Trump Tariffs, Trade Wars & The Abel-Lerner Connection – What It All Means for the Real World ?

This whole thought came about after watching a video of Dr. Steve Hanke speaking to a think tank ...snippet below, where he pointed out something remarkably simple yet deeply profound: “Tariffs are a tax on your own exports.” That line hit me like a freight train - and sent me digging into the Lerner condition, a 1937 economic model influenced by the mathematical symmetry thinking of Niels Henrik Abel.

In the chaos of trade wars, tariffs, and political grandstanding, it’s easy to get lost in economic jargon. But sometimes, the best insights come from surprisingly elegant theories - like the one Lerner proposed.

Let me break it down.

Understanding the Lerner Condition and Abel’s Influence

Imagine you slap a tax on imports to protect your local industries. Sounds smart, right? But Lerner’s condition flips this idea on its head. He argued that an import tariff is economically the same as a tax on your own exports. That’s because when you make foreign goods expensive, your own exporters face retaliation or reduced foreign income, which means less demand for your stuff too. It's like trying to win a pillow fight by punching yourself in the gut.

Mathematician Niels Henrik Abel didn’t study trade, but his obsession with symmetry influenced Lerner’s thinking. Just like Abel found elegant balance in equations, Lerner applied symmetry to global trade. A tax on imports = a tax on exports. Simple. Brutal. True. So how will the present embroglio pan out?

Scenario 1: The Tariff Spiral – Everyone Loses

This is the “nightmare mode” of a trade war. Country A (say, the U.S.) imposes tariffs. Country B (China) hits back. Both sides keep raising the stakes.

We’ve seen this play out. Under Trump, U.S. tariffs on China soared. China retaliated, targeting American exports like soybeans - crippling U.S. farmers. Trade volumes shrank. Prices rose. Consumers in both countries paid more. Global supply chains bent and broke.

This spiral fits Lerner’s model perfectly. Both countries tried to win but ended up taxing their own economies. It's like two neighbors blocking each other’s driveways out of spite - and then wondering why no one can go anywhere.

Scenario 2: The Truce – A Pause, Not a Peace

Now picture this: after months of economic damage, both sides say, “enough.” They agree to a partial rollback. This happened with the Phase One trade deal in 2020. China promised to buy more U.S. goods. The U.S. backed off new tariffs.

Great, right? Sort of.

Yes, it eased tensions and helped some exporters (hello again, soybeans). But most tariffs stayed. China didn’t fully meet its promises. And the structural issues - tech theft, subsidies - remained unresolved.

This is the halfway house. The bleeding slows, but the wound is still open. Trade recovers slightly, but the trust is fractured.

Scenario 3: The Standoff – The New Normal

Finally, we have the long-term stalemate: tariffs remain, trade adjusts, and both countries “decouple” bit by bit.

This is where we are today.

The U.S. still has tariffs on hundreds of billions in Chinese goods. China retaliates. Both economies slowly shift - U.S. importers turn to Vietnam or Mexico; China looks to ASEAN and Europe. Supply chains evolve, but efficiency drops. Everything costs a little more. Growth lags.

And the Lerner symmetry still applies. Those tariffs? They’re quietly taxing exporters and raising prices back home. No fanfare. Just a slow burn.

Final Thoughts: Trade Wars Are Boomerangs

If the Lerner condition teaches us anything, it’s this: tariffs hurt both ways. You can’t win a trade war by throwing taxes around. They come right back at you - hurting your exporters, your consumers, and your long-term growth.

Trump’s trade war with China showed this in action. The U.S. paid more, sold less, and achieved little lasting change. China took a hit too, but adapted.

So what’s the big takeaway?

In trade wars, there are no clean victories. Just costs - some obvious, some hidden. And if we want smarter policies in the future, we’d do well to remember what Lerner (and Abel) taught us: economic systems have symmetry - and that symmetry bites back.

The Mahakumbh Marketing Playbook: Modernizing the Lost & Found Saga

Lost & Found – R.I.P. Human Drama

I miss getting lost.

No seriously, back in the day, getting lost was an emotion. It was a plot twist. It was the reason for Bollywood’s existence. Today? It’s just…a GPS glitch.

You see, man is supposed to be a social animal. We were wired to mingle, bicker, play, fall in love, lose people and find them again - preferably with melodrama, rain, and background score. But no. Technology is killing it.

Socializing is now reduced to likes and comments on a post with a dog filter. Playing games means sitting in front of a console and yelling “camp the base!” at someone in Estonia. Even dating is a virtual tête-à-tête with someone who might be a fridge in disguise - or worse, a bot masquerading as Lolita_69.

