The consensus amongst economists appears to be that tariffs will have net negative impacts on our economy. Can someone explain the support amongst financially sophisticated people (e.g. Marc Andreessen) for a candidate whose economic policies rely heavily on tariffs? Is it just that they believe the benefits of Trump's other policies (e.g. deregulation of crypto) will outweigh the negative impacts of tariffs?
Pragmatic reason: I'd like to see American workers get American wages.
Long Term reason: We need the ability to manufacture critical things at all times.
We reversed on Smoot-Hawley in a few years. I expect the same this time. If you have capital, there will be a lot of agricultural and manufacturing assets in distress. If you don’t, I guess get some? (I’m putting aside cash to buy farmland.)
It can make more sense to buy pieces of a company during a bankruptcy firesale, instead of buying out that company as a bailout. In this case, the company is the USA.
EDIT:
Realistically, there's more blood to squeeze from the consumer stone - you can raise prices with the increased costs, and compensate by 'allowing' people to go far further into debt for longer.
It stresses the bounds of my ability to take the question at good faith or seriously, if Marc Andreessen is the example of "financially sophisticated." His technolibertarian California-ideology unchecked-rule-by-the-rich fervor doesn't feel well considered, it feels emotional. (If there is an ideology, it's "America's greatness is purely a function of my personal greatness", from what I can see.)
Regarding tariffs, they also predicted calamity from his first round, and that didn't happen in the US.
Similarly, Soy Bean farmers needed a large bailout.
Both of those sound pretty bad to me, and they were somewhat targetted - he has suggested blanket tariffs, which you only need to look back to Smoot-Hawley, which is generally accepted to have worsened the great depression.
There are also communities who don’t think tariffs will be reciprocated. If we truly engage in a trade war, American farming and car manufacturing will be in crisis—they’re overbuilt for a domestic-only market.
Maybe. Agricultural products is easy because there isn’t a billionaire at the top to be spiteful. Detroit auto a middle ground between pissing off Elon and not retaliating.
Farmers are typically chosen for counter-tariffs for the same reason -- politicians listen to farmers a lot more closely than their voting or economic impact would imply. Upset farmers get a lot of media time.
Musk has Trump's ear. That's why he'll be targetted.
In 2016, when countries were trying to influence policy. There are other motivations for tariffs, from seeking autonomy from an unreliable trading partner to straight-up spite. There is also the domestic component: you target industries you have domestic competitors for because that now makes them happy.
See Bytedance.
Honestly I think we should just ignore and let it pass.
What do you think China could do, comparatively speaking? If we look at what they did to Jack Ma [1], I could see China doing far more harm to Musk's China interests than the US can do to China.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Ma#During_tech_crackdown
For billionaires like Andreessen, it will be worth the very limited pain in order to see the destruction of the administrative and regulatory state.
Making stocks rise is pretty much the purpose of the whole sector. Hence ...