Back when I started working in finance in 2020, I remarked to a colleague that I felt pretty ignorant about all this finance stuff. So they suggested a basic online course in macroeconomics. That course: “The Power of Macroeconomics: Economic Principles in the Real World” taught by Dr. Peter Navarro.

In case the name doesn’t ring a bell, Dr. Navarro is currently the senior counselor for trade and manufacturing, in the Trump administration. He is seemingly the only economist in the world who thinks universal tariffs are a good idea. That guy. Even at the time I took the course, Navarro had been the director of the White House National Trade Council during the first Trump administration. But I swear, I didn’t realize who he was until 2022, when he was arrested in relation to the conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election.

No deep dive here–I’m not going back through the course to sift for oddities. This is just storytime, recalling what I can about Dr. Peter Navarro from several years ago.

When I told my husband about this course, he was shocked. “Do you have to go back and relearn everything about economics?” As far as I could tell, it was just a normal course on economics! Mind you, I haven’t taken any other courses in economics. But at least, I’ve never embarrassed myself at any cocktail parties by speaking ignorance about macroeconomics.

Well, admittedly there was that one time. This is a true story. I was at a party, and for whatever reason I was describing Okun’s Law to my conservative aunt. As I was explaining it, there was a sudden silence across the room as the whole party heard exactly what I said. A long pause. Then, “Happy New Year!”

Okay tangent story over. But seriously, I think it was just a normal course.

I do remember a couple specific things. There was a lecture about the modern history of American economics. Any such history must discuss the stagflation in the 1970s. And as part of this, he discussed Reagonomics, the economic policies of Ronald Reagan. Reagan followed a heterodox economic theory known as “supply-side economics” (or more derogatorily, “trickle-down economics”).

Now I thought that the professor might try to take a neutral stance, as he had taken a relatively neutral stance on many other historical economic policies. But nope. He was very critical. Good for him, I guess. Either he’s willing to admit conservative failures, or maybe Reaganomics is so widely discredited among economists that it’s impossible to defend. I wonder how Peter Navarro will feel about surpassing Reaganomics with an economic disaster of his own making?

The second thing I remember, was when he talked about global trade. He explained basic stuff, like comparative advantage. How ironic, that I would learn why tariffs are generally a bad idea from Dr. Peter Navarro of all people.

While universal tariffs are a bad idea, I think it’s commonly argued that tariffs may have utility in specific cases. Peter Navarro went on to discuss one particular area where he personally thought tariffs were a good idea: China. He claimed that while free trade was generally better for both sides, it was possible for one side to “cheat” and take advantage of the other. He claimed that China was cheating. But I don’t recall any specifics about what he meant by that, and maybe he just didn’t get into it.

I do not recall him saying anything about being cheated by penguins in the Heard and MacDonald islands. But presumably the same arguments apply.

So that’s my inconsequential story about Peter Navarro. Stay fed, my friends.