Even our storytelling has suffered. Remember Bollywood’s golden age of "Lost & Found"? That magical plot device where a simple earthquake or mela separated families like socks in a washing machine - only for fate to reunite them decades later with matching birthmarks and theme songs?

Take Waqt (1965) - a disaster separates a happy family. No Google Maps. No Aadhar card. Just destiny, drama, and a whole lot of melodious pining.

Amar, Akbar, Anthony... and Alexa

Or Yaadon Ki Baaraat, where a tragedy tears apart brothers, but a childhood song knits them back together years later. Or Amar Akbar Anthony, where three brothers are adopted by families of different religions - Hindu, Muslim, Christian - and then reunited in a divine moment of joint blood transfusion. Yes, they simultaneously donate blood to their mother like the tributaries of the Ganga merging into one biological miracle. Science weeps. Bollywood rejoices.

In Parvarish, a police officer’s son and a dacoit’s son are interchanged at birth - growing up on opposite sides of the law. Classic The Departed meets Butch Cassidy, if you like your metaphors spicy.

But today? You can’t even misplace a kid in a fair without someone scanning his forehead. Literally.

Kho Gaye QR Mein: Mela 2.0

Take the recently concluded Mahakumbh. Now THAT was the dream setting for a classic "Mele mein kho gaya tha" story. A writer’s paradise. Lost children, teary mothers, impromptu songs, maybe even a holy cow or two nudging a character toward enlightenment.

But no. Enter Techno Babu with his QR-coded kala teeka.

Yes, Fevicol (Pidilite Industries) , in its infinite wisdom (and adhesive strength), launched the Teeka ID -a traditional black dot on the forehead, only with a twist. Embedded inside it? A QR code. So if your kid wandered off, a simple scan gave you all his details - name, address, favorite cartoon, probably even his lunchbox contents.

No suspense. No "Bachha kahaan gaya?" wailing. Just a beep and poof - child located. Drama canceled. Plot lost.

It’s like someone took your DDLJ moment and replaced it with a push notification: “Simran has been auto-rescued. Please proceed to Gate No. 3.”

So here lies the lost art of getting lost. Hijacked by GPS, murdered by QR codes, and buried under real-time updates.

I say bring back the chaos. Let us drift. Let destiny do its thing. Let us meet long-lost siblings through dramatic songs in shady bars. Let teekas be just teekas and not Google Maps in disguise.

Because sometimes, being found is only special…if you were truly lost.

Tooth or Dare: My Tribal Encounter in the Dentist’s Chair

They say dentists are the only people who can make your mouth feel like a construction zone while smiling politely. And oh, how true that is! You walk in hoping for a simple cleaning and before you know it, there’s a vibrating drill jackhammering away like you’re prepping for roadwork on Main Street - inside your face. Yet, through all this, your dentist flashes that reassuring grin, as if to say, “Relax, we’re just reinforcing the foundation.”

People seriously underestimate these folks. Sure, we nod and thank them at checkouts like they’ve just handed us a grocery bill, but deep down, dentists are the unsung warriors of modern life.

And trust me, they’re not just polishing teeth—they’re fortifying your very existence...

The Unsung Hero of the Fort: The Dentist

People grossly underestimate the role of dentists. Sure, we’re quick to notice a sharp haircut or someone’s new shoes, but trust me, nothing grabs attention like a missing tooth. Forget your missing eyebrow, people will skip straight past it and lock eyes with that dental gap like it’s the black hole of social conversations.

Now, people who shiver at the thought of third-degree police interrogation clearly haven’t been introduced to a root canal. I mean, if you’ve survived one - thank the anesthesia gods - you’ve dodged a trauma that could have you narrating your darkest secrets to a potted plant. A root canal without anesthesia? Oh, that makes "aeroplane climb" drills during police torture look like a breezy Sunday picnic.

"The only thing scarier than the drill’s noise is your dentist whispering, ‘You might feel a little pressure.’"

When dentistry feels less like healthcare and more like surviving an ancient ritual.

Imagine this: you’re lying on that dentist’s chair, staring at the blinding light above like a prisoner waiting for judgment. The dentist enters, wielding that electric drill - the one that sounds like a mosquito on steroids - whirring away with sinister glee. As it descends towards your poor, compromised tooth, your brain conjures images straight from a horror novel. It’s like watching a tribal dance around a boiling cauldron -except, instead of a trapped adventurer, it’s your molar being stewed alive.

