Core Argument - The article critiques the Trump administration's industrial and tariff policies, labeling them as "rule by deal" rather than effective economic nationalism or state capitalism [1][3]. Group 1: Industrial Policy and Economic Nationalism - The Trump administration's approach involves making private deals with select companies, leading to a lack of transparency and accountability in the industrial landscape [5][4]. - There is a concern that this method of picking winners and losers could misallocate private capital and enrich certain market actors without a coherent strategy [13][12]. - The need for a comprehensive institutional approach to industrial policy is emphasized, particularly in critical sectors like rare earths and semiconductors [8][9]. Group 2: National Security and Critical Minerals - The dominance of China in critical minerals and semiconductors necessitates government intervention to ensure national security [7][6]. - A clear mission and institutional capacity are required to develop domestic production capabilities for critical minerals [9][10]. - The development finance corporation is suggested as a suitable entity to facilitate investments in critical industries [10]. Group 3: Tariffs and Trade Policy - The article discusses the implications of tariffs, suggesting that aggressive and sweeping tariffs could harm economic growth and consumer prices [20][22]. - Targeted tariffs may serve specific public policy goals, but broad tariffs across all imports could lead to higher costs for consumers [21][20]. - The potential for a domestic automobile market to emerge due to tariffs raises concerns about competitiveness and consumer choice [18][19].