So, it’s been a minute. Details are unimportant. But one thing I have been doing is getting a degree in Bioethics from Columbia University. As part of this, I did an assignment where we asked ChatGPT to do an ethical analysis with some guided prompts. I thought I would recreate this for the latest economic disaster to come out of Washington.
I asked ChatGPT to tell me “If you were to implement a new tariff on coffee, from Indonesia, what would it be and why?” In summary, it said to be careful not to overburden consumers, create supply shortages, or start a trade war. It suggested a moderate 5% tariff would protect domestic producers while maintaining prices. This, by the way, is 27% lower than the tariff going into effect. I then asked “Would 32% be a good tariff rate for coffee?” ChatGPT said “A 32% tariff on coffee would be considered quite high and could have significant economic consequences” Those included higher prices, higher costs, retaliation, bad business all around. It again suggested a 5-10% tariff. I asked about our “local producers”. It told me about Hawaii and Puerto Rico. I asked if these regions could support our demand. No. We are one of the largest coffee demanders in the world, with 400 million cups drank a day. 98% of it is imported – much of it from countries on the “LIberation” list.
So, ChatGPT thinks a 5-10% tariff, if you were going to put one on at all, would be a better choice. But instead, tariffs several fold that much will be enacted that much. I for one would welcome an AI overlord right now.
stayathomeeconomist 