Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
Before we dive in, I want to share a little context behind what you’re about to read.
Like many of you, I’ve been deeply unsettled by the recent economic headlines—rising costs, tense trade relationships, uncertainty hanging over our future like a thundercloud. But honestly, what’s been just as disheartening—maybe even more so—is the tone of the conversation around it all.
I’m tired. Not of the complexity—we can handle complexity. I’m tired of the ugliness. The way we talk to one another. The way every disagreement turns into a personal attack. The way people go viral for dunking on someone instead of trying to understand them. Somewhere along the line, we replaced discussion with demolition. And in that mess, the actual message—the nuance, the reasoning, the humanity—gets completely lost.
So I decided to do something different.
I took a hard look at the Trump administration’s tariff strategy—not through a partisan lens but through a leadership lens. I wanted to understand what it’s really trying to solve, what’s at stake, and why this direction—however controversial—is being pursued.
Then, I put myself in the shoes of a president—not a politician, not a pundit, but a leader responsible for explaining a painful but strategic decision to 330 million people. I didn’t want to rant. I didn’t want to score points. I wanted to communicate—kindly, honestly, empathetically.
As a CEO, I’ve had to do this before. I’ve had to deliver tough news and ask people to hang in there when the path forward wasn’t glamorous or easy. And I’ve learned this: People can handle hard truths. What they can’t handle is being talked down to, gaslit or ignored.
What follows is not an endorsement. It’s not a sound-bite war. It’s a thought experiment. A reframing. A reset.
This is the speech I would give to the American people—if I were president—explaining tariffs, sacrifice and the long game in a way that treats people with the dignity they deserve.
My fellow Americans,
Tonight, I want to speak to you with complete honesty—no spin, no slogans, no political theater. Just one American talking to 330 million others about where we are, where we’re going, and why the path we’ve chosen is difficult but necessary.
You’ve probably heard a lot about tariffs lately. You’ve felt the ripple effects—prices shifting, businesses adjusting, headlines blaring. And you might be asking: Why are we doing this? Is this worth it? Why now?
Here’s why.
For decades, America built a global economy that prioritized short-term cost savings over long-term strength. We outsourced our manufacturing, our supply chains—even our economic resilience—because it was cheaper. And, yes, in some cases, that strategy delivered lower prices and corporate profits. But it also made us dependent. Fragile. Exposed.
So today we are taking decisive action. We’ve implemented a series of targeted tariffs designed to rebalance trade, protect vital domestic industries and reanchor critical manufacturing right here at home. This isn’t about nationalism or economic isolation. It’s about security. It’s about jobs. It’s about making sure America can take care of its people without relying on unstable supply chains or adversarial governments.
Let me be clear: This will not be painless.
We’re already seeing higher prices in some areas. And I know what that feels like. I know the stress of walking into a grocery store and wondering why everything in your cart suddenly costs $30 more than it did last month. I know the quiet anxiety of filling your tank and thinking about what you’ll have to cut from your weekend plans just to make the numbers work.
And for those of you nearing retirement—or even decades into a long, disciplined savings journey—I know how demoralizing it is to open up a 401(k) statement and feel that jolt of fear. You’ve contributed for years. You’ve done everything “right.” And then you see a drop—on paper, it feels like your future is slipping through your fingers. That’s not just numbers. That’s your trust. That’s your effort. That’s your sense of progress and security.
I want you to know: I see it. I get it. And I wouldn’t be asking you to endure this if I didn’t believe it necessary to build a stronger, more independent America on the other side.
I expect this period of adjustment—this economic discomfort—to last 18 to 24 months. That’s how long I believe it will take before we start to see the benefits emerge: more resilient supply chains, rebounding markets and domestic industries coming back to life.
And, yes, the critics have valid concerns.
Some worry that tariffs will backfire. That they’ll slow growth or invite retaliation. That we might overcorrect. These are not bad-faith arguments. They’re thoughtful, and I respect them. But here’s what I also know: The cost of not acting is far worse.
If we continue on the current path—if we prioritize convenience over self-reliance—we will lose something far more valuable than short-term comfort. We will lose control over our economic future.
We’ll be the nation that can’t build the chips it needs for its cars. The country that can’t produce its own antibiotics. The economy that’s held hostage by the political storms of other nations, while our shelves sit empty and our workers sit idle.
That is not an exaggeration. It is not fearmongering. It is the logical end point of decades of offshoring and short-term thinking.
But here’s what I believe: Americans are not afraid of hard things. We just want to be told the truth about what we’re facing and what it’s going to take to get through it.
And that’s what I’m doing now.
I’m asking you to hold steady. To understand that temporary sacrifice is the price of lasting strength. I’m asking you to keep investing—not just financially but emotionally—in the idea that we can build again, and that we will.
Because this isn’t about tariffs. It’s about trust. It’s about the belief that America can still make things. Still stand on its own. Still chart its own economic destiny without waiting on clearance from a port halfway around the world.
So, no, this won’t be easy. But nothing worth doing ever is.
We are not dismantling the economy. We’re rebuilding it—slowly, deliberately and with the full weight of our values behind it. And when we get to the other side, we will not only have more jobs and stronger industries. We will have restored something even more important: our confidence.
Thank you. God bless you. And may God bless the United States of America.•
__________
Dunn is CEO of Your Money Line powered by Pete the Planner, an employee-benefit organization focused on solving employees’ financial challenges. Email your financial questions to [email protected].
