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.
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.
i'd add one thing. history shows us that tariff wars ended for a reason: they aren't effective at all. you can target specific products with tariffs to protect your domestic products, and it makes sense in some cases.
but general tariffs across all products will simply drive inflation for no reason. wanna drink some coffee? you can't grow it locally, you have to import it. you want to import lithium? talk to one of these countries "to make a deal" or hit them with tariffs to shoot yourself in the foot:
anyway... there's not a single angle from where general tariffs for all trading partners, ranging from 10 to 99% is a remotely good idea
- - - Updated - - -
okay, that's a fucking idiot right here, no other way to put it
why did the japanese manage to outsell murican shit on the domestic market when it comes to cheap cars? perhaps because they were better and even cheaper at the same time? why is bmw more attractive than cadillac to most of the world? maybe because it offers better quality with better driving experience and better economy?
making better cars is an option, dumbo

Last edited: