National Strategy 2.0: Tariffs, Outliers, and Immigration Limits

In today’s globalized world, the intersection of immigration, trade policy, and national economics is increasingly shaped by a few high-performing outliers. Figures like Elon Musk, an immigrant entrepreneur who built companies across multiple continents, often dominate the narrative. But a deeper look reveals a different perspective: not all success stories require open borders, and in fact, tightening them—paired with strategic trade tariffs—might contribute more to national stability and deficit reduction than previously believed.

The Multinational Illusion

When you run a multinational corporation, you are incentivized to support both trade and immigration. These positions optimize supply chains and labor access, but they don’t necessarily serve the national interest—especially when the domestic labor market is under strain and the trade balance is skewed. The pro-immigration and pro-trade rhetoric is often driven not by national need, but by corporate expedience.

However, if you take trade and immigration out of the equation, some outliers—like Musk—might start to see that their success doesn’t depend on these globalist frameworks. Outliers are outliers precisely because they thrive regardless of constraints.

Outliers vs. the Majority

The uncomfortable truth is that most people are not high-performers. Many are unproductive or rely heavily on systems that are already overburdened. A majority of people are a mess, and that’s precisely why closing borders becomes a strategic decision. It’s not about xenophobia—it’s about optimizing national systems by reducing strain from low-skill immigration.

Those who succeed in constrained systems—outliers—will continue to do well regardless of location. I personally have found success in Asia irrespective of the environment.

Trade Tariffs as Deficit Weapons

The conversation shifts further when tariffs enter the mix. By imposing tariffs on imports, a country can reduce its trade deficit by discouraging the importation of goods and encouraging domestic production. This isn’t theoretical—it’s historical. U.S. tariffs on steel and electronics, for example, have at times narrowed the trade gap and supported local industries.

Tariffs, when paired with limited immigration, create a feedback loop that supports domestic employment, reduces reliance on foreign labor, and shores up national budgets. In essence, you keep more capital within the borders—capital that would otherwise flow out via trade imbalances or immigrant remittances.

The Bottom Line

Not everyone needs immigration to thrive. In fact, some of the world’s most successful individuals are proof that outliers can prosper in closed systems. When you remove the ideological bias and look strictly at outcomes, a policy mix of strategic trade tariffs and selective immigration may not just be economically viable—it might be essential to reducing deficits and re-centering national sovereignty.

In a world increasingly shaped by a few high performers, the best path forward may not be more openness—but smarter selectivity.