Blaze News original: Trump's reciprocal tariffs — and decades of devastating fees the world pushed on America



President Donald Trump has repeatedly scorched decades of unfair trading practices for hindering the United States' economy. He dubbed Wednesday, April 2, "Liberation Day" for America, unveiling a sweeping list of new tariffs targeting nations — both friends and adversaries — that have long burdened the U.S. with far higher fees than it has placed on them in return.

The administration had previously announced that it planned to roll out "reciprocal tariffs," explaining that the U.S. would begin imposing balanced fees. Trump left room for some exceptions to this rule, noting that countries fueling America's illegal immigration and drug crisis would face significantly higher tariff rates.

‘They charge us; we charge them.’

While Trump and his Cabinet have maintained that increasing tariffs will boost the U.S. economy, his Democratic critics and their corporate media allies contend it will have the opposite effect — passing the increased costs of imports on to American consumers. Everything from vehicles to everyday necessities, including gas and groceries, will skyrocket, according to Trump's detractors.

The fierce backlash and potential economic uncertainty of the unprecedented tariff hikes appeared to influence Trump to dial back his initial plan to implement across-the-board equal tariffs. Instead, on Wednesday, he revealed that most of the increases, while still reciprocal, are capped at about half the levels other nations currently slap on the U.S.

The new reciprocal tariffs

On Wednesday afternoon, Trump announced the administration's final decision on tariffs while highlighting how America has been treated unfairly.

Trump held up a chart listing the new "discounted reciprocal tariffs" next to "tariffs charged to the U.S.A.," which he noted factored in currency manipulation and trade barriers, not tariff rates alone.

— (@)

The chart listed China as charging the U.S. 67%.

"We're going to be charging a discounted reciprocal tariff of 34%," Trump said, referring to China. "They charge us; we charge them. We charge them less, so how can anybody be upset?"

"They will be because we never charge anybody anything," he added.

Trump continued down the chart, stating that the European Union has been "very tough traders."

"They rip us off," the president declared.

‘For decades, our country has been looted, pillaged, raped, and plundered by nations near and far, both friend and foe alike.’

Trump noted that most of his administration's reciprocal tariffs would amount to about half the rates foreign countries currently levy against the U.S. However, he stated that the administration would implement a 10% minimum baseline. For example, according to the chart, the U.S. will match the United Kingdom's and Brazil's 10% rate.

The administration rolled out the new tariff rates to address the U.S.' $1.2 trillion trade deficit. According to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, 15% of countries compose America's most significant trade deficits. He dubbed those nations the "dirty 15" in a March interview with Fox Business.

In its reasoning for the baseline rate, the White House cited a 2024 economic analysis that found a global 10% tariff would generate $728 billion and 2.8 million new jobs.

High tariffs against the US

Trump highlighted instances when foreign countries imposed steep tariffs against the U.S., pulling data from the U.S. Trade Representative's 2025 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers.

"For decades, our country has been looted, pillaged, raped, and plundered by nations near and far, both friend and foe alike," he claimed.

"Let me offer just a few examples of the vicious attacks our workers have faced for so many years," Trump continued. "The United States charges other countries only a 2.4% tariff on motorcycles. Meanwhile, Thailand and others are charging much higher prices, like 60%. India charges 70%. Vietnam charges 75%. And others are even higher than that."

Trump also explained that the U.S. charged only 2.5% on foreign-made automobiles, while the European Union imposes over 10% tariffs with 20% VAT fees, and India charges 70%.

"Perhaps worst of all are the non-monetary restrictions imposed by South Korea, Japan, and very many other nations," he added. "Toyota sells 1 million foreign-made automobiles into the United States, and General Motors sells almost none. Ford sells very little."

As a result of the "horrendous imbalances," Trump revealed that the U.S. would impose a 25% tariff on all foreign vehicles.

Trump stated that Canada imposed a 250% to 300% tariff on dairy products.

"China charges American rice farmers an over-quota, it's called, tariff rate of 65%," he stated.

‘Official trade data appears to show that China fell far short of implementing its commitments to purchase US goods and services.’

