Credit of this goes to a certain Mr. Tim Bratton, whose comment under a Facebook post exactly reflects my sentiment:
The market simply doesn't believe Bessent, Lutnick, and Miran when they are saying three different things. You can't simultaneously use tariffs to reindustrialize the US, negotiate better trade deals, and pay for the tax cuts.
The current administration's tariff rhetoric is tautologically unsustainable. It frames tariffs as simultaneously permanent (to support reindustrialization), temporary (as a negotiating lever), and revenue-generating (to offset tax cuts). But each of these objectives implies a different and often contradictory tariff structure. A policy cannot be both enduring and contingent, nor can it generate stable revenue if its very purpose is to be bargained away. The internal logic collapses under scrutiny: the more you try to satisfy one justification, the more you undermine the others. The framework becomes not just politically unstable, but economically incoherent.