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.
“I wanted to understand what it’s really trying to solve, what’s at stake, and why this direction—however controversial—is being pursued.”
This seems to be much more thought than the current administration has done. You missed the main feature of this administration, in that tariffs is the one tool that the president can unilaterally weild without getting congress involved. A normal administration would have stated a policy goal and then gotten the entire government to work together to those ends. You are still making the mistake that this is a normal administration. While you make great points, your flawed assumptions make everything else you’ve written nearly meaningless.
+1
+1
A great article!
Pete, you may be a great financial planner but you are certainly not an economist who has studied trade and manufacturing. I suggest you read Professor Hicks’ column in today’s Star. (Link not included because IBJ’s comment system doesn’t like them.)
The money quote: “The GOP is vacillating between contradictory claims that President Trump’s tariffs are either negotiating tactics designed to end tariffs everywhere or a long-term strategy to onshore U.S. manufacturing. We have no evidence that either approach has worked anytime, anywhere in the past 250 years.”
Based on facts and data, Hicks says the impact of the tariffs in 12-24 months will be…a recession in Indiana.
Thanks for your comment, Chris. I never suggested I agree with the tariffs, in fact I don’t think it’s a good strategy. Instead, I chose to try to adopt the thinking of someone in support of the tariffs, and then communicate their point more clearly. The point of this week’s column was to take something I don’t agree with, and try to consider WHY someone might support it, and how to better message that idea. – Pete
But you are right, I’m definitely not an economist.
Pete, thanks for the response. I get it…trying to see both sides is a lost skill today. But that assumes there isn’t a time-proven wrong side of a question. This is simply not a matter of differing opinions…it’s a matter of facts vs. fantasy.
I could make an argument with you that your clients are better off investing in Ponzi schemes because the returns are so much better. But that is absolute fantasy also.
Pete D (from another Pete D), your article is awesome. Unlike the current Wannabe Dictator-in-Chief, you explain the current state of affairs using logic and reason. Submit to WaPo and NYT for consideration.
Pete for Prez in 2028!
Except the problem with the tariffs as implemented is not a problem of messaging, the problem is they are designed and implemented in the most ham-fisted way possible, so that they could not possibly achieve the desired outcome. Add on the fact they are constantly changing at a whim and that only creates chaos that makes it impossible for a business to plan for the future.
If there was a reasonable chance of success, the shared sacrifice might be worthwhile, but as implemented, there is very little chance of success here. We will be sacrificing our and likely the entire world’s economy for no good reason. There is no change in messaging that can solve those problems.
Its not so black and white. Tariffs are only part of the deal and dreadful dysfunctional dynamics of this administration. Manufacturing what we need will require a significant investment in infrastructure and manpower. Both are lacking. Will the US begin to roll steel to meet domestic demand. And where might this happen and will the private sector be motivated enough to invest, of course with anticipated positive returns. Assuming efficiencies in production, still employees will be needed.
But there is also the issue of lower [corporate] taxes to stimulate the economy. That has proven to enrich stockholders and provide capital for mergers and acquisitions with little benefit in long-term growth of jobs that provide a living wage. And the current slash and burn tactic of DOGE will not result in any appreciable savings to subsidize a tax break for corporations and weel to do that tjos nation can ill afford.
Energy efficiency will not be achieved through drilling and extraction in areas heretofore off limits. And key elements needed for state of the art industries are not available in the US but must be imported and may well be subject to massive retaliatory tariffs. Or, the US might have to seek another source of elements necessary for chips, for example. Is the what the WH so-called Africa czar is seeking to do?
Commingled with aspects of diminished free speech and assembly, the loss of due process, denigration of a free media, ignoring courts, making gross mistakes and inane sophomoric insults to please some devoted followers, this tariff-come-authoritarian I know best administration is indeed taking the nation down long-term, and that is beyond 18 to 24 months.
I appreciate the tone of your article and the desire to respectfully engage with those we disagree with. We need more of this from everyone.
The downside is it try’s to make sense out of the senseless daily impulses of one man and In the process many people who read it may wrongly assume the emperor actually has some clothes.
Your central point, that the Trump administration is not adequately articulating their tariff strategy, is a good one and is accurate. It was unclear to me if you were advocating for the current strategy or just opining on how it should be better communicated, but then I saw your reply to an earlier comment stating that you are not addressing whether you agree with the tariffs. To that point, one of two things can happen: 1) In a few years we will all be wealthier, the U.S. will be on fairer trading terms with foreign countries, and all the Economics books will have to be re-written to reflect that tariffs actually make sense, or 2) well, let’s just say I’ll have to come out of retirement.
Come on admit that this came from ChatGPT. You can tell because it quotes no data but includes every hackneyed rationale that can justify any poor policy choice.
Again, I don’t agree with the logic behind the tariffs. That wasn’t the point of the column. This was a comms exercise. And no, I didn’t use ChatGPT. I appreciate you reading and taking time to comment all the same.
A great attempt to explain and give credence to an irresponsible set of economic proposals. If Trump hasn’t gotten the message by now, he never will. Tragically the downfall of his presidency is just around the corner if he doesn’t self correct. I hope it doesn’t have long lasting repercussions to our economy and Americas place in the world.