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, a tariff quota, or a two-tiered tariff, allows countries to impose a lower rate for initial imports and a higher rate for later ones.

Trump also noted that South Korea charges American rice farmers rates between 50% and 513%, while Japan imposes 700%.

A White House fact sheet from Wednesday highlighted several more "unfair tariff disparities," stating that the U.S. sets a 0% tariff on networking switches and routers, while India charges 10% to 20%.

"Brazil (18%) and Indonesia (30%) impose a higher tariff on ethanol than does the United States (2.5%)," it read. "Apples enter the United States duty-free, but not so in Turkey (60.3%) and India (50%)."

Trump's critics have claimed that his recent increased tariffs will result in higher costs for American consumers, with some countries imposing their own retaliatory fees. However, the administration argued that the U.S. has been mistreated for decades — long before Trump hiked any rates.

While Democrats continue to paint a picture that Trump's increases will spell disaster, a 2018 report from the Pew Research Center stated that U.S. tariffs were "among the lowest in the world."

"In 2016, according to the World Bank, the average applied U.S. tariff across all products was 1.61%; that was about the same as the average rate of 1.6% for the 28-nation EU, and not much higher than Japan's 1.35%," the report read.

However, it noted that the "average rates are weighted by product import shares with all of each nation's trading partners, and don't necessarily reflect the provisions of specific trade deals."

In other words, these averages include all trade with every nation, so the actual tariffs imposed on the U.S. could be lower or even much higher depending on the product and the partner country.

China

The USTR's latest annual foreign barriers report, cited by Trump, further exposed unequal trade practices between the U.S. and other nations, dedicating a significant portion of the document to detailing obstacles with China.

It stated that China has failed to follow through on implementing some of the "more important commitments" from its January 2020 economic and trade agreement with the U.S. The report specifically pointed to agriculture-related provisions and intellectual property and technology agreements.

"In addition, official trade data appears to show that China fell far short of implementing its commitments to purchase U.S. goods and services, which covered the years 2020 and 2021," it read.

Prior to China joining the World Trade Organization, an international group dealing with trade rules and agreements, it imposed notoriously steep tariffs on the U.S. China was charging an average of 22.1% on all general imports and up to 100% on vehicles.

Meanwhile, the U.S. has historically imposed a 2.5% tariff on imported foreign vehicles before Trump took office.

Upon joining the WTO in 2001, China consented to bring auto tariffs down to 25% over a six-year period and farm products to 15% or less.

A 2010 USTR report noted that China had made significant progress in lowering its tariffs after joining the WTO. However, it maintained "high duties on some products that compete with sensitive domestic industries." According to the report, China imposed 30% tariffs on large motorcycles.

"Likewise, most video, digital video, and audio recorders and players still face duties of approximately 30 percent. Raisins face duties of 35 percent," the report read.

India

In 2016, the USTR called India's tariff system "complex and characterized by a lack of transparency in determining net effective rates."

India, also a part of the WTO, reportedly had significant disparities between its Most Favored Nation rates and its bound rates, which are fees that generally cannot be exceeded for other WTO nations.

"India's average bound tariff rate was 48.6 percent, while its simple MFN average applied tariff for 2014 was 13.5 percent," the report stated.

At the time, the WTO listed India's bound rate at 114%.

"India also maintains very high tariff peaks on a number of goods, including flowers (60 percent), natural rubber (70 percent), automobiles and motorcycles (60 percent to 75 percent), raisins and coffee (100 percent), alcoholic beverages (150 percent), and textiles (some ad valorem equivalent rates exceed 300 percent)," the USTR report read.

European Union

The USTR reported in 2017 that the EU's tariffs were "generally low for non-agricultural goods" but listed several higher fees, including 26% for fish and seafood, 10% for vehicles, 22% for trucks, 6.5% for fertilizers and plastics, and 14% for bicycles.

The 2025 updated USTR report revealed that tariffs remained at those same rates.

Brazil

A 1996 UTSR stated that Brazil's maximum tariff level was 70%, which was down from 105% in 1990.

The USTR's 2016 report revealed that despite Brazil being a part of the WTO, its maximum tariff rates were steep, including 55% for agricultural goods and up to 35% on industrial products.

