaker 05

  Pointless self inflicted wound.

• 56:15Kara Swisher?

  And will they bounce back if he stops?

• 56:19Speaker 05

  Well, I mean, he's still the mad king. So, you know, could the mad king, you know, strike again? Probably he will. So again, if I were advising, as I used to do for 20 years, CEOs on whether to do deals, I would have them think long and hard. I mean, you can do a $1 billion or $2 billion tuck in add on or whatever, you know, but a strategic merger, you know, one that many people like have been talking about in Hollywood forever, like, you know, Warner Brothers Discovery merging with NBC Universal? Absolutely not. No way.

• 56:52Kara Swisher?

  All right. Last question for each of you. This is all, of course, a roller coaster and it's hard to predict what's going to happen next. It's hard to predict what's happening in the next five minutes with Donald Trump. But based on where we are now, give me your prediction of where the economy is going at six months from now, very quickly.

• 57:06Speaker 06

  Recession, mild to moderate.

• 57:12Speaker 04

  Oof. Always dangerous to make predictions, especially about the future. I think that's the Yogi Bear line. If we stay on our current path, which is escalating trade wars, fights with the Federal Reserve, and basically no fiscal discipline, I think we are likely to have a recession later this year. I really hope we find an off ramp, and I hope I'm wrong, but that's my fear.

• 57:37Speaker 05

  Look, Karen, I think it literally depends on what the actions of one guy does. I mean, we were on a path, you know, I think JP Morgan Chase predicted 60% chance of recession, you know, this year as a result of the tariff shenanigans of the last few days. Now there's a pause, except for China, you know, is that going to be extended? Like, you know, things get extended. If he somehow comes to his senses, which is very unlike Donald Trump.

• 58:09Speaker 05

  Then I think the chances of recession go way down again. And we can just try to pick up the pieces from this incident. But if he, you know, is determined, you know, as he gets, we know how he gets his back up and won't listen to anybody. If he's determined to follow through on this, then absolutely we will be in a recession.

• 58:31Kara Swisher?

  Yeah, he says to be cool, you guys.

• 58:33Speaker 05

  Yeah, be cool.

• 58:35Kara Swisher?

  Great. All right. Thank you, guys, for coming. I really appreciate it.

• 58:38Speaker 05

  Thank you, Kara. Thank you, Kara.

• 58:39Speaker 04

  Thank you.

• 58:45Kara Swisher?

  On with Kara Swisher is produced by Kristin Castor-Russell, Kateri Yokum, Dave Shaw, Megan Burney, Megan Cunane, and Kalen Lynch. Nishat Kurwa is Vox Media's executive producer of audio. Special thanks to Eamonn Whalen. Our engineers are Rick Kwan and Fernando Aruda, and our theme music is by Trackademics. If you're already following the show, you are not a moron like Ron Nava. If not, you are on Trump's tariff teams. So sorry. Go wherever you listen to podcasts, search for On with Kara Swisher, and hit follow. Thanks for listening to On with Kara Swisher from New York Magazine, the Vox Media Podcast Network, and us. We'll be back on Thursday with more.

• 59:29Speaker 02

  Support for the show comes from Engine. Running a small business means every dollar has to work hard. But if your team is still booking travel the old way, it's costing you more than you think. Engine is the fastest-growing travel and spend platform in the country, built specifically for businesses like yours. Book a trip in as little as two and a half minutes, earn up to 10% back on hotels. And in 2025, Engine customers save more than $300 million on travel with zero booking fees, no contracts, and no BS. More than 1,000 businesses join Engine every month. Join them and get $500 when your business signs up and starts traveling at engine.com/vox.

• 1:00:14Speaker 03

  Support for the show comes from TikTok. There is a scientifically documented correlation between listening to podcasts and curiosity. So since you're here, you probably enjoy discovering new things. One great place to indulge your curiosity is TikTok. Whether it's how to forecast volcanic eruptions, strange phenomena that the James Webb Space Telescope picked up near the beginning of time, or a literal deep dive on the ocean's deepest reefs. TikTok has a wealth of fascinating videos just waiting to be discovered. Your next discovery is waiting on TikTok. Learn more at tiktok.com/discovermore.

• 1:00:56Speaker 11

  Ryan Reynolds here for Mint Mobile. I don't know if you knew this, but anyone can get the same premium wireless for $15 a month plan that I've been enjoying. It's not just for celebrities, so do like I did and have one of your assistant's assistants switch you to Mint Mobile today. I'm told it's super easy to do at mintmobile.com/switch.

• 1:01:16Speaker 12

  Upfront payment of $45 for three-month plan, equivalent to $15 per month required. Intro rate first three months only, then full price plan options available. Taxes and fees extra. See full terms at mintmobile.com.