[id34]

The use of tariffs as a mid-long strategy, in my view, would require a stable, long-term communication that the US government will implement careful, strategic tariffs alongside incentives to strengthen chosen domestic industries where they believe a domestic alternative is feasible. We haven't seen anything even close to that at any point in this tariff rollercoaster - tariffs for products that cannot be produced at scale domestically (coffee, bananas), tariffs for grudges, tariffs that only exist for a week, tariffs that are written post-hoc after a Truth post to fit what the president said. There's an argument to be made for domestic protectionism, but the people currently at the levers are not serious policy-minded folks.

[kryogen1c]

Im inclined to agree with most of what you say, although I dont follow economics or current events closely enough to have a strong opinion.

My point is that your thoughtful response about reliable continuity, both inter- and intra- president, is not present in a lot of the comments.

[estearum]

Because it's a layer too rudimentary. You also don't see people commentating that "taxation is when the government takes a cut of a transaction or of property."

The only people who need to back up to "industrial policy requires consistency and transparency" are those who are either incapable of or willfully deciding not to understand what's going on around them.

[Herring]

It's becoming a real problem how the human brain is wired to prioritize "group-loyalty" over "factual accuracy."

I'm sure it worked great when we were in small groups living in caves, but it is making the modern world a lot more dangerous.

[tsss]

This is the real problem with the US tariffs. There is no strategy and no confidence from businesses that their investments will pay off. China can do it because everyone knows that the CCP will stick to their plan but Trump changes his mind every hour and no policy can ever last more than an election cycle.

[stevenwoo]

The economist upon whom many of Trump tariff supporters reference says essentially the same thing: https://www.npr.org/2025/12/29/nx-s1-5660865/why-economists-...

We never accurately measured effect of pedal on the gas trade with China caused with WTO admission nor even NAFTA, the no on ramp was huge shock that didn’t show up in traditional measures. So trying to go full gas reverse with no real strategy is almost mindless.