"Brazil imposes relatively high tariffs on imports across a wide spread of sectors, including automobiles, automotive parts, information technology and electronics, chemicals, plastics, industrial machinery, steel, and textiles and apparel," the report found.

The response

The Trump administration anticipates that some countries will respond to the tariff increases by implementing their own retaliatory fees. However, officials remain confident that the U.S. price hikes will bring more economic growth and not less.

Last month, Trump warned, "It's going to be very costly for people to take advantage of this country. They can't come in and steal our money and steal our jobs and take our factories and take our businesses and expect not to be punished."

‘A long-overdue shift away from a harmful economic framework that has devastated the working class.’

"And they're being punished by tariffs. It's a very powerful weapon that politicians haven't used because they were either dishonest, stupid, or paid off in some other form," he stated.

Trump committed to removing tariffs for foreign companies that build their products in the U.S. He rattled off a list of businesses that have already agreed to make significant investments in the U.S., including Apple, SoftBank Group, OpenAI, Oracle, Nvidia, Johnson & Johnson, Eli Lilly and Company, and Meta. Trump also noted that several automakers are ramping up American investments.

United Auto Workers members applaud as President Donald Trump announces new tariffs during a Make America Wealthy Again trade announcement event in the Rose Garden on April 2, 2025, in Washington, D.C. Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Trump pledged that Liberation Day would go down in history as the turning point that would "make America wealthy again," stating that "jobs and factories will come roaring back into our country."

The United Auto Workers, a union that endorsed Trump's challenger, Vice President Kamala Harris (D), in the 2024 presidential election, has expressed strong support for the president's foreign automobile tariffs, calling it "a long-overdue shift away from a harmful economic framework that has devastated the working class."

During his Wednesday address, Trump highlighted how the imbalanced trade market has also harmed American farmers and ranchers.

The National Cattlemen's Beef Association backed Trump's decision to impose higher tariffs.

"For too long, America's family farmers and ranchers have been mistreated by certain trading partners around the world. President Trump is taking action to address numerous trade barriers that prevent consumers overseas from enjoying high-quality, wholesome American beef. NCBA will continue engaging with the White House to ensure fair treatment for America's cattle producers around the world and optimize opportunities for exports abroad," said Ethan Lane, the association's president of government affairs.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The Paris climate agreement is dead — time to bury it for good



The Paris climate agreement was doomed to fail from its inception. It is long past time for all parties involved, as well as the media, to acknowledge this fact.

The mainstream media has lamented the Paris agreement’s fate since President Donald Trump’s re-election. Trump withdrew the United States from the agreement during his first term and vowed to do so again after Joe Biden rejoined it. While Trump’s withdrawal was a public rebuke that undermined the pact’s “effectiveness,” the agreement was effectively dead before the ink on the last signature was dry.

China’s rising emissions since 2015 all but guarantee that global CO2 levels will continue climbing through 2030 and beyond, no matter what other nations do.

The structure of the agreement itself ensured that it would be ineffective in preventing greenhouse gas emissions from rising.

As I noted shortly after its completion in 2015, even the architects of the Paris agreement quietly admitted that the emissions pledges made by signatory countries would fall short of limiting global warming to 2 degrees Celsius. At the time, their own estimates showed that if every nation fulfilled its commitment, the combined result would still account for less than half the greenhouse gas reductions needed to meet the 2-degree goal.

By 2017, the United Nations confirmed this shortfall. Its report projected that even if every country fully complied with its Paris agreement targets — an optimistic scenario — global temperatures would still rise by 3 degrees Celsius by 2100.

The agreement’s prospects have only worsened since. As the BBC has reported, several countries openly acknowledge that they will not meet their commitments. Nations such as Argentina, Indonesia, South Africa, and South Korea — all signatories that previously pledged to curb fossil fuel use — now plan to increase the production of coal, natural gas, and oil. Many also hope to import additional fuel from the United States.

These nations are now blaming Trump for their decision, but the data shows that every single country now seeking more fossil fuels had already increased its use long before Trump was re-elected and withdrew from the Paris agreement. In fact, no country that set specific emissions reduction targets in the first Paris commitment period has made significant progress toward meeting its goals.

