Helicopter parenting seems to be a feature of some child raising today, may be an inbred reflex for older marrieds finally birthing one or two children. It comes with unforeseen costs which will be borne by the child later in life. The coddling cripples the youngster from developing the coping mechanisms and needed personality corrections when facing difficulties. Life disciplines if allowed to operate. The costs of leniency appear later when bail becomes necessary for storming federal courthouses, assaulting ICE agents, toppling statues and defacing cemeteries, and roaming around in mobs threatening free speech on campus. Mom and dad, get prepared for a hefty therapy bill as well. Coddled people are frequently nervous wrecks as adults.
The costs of coddling reach humungous levels when implemented on a national scale, such as showering subsidies, tax code benefits, and tariff protections on certain industries. Government becomes a helicopter parent, permissive and indulgent, enticing their dependents to continue in their morbid obesity and gross wastefulness. Who ultimately pays? Guess what . . . You!
Does any of this make any sense? “Yes” to the recipients, and “no” to everyone else. The more important question is, do our elected poohbahs wallow in this form of bad parenting on a national scale? Yes, because it pays. It buys the votes of people nostalgic for a world before the latest innovation. It goes something like this: my dad worked on Chevies, Fords, and Dodges, and that’s how God created the world. Who doesn’t want to freeze in amber the world of their formative years? Luddites of every generation will always be a potent political constituency.
The application of economic laws (supply, demand, price signals, incentives, etc.) to government was explored by economists Gordon Tullock and James Buchanan in something that they called Public Choice Theory. Surprise, they showed that politicians shop around for votes. They won the Nobel prize in economics for their groundbreaking work. Tullock took the analysis further by examining the immense hidden costs of tariffs; something Trump refuses to understand (see #1, #2).
Tariffs coddle the too-big-to-fail companies and their extortionate union parasites, both with their tentacles deep into the campaign war chests of the elected. Then, once in office, the bennies roll in, now especially under Trump. Trump’s most beautiful word in the English language, tariff, acts as an accelerant for a new growth industry, special consultancy services (tariff brokers and such) to help business navigate the new flood of paperwork and rules, and army of new government hires, regurgitated out of Leviathan. These services aren’t free, and add new costs to the bottom line and the public purse, all to be borne by you in fewer choices, higher prices, and higher taxes and/or public debt.
Think about it, think about a time before the income tax. Yes, there was a time when April 15 was just another spring day, and not the deadline to avoid fines and jail. It used to be the natural order of things, except for the brief period of the Civil War, until 1913 and Woodrow Wilson signed the implementing law after the 1909 approval of the 16th Amendment allowed the monstrosity. After it and other changes to the tax code, who doesn’t need a tax accountant to steer clear of the maw of the IRS? Many, many. The government’s insatiable appetite for more money added a new layer to the cost of living, the professional tax accountant and lawyer and software.
Trump is accomplishing the same feat with his “Liberation Day”. That and all the subsequent trade deals will end up spiking the average U.S. tariff from a low of 2.5% in 2024 to over 5% in 2025, and a general 15% on a huge portion of it (see #3). It’s a flat-out tax increase added to the bottom line, added to your cost of living and running a business. Trump boasts of billions pouring into the federal treasury as if it is coming out of the pockets of foreigners. He’s selling a falsehood. Much analysis has been devoted to who pays the tariffs (see #2). It shows the residents of the authoring country footing the bill. I don’t think Trump cares because tariffs are “beautiful” to him; they harken him back to a time 70 years ago, the world of his youth, and his obsession with recreating it.
The sheer absurdity of Trump’s tariff regime will be clear if we take a look at one industry, copper. You know, the hotly sought-after basic and essential stuff for the Dems’ greenie electrified utopia or Trump’s buy-only-America one. It’s a classic case of a blockheaded Trump obsession mucking up U.S. industries by pushing a solution in search of a problem.
Let’s start with a basic stat: 45% of U.S. copper consumption is imported (see #5). The remaining 55% is domestically produced. So, why the 50% tariff on imported copper? Intended or not, Trump is forcing domestic users of copper to pay more for it out of a constricted internal supply. Why constricted? Over decades, we willed it so. Try to open a new mine and avoid the stinging swarms of eco-zealots at all levels. Behind walling off the richer seams behind national monuments and lines of legal-eagle firing squads, the potentially condemned seek other venues of investment. 55% could be a lot more but isn’t because we’d rather pay to dig up the land under other people. Currently, the U.S. ranks seventh in proven reserves in the world, more than China, but won’t touch much of it (see #5).
And, anyway, it’s not such a bad idea to diversify sources for national security reasons. Domestic supplies can be disrupted by events such as strikes by Trump’s newfound allies in organized labor’s extortion racket. Natural disasters and mechanical breakdowns in the chain from mine to mill, as happens in oil refining, are inevitable. Is it such a horrible thought to be on good terms with countries like Chile, our largest foreign source? Though, If you see foreigners as enemies, like Trump, economic or otherwise, don’t be surprised that many of them end up providing new naval basing and investment opportunities for the CCP. Tariffing our hemisphere will require a much bigger navy to blockade South America.
The bottom line is that coddling domestic producers behind the padded walls of 50% tariffs makes them more willing to buy off the eco-gangsters and their featherbedding union masters, a win/win for producer and parasites alike. The only loser is the DIYer trying to wire his garage. Maybe now, his only option is shivering in winter.
Coddling “Made in America” by federal helicopter parents is a surefire way to screw up people. It isn’t good policy in raising children nor in the making of prosperity.
RogerG
Sources:
1. If you want to get into the weeds of Tullock’s insight, read “The Welfare Costs of Tariffs, monopolies, and Theft”, Gordon Tullock, Rice University, June 1967, at https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1465-7295.1967.tb01923.x.
2. For a more concise depiction of Tullock’s thesis, go to “The Hidden Costs of Trump’s Tariffs”, Augustin Forzani, National Review, 7/31/2025, at https://www.nationalreview.com/2025/07/the-hidden-costs-of-trumps-tariffs/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=right-rail&utm_content=capital-matters&utm_term=first.
3. “Trump Tariffs: Tracking the Economic Impact of the Trump Trade War”, Erica York and Alex Durante, Tax Foundation, 7/29/2025, at https://taxfoundation.org/research/all/federal/trump-tariffs-trade-war/.
4. “Chart: The Average U.S. Tariff Rate (1890-2025)”, Dorothy Nuefeld, Visual Capitalist, 4/10/2025, at https://www.visualcapitalist.com/the-average-u-s-tariff-rate-since-1890/.
5. “45%”, Dominic Pino, National Review Magazine, September 2025, p.11.