The total income of the business is P x C, where P is the number of sold items and C is the cost. Under some model of P(S), businesses try to maximize this product. The tariffs caused an imbalance in this product, but they still were able to maximize it. Only the maximum value of this product was reduced.
Also, the businesses were paying tariffs, so obviously tariffs increased expenses.
Then the government decided to do the reimbursement for the expenses, but not for the difference in maximum incomes.
Thus, on average
businesses lost some income
government spends all its tariff income on reimbursement
customers payed more
chineese manufactureres lost some income too
GOP and Trump will be reelected because fuck China I guess
IDK, but it does make sense?
The total income of the business is P x C, where P is the number of sold items and C is the cost. Under some model of P(S), businesses try to maximize this product. The tariffs caused an imbalance in this product, but they still were able to maximize it. Only the maximum value of this product was reduced.
Also, the businesses were paying tariffs, so obviously tariffs increased expenses.
Then the government decided to do the reimbursement for the expenses, but not for the difference in maximum incomes.
Thus, on average
businesses lost some income
government spends all its tariff income on reimbursement
customers payed more
chineese manufactureres lost some income too
GOP and Trump will be reelected because fuck China I guess
For business that were in on the grift, and/or just gouging customers “because tariffs”, it absolutely made sense.
This kinda works for essential commodities and not for luxury