What’s more, of the nearly 200 countries that signed the agreement, only 10 submitted their updated carbon reduction commitments by the deadline — meaning 190 nations failed to comply. Even the 10 countries that submitted their updated commitments failed to meet their previous targets.

Two of the world’s three largest carbon dioxide emitters — China and India — have made no firm commitments under the Paris agreement. Instead of pledging to reduce emissions, both countries offered vague assurances that they expect emissions to peak eventually. If carbon dioxide truly drives climate change, China’s rising emissions since 2015 all but guarantee that global CO2 levels will continue climbing through 2030 and the 2050, no matter what other nations do.

As Thomas Hobbes wrote, “Covenants, without the sword, are but words, and of no strength to secure a man at all.” Every climate agreement to date has embodied that idea — unenforceable promises with no mechanism to guarantee compliance.

The fact is that the Paris agreement was never a binding treaty. Countries set their own emissions targets, but the agreement included no international enforcement. Unless countries pass laws domestically to formalize their pledges, those goals remain legally meaningless — even within their own borders.

Ultimately, the Paris agreement demands long-term sacrifice without any clear or measurable benefit. Politicians focused on re-election hesitate to adopt policies that visibly harm their constituents today in exchange for hypothetical rewards decades after they’ve left office. That political reality is why the Paris climate agreement was doomed from the start. Now is the time to acknowledge its failure — without regret. The trillions already spent are sunk costs, but at the very least, we can stop wasting more.

Trump imposes 25% tariff on countries buying Venezuela’s oil



President Donald Trump announced plans to impose a 25% tariff on any country purchasing oil or gas from Venezuela in an attempt to crack down on Venezuela’s hostility toward the United States, according to a post on Truth Social.

'The return of our compatriots to their nation.'

The post read, “President Donald J. Trump announced today that the United States of America will be putting what is known as a Secondary Tariff on the Country of Venezuela, for numerous reasons, including the fact that Venezuela has purposefully and deceitfully sent to the United States, undercover, tens of thousands of high level, and other, criminals, many of whom are murderers and people of a very violent nature.”

The post called returning Tren de Aragua gang members to Venezuela “a big task.”

“In addition, Venezuela has been very hostile to the United States and the Freedoms which we espouse,” it added.

“Therefore, any Country that purchases Oil and/or Gas from Venezuela will be forced to pay a Tariff of 25% to the United States on any Trade they do with our Country,” Trump’s post continued.

The tariffs are slated to go into effect on April 2.

“Please let this notification serve to represent that the Department of Homeland Security, Border Patrol, and all other Law Enforcement Agencies within our Country have been so notified,” the post read.

The New York Times reported that the U.S. and China have led Venezuelan oil purchases in recent months, with India and Spain buying smaller volumes.

With Venezuelan oil making up a slim percentage of China’s imports, Jorge León, a Rystad Energy research analyst, told the Times that he expects China will seek alternative sources to dodge the additional tariffs.

On Saturday, Venezuela announced that it had reached an agreement with the Trump administration to resume repatriation flights. Nicolas Maduro’s regime had previously refused to take back Venezuelan citizens, briefly prompting Trump to deport violent gang members to El Salvador instead.

Jorge Rodríguez, the president of the National Assembly of Venezuela, stated, “We have agreed with the U.S. government to resume the repatriation of Venezuelan migrants with an initial flight tomorrow, Sunday.”

Rodríguez claimed that Venezuela reached the deal to allow “the return of our compatriots to their nation with the safeguard of their Human Rights.”

“Migrating is not a crime, and we will not rest until we achieve the return of all those who require it and until we rescue our brothers kidnapped in El Salvador,” he added.

Sunday’s deportation flight carried 199 Venezuelan nationals, including alleged Tren de Aragua gang members, back to their home country.

Maduro claimed that Venezuela had resumed the repatriation flights “to rescue and release migrants from U.S. prisons.”

He slammed the president of El Salvador, Nayib Bukele, for accepting 238 deported Venezuelan nationals.

“You guarantee their health and, sooner rather than later, you have to hand them over and release them, because they are kidnapped,” he declared.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

FACT CHECK: Did The US Reject India’s Latest Attempt To Buy F-35s?

