"The Dangerous Absurdity of America’s Trade Wars," by Jeffrey D. Sachs [Close, and still a cigar]

Trump's secular error is not tariffs but almost exclusively taxes. There is no doubt whatsoever that trade deficits are fiscal deficits if the fiscal side is mismanaged, which it is. That is only made worse by imperialistic ambitions run amok for being win-lose propositions for everyone else, which Trump's typically are.

Jeffrey D. Sachs says the following:

A deficit on the current account is purely a macroeconomic measure: the shortfall of saving relative to investment. The US external deficit is not in any way, shape, or form an indicator of unfair trade practices by Canada and Mexico, the European Union, or China. [Source]

"The US external deficit is not in any way, shape, or form an indicator of unfair trade practices...." By itself, that's correct. However, unfair trade practices can still make the US external deficit worse and do. The fact that they don't necessarily have to doesn't mean they can't or aren't. Sachs has failed to think it through enough. He's only looked at it from one angle at best.

The reason Trump's tariffs on China haven't resulted in no deficits (trade or fiscal federal budget) is because of his stupid corporate-tax cut. The cut was completely misplaced. However, Trump's economic advisors knew that. They were deliberately misplaced so corporate CEOs and shareholders could be further enriched while Federal revenues shrink so the deficit hawks could call for more privatizations (to further enrich the top end of the private sector) and slashing of the welfare state (to weaken and hold down the bargaining position of workers).

The right tax cuts would have been to eliminate taxes altogether for those at the bottom and to increase those cuts until the economy is humming as a result, which it would. That would have further enriched the rich but not at the expense of anyone else. Trump probably knew that but wanted an immediate payoff to CEOs and others so they'd get behind him and want to donate to his reelection. He wouldn't have wanted to risk alienating them by running contrary to the privatizers' mindless, mind-numbing mantra.

The balance of Jeffery's article, which I didn't finish reading before writing the above, comes very close to taking my position. The real difference is the degree to which bad trade deals matter. I agree more with Trump as to degree but not as to remedies. Jeffery's heart is more in the right place.