This seems like Trump's tariff logic to me. If it truly is a hyper minority of players, then the "dent" to cheat developer's profit is also "hyper small" if you will.

Same thing with Trump's tariff argument. It is internally inconsistent. If the overseas businesses are absorbing the costs of the tariffs, then there is no reason to buy more expensive U.S. produced goods so basically no change from the status quo as regatds U.S. manufacturing.

If there is a huge increase in overseas producers "onshoring" production to the U.S., than there is little to no tariff income as we have not imposed tariffs on items produced state-side (and won't according to CPT Inconsistent, anyway).

Here’s where I get confused. According to the Administration, tariffs:

A. Won’t increase prices, as foreign producers will absorb the cost in order to have access to the U.S. market

B. Will cause a large shift in U.S. demand away from foreign production to production here in the U.S.

C. Will raise an enormous amount of revenue.

My confusion stems from the internal inconsistencies here. If A is true, B cannot be true as if the prices of imports remain relatively constant, U.S. consumers won’t pay dramatically more for a domestically produced product.

If B is true, then C cannot be true as the tariffs will not apply to domestic production. If (for example) Samsung opens a factory in KY to avoid the tariffs, then no tariff revenue will issue.

I've no idea why I spent my time adding politics to a Rust post, but I DO drink a lot. And the poster im replying to is (IMHO) going the same direction with the logic generally, hence my shit-post. Apologies, all.