A post shared on Facebook claims the U.S. rejected India’s latest attempt to buy F-35s. Verdict: False India has not sought to buy F-35 fighter jets. The United States has tried to woo India to purchase F-35s. Fact Check: Social media users are claiming that the U.S. rejected India’s latest request to buy F-35s. One […]

India agrees to take back illegal migrants to keep H-1B floodgates open



India has reportedly offered to repatriate all of its citizens who are currently residing illegally in the United States.

While India has historically complied with the U.S.' repatriation flights, New Delhi is signaling early cooperation with President Donald Trump's administration to avoid potential visa restrictions and stricter trade policy, a Tuesday report from Bloomberg revealed.

'Both sides are engaged in a process to deter illegal migration.'

India seeks to ensure its citizens can continue to enter the U.S. with student visas and through the H-1B program. According to government data, 72% of the H-1B visas granted in 2023 went to Indian nationals.

U.S. officials have reportedly identified more than 18,000 illegal Indian nationals for deportation. However, the figure could be significantly higher, sources indicated to Bloomberg.

Customs and Border Protection data reveals that agents encountered more than 18,000 Indian nationals in the first three months of fiscal year 2025. The previous year, nationwide encounters of Indian nationals exceeded 90,000. Yet, immigrants from India account for only 3% of total illegal crossings.

A report from the Department of Homeland Security estimated that there are roughly 220,000 Indian nationals in the U.S. illegally as of 2022.

On Tuesday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio met with Indian Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar. A Department of State press release indicated that the two discussed illegal immigration concerns.

Rubio and Jaishankar "affirmed a shared commitment to continuing to strengthen the partnership between the United States and India," it read.

"They discussed a wide range of topics, including regional issues and opportunities to further deepen the U.S.-India relationship, in particular on critical and emerging technologies, defense cooperation, energy, and on advancing a free and open Indo-Pacific region," the press release continued. "Secretary Rubio also emphasized the Trump administration's desire to work with India to advance economic ties and address concerns related to irregular migration."

Randhir Jaiswal, spokesperson for India's Ministry of External Affairs, told Bloomberg, "As part of India-U.S. cooperation on migration and mobility, both sides are engaged in a process to deter illegal migration. This is being done to create more avenues for legal migration from India to the U.S."

"The latest deportation of Indian nationals from the U.S. by a chartered flight is a result of this cooperation," Jaiswal stated, referring to an October repatriation flight that returned more than 100 illegal aliens to India. During the previous 12 months, over 1,100 Indian nationals were returned to their country of origin.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The H-1B brouhaha: Here's what you need to know



Recent infighting over H-1B visas came up after Trump chose Indian-born Sriram Krishnan to be his adviser on AI.

While some see the controversy as a cynical attempt to divide the MAGA movement, the two primary points of view are simple: the populist, nationalist Bannon wing, which wants to cut H-1B visas and boost the domestic workforce, and the Big Tech, Elon Musk, Vivek Ramaswamy wing, which wants to maximize skilled immigration and H-1B visas in order to “win.”

More often than not, the incentive lies not in a worker's exceptional talent but in his or her desperation.

In a recent bizarre post, Ramaswamy claimed Americans are raised by a pop culture without a good work ethic and thus deserve to be replaced by harder-working foreigners.

A 'complete scam'

Krishnan seeks to remove national origin caps on green cards to make it easier for H-1B recipients from countries like India to become American residents and citizens. He has also repeatedly talked about and focused on how difficult and Byzantine the U.S. immigration system can be for legal immigrants.

Musk has promised to “go to war on this issue,” crediting the H-1B with his own immigration and American success story.

Bannon has said H-1Bs are a “complete scam” and promised that he and the base are going to “rip your face off” if Musk and his allies think they can get away with supporting immigrants taking American jobs.

The left has gloated over the conflict, with former CNN host Don Lemon calling Musk and Ramaswamy “dumb f***ing idiots” and laughing about tech bros who are seeing Trump’s base turn against them in the “MAGA civil war.” Claiming this is just a fight over “white jobs,” Lemon admitted, “I just f***ing love it.”