I swear, in those moments, when that vibrating instrument starts its deep dive into the enamel towards your already jangled nerve, you half-expect a chorus of “Jinga-lala-ho Jinga-lala-ho.... Hurr Hurr” to erupt in the background. Primitive? Yes. Accurate? Even more so.

From Castles to Canines: The Dentist as Your Modern-Day Killedar

But let’s cut our dentists some slack. Beyond their love for terrifying drills and scary x-rays, they are the silent protectors of our oral fortresses. I like to think of them as modern-day ‘Killedars.’ Back in the Maratha Empire days, the Killedar was the governor of a fort, a stoic figure responsible for its defense and maintenance. Fast forward to today, and your dentist is basically your personal Killedar - except, instead of cannons and soldiers, they’ve got dental picks and floss.

"Some warriors wield swords. My dentist wields a vibrating spear that hums like an angry wasp."

Cavities? Gum issues? Plaque buildup that could rival the Great Wall? Fear not, for your Killedar will guard your fort (aka your pearly whites) with the same diligence as any medieval Castellan. Sure, you might be paying them in cash instead of gold coins, but the principle remains.

So, next time you recline nervously in that dental chair, remember: you’re not in a torture chamber; you’re in a well-guarded fort, and your dentist - armed with gadgets, grit, and a slightly warped sense of humor - is just doing their duty.

Besides, would you rather face them now... or risk flashing your next date a smile with more gaps than a pirate’s treasure map?

So the next time you find yourself under that blinding light, staring into the eyes of your tribal warrior-dentist, just remember: you’re not losing your mind, you’re preserving your fort!

Jevons Paradox vs. Moore’s Law: Why We Always Underestimate Technology's Future

Why Jevons Paradox and Moore’s Law Prove We’re Always Underestimating Technology

There’s something hilarious about looking back at past predictions about technology. The one that always gets me? That infamous (possibly misattributed) Bill Gates quote: "No one will ever need more than 64K of memory." Oh, Bill. How adorable. Today, I have individual memes that take up more storage than that.

But this isn’t just about Gates and his 64K moment - this is a broader pattern. Humans, despite all our brilliance, are spectacularly bad at predicting how much of a good thing we’ll use once it becomes more efficient. Enter: Jevons Paradox.

Jevons Paradox: The "Oh, We’ll Just Use More of It" Effect

Back in the 19th century, a British economist, William Stanley Jevons, noticed something weird. As steam engines became more efficient at burning coal, people didn’t use less coal. They used more. The cheaper and more efficient something becomes, the more people lean into it.

Fast forward to today, and AI is proving Jevons right again. The cost of AI models is dropping, their intelligence is skyrocketing, and guess what? Instead of slowing down, we’re cramming AI into every possible application. From writing our emails to generating cat pictures, we just keep using more AI.

Moore’s Law: The "Tech Gets Faster, and We Want Even More" Effect

Now, let's talk about Moore’s Law. In 1965, Gordon Moore predicted that the number of transistors on a chip would double every couple of years, making computers exponentially faster and cheaper. He was right - for decades.

This is why your phone today is more powerful than the computer that sent astronauts to the moon. And yet, somehow, it still feels sluggish when you have 37 Chrome tabs open. Why? Because every time computing power increases, we find new, more demanding applications. We’re like kids who get a bigger toy box and immediately demand even bigger toys.

Jevons vs. Moore: The Ultimate Tech Showdown

Jevons Paradox and Moore’s Law are basically two sides of the same coin:

• Moore’s Law predicts that technology will keep getting exponentially better.
• Jevons Paradox predicts that as it does, we’ll use even more of it than we ever thought we would.

The result? A never-ending cycle where efficiency fuels demand, and demand fuels even more advancements. It’s why “no one needs more than 64K” turned into “no one needs more than GPT-5” which will, inevitably, turn into “no one needs more than GPT-10” before we all start casually chatting with AI versions of ourselves in the metaverse.

The Lesson: Never Underestimate Our Ability to Want More

So, what can we learn from all this? First, any time someone says, “We’ll never need more than [X],” get ready to laugh at them in about a decade. Second, AI and computing aren’t slowing down—they’re accelerating. And if history has taught us anything, it’s that efficiency doesn’t reduce demand. It makes us want way more of the thing.

Which brings me to the final question: how long before we start saying, “Nobody will ever need more than AI that can run the entire world economy in real time”?

I’d give it about five years. Maybe less if Moore and Jevons have anything to say about it.