[K0nserv]

There are a few problems with how Trump is going about this:

1. The tariffs are too broad, they don't target a single or a few industries.

2. Trump has gone back and forth many times on them, using them as negotiating leverage, not as long term incentives.

3. They are on very shaky legal grounds and will likely end up getting reversed by either the Supreme Court or the next president.

If you want to use tariffs to encourage on-shoring you make them targeted and pass them with bipartisan support through congress. Companies need stability and long term guarantees for the kind of capital expenditure that is needed. Even better if you use a mix of carrot and stick, rather than all stick

[mancerayder]

I agree that's actually the problem. The problem with discourse in the US is that it comes in soundbites, division and confusion. This predates, arguably ENABLED Trump.

There could have been an argument for tariffs, done rationally and with a very specific program to rebalance trade. I'm not saying it's necessarily correct, but it could have entered as an option for voters to consider. But that's an alternative universe to people at this point, and we end up with an unpredictable waffling that scares businesses and doesn't appear to have obvious aims at this point beyond petty attacks.

[bubbadog77]

Very well put.

And with China a key target in the Trump Tariff debacle, China is punching holes in these punitive tariffs. Besides shipping goods to intermediary countries that are not as heavily tariffed then exporting to the U.S., China is taking ownership stakes in American businesses, thus circumventing the whole tariff thing. And the beauty of this is, they can take advantage of U.S. taxpayer benefits, such as an R&D tax credit, to sweeten the deal.