Trump's temptation

Trump has been in favor of limiting or ending H-1Bs in the past, saying they are granted for the “explicit purpose of substituting for American workers at lower pay.” However, Trump now says he agrees with Musk that H-1Bs are a valuable tool for increasing American economic greatness, claiming this has always been his view.

Trump’s 2024 victory was helped greatly by the money and influence of Big Tech backers like David Sacks, Musk, and the Winklevoss twins. But his base is still deep-red Americans who don’t want to hear about how foreigners getting jobs helps some abstract idea of America or striving foreigners who barely speak English landing cushy tech jobs in Austin or San Francisco.

It’s understandably ridiculous to hear that America is just about GDP numbers and not about the generations who have lived and died as patriotic Americans.

H-1B 101

A look at what H-1B visas are and how they work helps dispel the canard that America lacks a skilled, disciplined workforce.

Anyone holding a bachelor’s degree or above and who has “highly specialized knowledge” can apply for an H-1B. If granted, it gives them the right to work in the U.S. for three years and apply for an extension up to six years. Officially, the wage paid to H-1B workers has to be equal to what would be paid to an American worker.

H-1Bs have existed since 1990 and are especially popular for foreign students in the U.S. who want to get hired at an American company and eventually get citizenship. These visas are liberalized legislative descendants of the H-1 visa of 1952, which excluded most applicants from Asia.

H-1Bs have been widely used by Silicon Valley to recruit graduates from India, China, and elsewhere, ostensibly to address the lack of qualified native-born Americans. The government can issue 85,000 H-1Bs per fiscal year via a lottery system. Much rarer visas like the O-1 are not used nearly as often.

Indentured servants?

But how exactly do H-1B visas help companies?

More often than not, the incentive lies not in a worker's exceptional talent but in his or her desperation. While an H-1B employee can theoretically change jobs, the process is quite difficult; the best chance of staying in America is keeping the current boss happy. At the very least, this makes for compliant workers; in some cases it essentially amounts to indentured servitude.

Instead of offering more and more foreign workers a path to citizenship, we should be helping the citizens we already have participate more fully in the American economy. The Trump administration must focus on preparing Americans to get and excel at the jobs of the future, rather than reinforcing the cheap labor pipeline.

Jill Biden Collected Tens Of Thousands Of Dollars Worth Of Gifts From Foreign Leaders In 2024

The 7.5 carat diamond was a gift

Vivek Ramaswamy exposes ‘right fragility’ with culture truth bomb



If Vivek Ramaswamy continues discussing immigration on X, some of his former supporters might urge the incoming Trump administration to assign him to manage the White House 7-Eleven, a scenario humorously predicted by the Babylon Bee earlier this year.

The biotech entrepreneur sparked a firestorm with a lengthy post about immigration and the economy. In his opening paragraph, he wrote:

The reason top tech companies often hire foreign-born and first-generation engineers over "native" Americans isn’t because of an innate American IQ deficit (a lazy and wrong explanation). A key part of it comes down to the c-word: culture.

The former GOP presidential candidate and Trump surrogate argued that American culture has emphasized mediocrity over excellence long before young people reach college. His comments drew sharp criticism from conservatives who support stricter limits on both illegal and legal immigration. Critics argued that institutions should prioritize American workers, address skills gaps, and avoid outsourcing high-paying jobs to other countries.

I believe every country’s policies should prioritize its citizens over foreign nationals. I understand the frustration felt by STEM graduates who struggle to find jobs in their fields, especially when they see companies hiring workers from India, China, and other parts of Asia. But strong leaders must prioritize hard truths over convenient lies.

Unfortunately, too many conservatives default to 'right fragility' whenever the culture police come knocking.

Anyone who has criticized participation trophy culture in youth sports, grade inflation in high schools, or emotionally fragile college students knows there is some truth in Ramaswamy’s argument. His point about how social norms influence social outcomes deserves discussion, not dismissal.

Unfortunately, many conservatives reacted emotionally, interpreting his comments as a claim that Asians — specifically Indians — are superior to Americans — specifically white people. This simple observation about cultural norms inadvertently exposed the “right fragility” increasingly evident among conservative social commentators.

