I think it's not clear whether to take him seriously or literally. So there are a lot of ways this could go. And if you think about, in his first campaign, he said he was going to renegotiate NAFTA, and then he renegotiated NAFTA, and it was like, I changed three commas. It's the best trade deal ever. Not much actually changed from that. Partly, I think because his advisors told him that would be a bad idea, partly because negotiating trade deals, it turns out, is harder than it looks. And so the question here is, how is he viewing tariffs, and how seriously is he going to pursue the across the board tariffs? So what I mean by how is he viewing tariffs? There are different ways you can think about tariffs. One is as a way to raise tax revenue. That is a very bad way to think about tariffs. By the way, last year, total net imports were about $3 trillion and to replace the federal income tax, you would need like a 70% tariff, which is, of course, doesn't even help, because if you slap a 70% tariff on everything, you're gonna lose a lot of revenue as people switch away from imports. So it's mathematically, probably impossible to replace the income tax, it's most likely impossible even to pay for some of the new tax cuts that he would, that he has promised, which would cost almost a trillion dollars a year and which would require roughly a 30% tariff. But again, you have those dynamic effects. So you raise your tariff, your revenue goes down, you raise it more, it goes down further. So also probably mathematically impossible to do that. So I don't think that you should think of tariffs as a good way to raise revenue. Second way you can think about tariffs is as a way to improve American manufacturing. So let me try to give the best possible version of that or. Argument, which is that manufacturing isn't just about having a factory. It is about having a network of people who know how to run factories, of machinists, of having this deep, rich, robust labor market, a set of suppliers, your supply chain on shored and that when you have those things, the economy gets better at manufacturing. You move down the cost chain. I think this is also a bad way to think about tariffs, for a bunch of reasons. So number one, we actually, you know, people talk about China has taken all the manufacturing from us. We're nowhere. This is not true. Now we are second in the world in manufacturing, admittedly a distant second. If you look at how much China their gross output, they produce, about a third of the world's manufacturing. We produce about 16% sorry, 12% however, if you look at value add, which is when we have netted out those intermediate goods, like steel parts, and all of that, it's actually much closer. We produce about 16% of the world's value add, and China produces about 29% but then you also have to think about population, right? They have many, many times more people than we do. They employ a lot of them in manufacturing. The very reason that we employ so few people in manufacturing is that our manufacturing is super productive. We are producing high value, high value add things, while China is lower on the value chain. And so thinking about on shoring that stuff, are we going to bring back our lower value manufacturing? By the way, our labor markets are quite tight, especially for low skilled labor, so if we do that, we're gonna have to take people out of other things and employ them in manufacturing, or we could raise immigration. It's probably not a good idea. So the idea that, or I should say, I don't think it's probably a bad idea, but I think that Trump thinks it's probably a bad idea to increase the number of lower skilled migrants that we're bringing in to do factory work, which, by the way, he loves talking about McKinley and 19th century tariffs. You know, the economic consensus is that that story about 19th century tariffs, where they help create America's manufacturing center help make us a more productive and growing economy. Most economists think that that's wrong. But even if you think it's right, do you know how that was fueled? It's by hog wild immigration from abroad, which is bringing in all these lower skilled workers who are working in the factories. So I think this is probably also not a good way to think about it. The last thing we should say is that, look, when you are slapping tariffs on everything, you are raising the price of those intermediate goods, of all those inputs that go into manufacturing, and that makes manufacturing less productive. It makes our exports especially less competitive. And so this whole idea of export led growth. That's something that I think you can argue, I think this story is kind of weak, but I think you can at least argue that tariffs, along with other industrial policy, can help an economy that is, you know, very poor do catch up growth where they're essentially just copying what's happening abroad. America, as we said, are manufacturing super productive. We're at the technology frontier already. I'm not saying we are in every single good look. You know, Taiwan is better at semiconductors than we are, but in general, and right now, Airbus, sadly, is better at airframe than we are, because Boeing is having so many, many problems. But we can't copy some other country in general. We brought TSMC, which is the big Taiwanese semi semiconductor plant. We brought that here to do manufacturing. They're They're up, up and running, and somewhat to my surprise, they are as productive as their, as their Taiwanese plants. But in general, we can't do catch up growth. There's no one for us to copy, for us to learn, for us to protect our infant industries while they figure out how to do what people are already doing. We're already at that frontier where we need to do to get better, to grow, to make our economy more productive, to provide the jobs everyone wants, is to push the frontier farther, and that's not something you can do by closing yourself in, trying to limit your input, your inputs from abroad, especially because, you know, supply chains. Now look, if you're going to go, if you're going to be good at semiconductors, for example, you are going to need to buy high end photolithography machines from the one company that makes basically all of the high end photolithography machines, which is Dutch. And so I think when you look at this, either they're going to start carving out exceptions to get those inputs in, or our manufacturing productivity is more likely to drop than to rise, especially because you're now going to have a bunch of manufacturers who protected behind these tariff walls, who don't need to compete as hard as they do now. And that's going to actually sort of incentivize them to just cater to that sheltered market. And that's not again, how an economy grows and gets richer. The third way you can think about tariffs is as a bargaining chip, is as a way to force other companies to open up, to stop subsidizing their companies, to do various favors for our exports. If that's how he's thinking about it, I think there's on the margin, probably some potential there. But the question is, A, how do you negotiate it? B, what do you do about retaliatory tariffs, which, by the way, we are definitely 100% gonna get if we slap tariffs on everything. So if you are looking at export industries, those export industries, are going to be hurt by this. And also, who do you want to open up? You want to force China Open? Because that's not happening. I mean, you'll get you could get some gains on the margin, maybe, but very unclear to me that they would be offset by the losses. And also, if you're going to do that, you don't want to do across the board tariffs. When you do targeted tariffs that are giving you that negotiating advantage, so that when you can go in, you have the ability to say, look, you've got this tariff on you because you are doing X to me. I wish you to stop doing X to me. So a lot of this depends on how he's thinking about this. There are a couple of bad stories and one marginally better story, and then if you're doing the marginally better story, this is not going to be as big a deal as if he's trying to actually raise tax revenue or actually somehow Jump Start our manufacturing back to where it was in 1950 and I think no one at this point really knows what the answer. And that is and because it's hard to tell at any given point how serious Trump is about anything, or how long he will be serious about it. He is incredibly mercurial. He gets an idea in his head. The idea drops out of his head 10, months later, I think at the moment or 10 minutes later, really, I think he does really believe very hardcore and tariffs, so we're going to get something, but I don't think we know what.