I found the reactions to Vivek’s comments fascinating because white conservatives often invoke “culture” to explain why black Americans struggle to gain admission to elite universities or remain underrepresented in the tech industry. They cite factors such as family structure, study habits, media consumption, values, priorities, drive, and grit as alternatives to the progressive explanation of systemic racism. Some so-called racial realists take it further, claiming that low IQs account for the educational and economic disparities between black and white Americans.

Vivek’s remarks, however, revealed a closely guarded political secret: The socioeconomic gaps between Asians and whites are as significant as those between whites and blacks. For instance, the difference in SAT math scores between Asian students (626) and white students (532) exceeds the gap between white and black students (441). Similar disparities exist in the average number of hours high school students spend on homework and the percentage who complete it five or more days a week.

Even smaller achievement gaps can significantly affect outcomes. According to the National Assessment of Educational Progress, 64% of Asian eighth-grade students are proficient in math, compared to 44% of white students. A similar disparity exists in reading proficiency. Conservatives often cite family stability as a factor contributing to the “achievement gap” between black and white students. While Ramaswamy didn’t address these factors in his cultural analysis, he easily could have. Asian-Americans have higher marriage rates and lower divorce rates, and they are far less likely to have children out of wedlock.

Discussing culture, rather than genetics, is valuable because a society’s norms, values, and priorities can change over time. No country or ethnic group has a monopoly on hard work, determination, or innovation. The dominance of students of Indian descent in the Scripps National Spelling Bee has little to do with the H-1B visa program. In many cases, these children likely speak English as a second — or even third — language at home.

Excelling in math and science at the highest levels requires tremendous discipline and dedication, much like the commitment needed to become an elite athlete. The makeup of the robotics club and basketball team at the University of North Carolina reflects the students who are willing to put in the hard work necessary to compete at the highest levels in their respective fields. Complaints about discrimination will not change that reality.

Educator Jawanza Kunjufu once appealed to young black men by saying, “That that you do most will be that that you do best.” His call to foster a culture of excellence in the classroom should resonate with conservatives who acknowledge the challenges in the K-12 education system and seek to improve economic opportunities for American citizens. Unfortunately, too many conservatives default to “right fragility” whenever the culture police come knocking.

FACT CHECK: Video Claiming To Show Assad Plane Crashing Is Old
play icon

FACT CHECK: Video Claiming To Show Assad Plane Crashing Is Old

A video shared on Facebook claims to show former Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad’s plane crashing. Verdict: False The video is not from Syria. It is from India. Fact Check: The video claims to show Assad’s plane going down around Homs, killing him. One user wrote, “BREAKNEWS | PLANE CRASH OF SYRIAN PRESIDENT BASHAR AL ASSAD NEAR […]

America last? Foreign workers fill jobs while Americans are left out



America is full. Beyond the ongoing waves of illegal immigration, the country has admitted 36 million legal immigrants since 1989 (68 million since 1965), bringing the foreign-born population to a record 51.6 million. Every year, the U.S. issues 1.1 million green cards, 1 million guest worker visas, and 1.1 million foreign student visas. This level of immigration has transformed the nation over the past generation in unprecedented ways.

The real debate should focus on how much immigration we can curtail. Unfortunately, influential forces connected to Trump donors and transition team leaders are pushing to expand the foreign-worker pool, even though America already has more than enough.

Eight years into the MAGA movement, conservatives should not have to play defense to prevent further increases in immigration after four years of Biden’s disastrous policies.

Calls for more foreign workers come from multiple sources, including Elon Musk, who advocates for increasing foreign-worker visas and green cards. The “tech bros” even persuaded Trump to echo Mitt Romney’s half-baked suggestion of “stapling green cards to the diplomas” of foreign students.

We don’t need more foreign workers

After the election, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) emphatically declared, “We need more work visas,” as though it were an unassailable truth. However, the idea of a foreign-worker shortage exists only among those who believe new jobs should be reserved for foreigners while sidelining Americans.

In reality, all net job growth in the U.S. since 2019 has gone to foreign-born workers. Heritage Foundation economist E.J. Antoni notes that, over the past year, native-born workers have lost 773,000 jobs on net, while foreign-born workers have gained more than one million jobs.

Since before the pandemic, the foreign-born workforce has grown by 3.7 million, while the native-born workforce has shrunk by 873,000. These numbers challenge the narrative that America needs more foreign labor.

What began as an argument that Americans won’t do manual labor has evolved into a claim that Americans won’t work in accounting, engineering, computers, or nursing. This belief creates self-fulfilling momentum, working against Americans in numerous industries. As more industries become saturated with workers from India or other countries accustomed to lower wages, salaries are depressed, and Americans are increasingly sidelined — especially as government policies often pay them not to work.

Indian contract companies like Infosys, HCL, Wipro, Cognizant, and Tata have exploited the H-1B, L-1, F-1, and Optional Practical Training visa pipelines to flood Silicon Valley and American tech companies with cheap labor. This approach not only boxes out American workers but also treats many Indian recruits as indentured servants. Over the past few decades, 71% of jobs in Silicon Valley have gone to foreign workers, while 74% of American STEM graduates have failed to secure jobs in STEM fields.

As industries like tech and computers become increasingly saturated with Indian workers, they develop cultures of parochialism and discrimination against Americans. In October, a federal jury found Cognizant, the largest recipient of H-1B visas for many years, guilty of discriminating against American IT workers. During the California-based discrimination lawsuit in Palmer v. Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp., evidence revealed that tech firms were actively terminating American employees to replace them with H-1B workers, primarily from India.

The population of Indian nationals in the United States has grown 13-fold since 1980. Every year, Indian nationals consistently rank as the second-largest recipients of green cards, with more than 100,000 issued annually. Additionally, there are 330,000 foreign students from India studying in the U.S. On what planet do GOP donors believe we don’t already have enough?

Toward a more balanced approach

The goal of economic policy — including tax, regulatory, welfare, and immigration measures — should focus on bringing sidelined American workers back into the labor force. Yet, one of the primary arguments for admitting so many immigrants is the supposed lack of available workers. This narrative ignores the significant rise in working-age Americans (16 to 64) not participating in the labor force. These individuals are not counted as unemployed because they are no longer actively seeking work.

The combination of welfare incentives and immigration-driven wage suppression has discouraged an entire generation of workers from rejoining the labor force. According to the Center for Immigration Studies, “If the same share of U.S.-born men (16 to 64) were in the labor force in 2023 as in 1960, there would be 9.5 million more U.S.-born men in the labor force. Even if the share returned to the 2000 level, it would still add 4.8 million men to the labor force.”

Instead of flooding the market with more cheap labor, further discouraging these sidelined workers, policymakers should consider a more balanced approach. Combining immigration reform with welfare reform could help incentivize Americans to re-enter the workforce and reverse these damaging trends.

We constantly hear about the supposed shortage of STEM workers, but labor scholar Steve Camarota of the Center for Immigration Studies raises an important question: “If employers are desperate for more STEM workers, why have they been lowering the compensation offered?” According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, compensation for STEM workers in 2023 was actually 7.1% lower than in 2019. If there is a tight labor market, it’s not for Americans but for the growing segment of third-world imports willing to work for less.

Congress banned contract labor immigration in 1891 for good reason. Sections 3 and 4 of the Immigration Act of 1891 prohibited companies and travel agencies from marketing or soliciting immigration with the promise of employment. The Founders envisioned a system that attracted productive immigrants who would assimilate into America’s political system and work freely, rather than one that functioned as a foreign labor mill designed to depress wages for Americans.

As Trump said during the 2016 campaign, “The time has come for a new immigration commission to develop a new set of reforms ... to keep immigration levels, measured by population share, within historical norms ... and to establish new immigration controls to boost wages and to ensure that open jobs are offered to American workers first.”

Trump made these promises before the record-setting immigration years under the Biden administration and before all the new job gains were captured by foreign nationals. Now is the time to fulfill those promises and return immigration to historic norms. Eight years into the MAGA movement, conservatives should not have to play defense to prevent further increases in immigration after four years of Biden’s disastrous policies.