People are very quick to make kneejerk reactions to tariffs while assuming the other guys have different opinions.

The Biden admin went after Canada repeatedly for unfair trade practices, and issued a blanket 10% tariff on Chinese goods.

The only difference is to what degree they wield the tariff hammer, and in which direction it is swung.

The one thing the current admin does have a point on is non-tariff meddling. Numerous countries make it almost impossible to sell goods in their countries while the same is not true in reverse, or they levy a high price in garbage regulatory fees (see the EU's new packaging identification directive that completely destroys small business), or in completely made-up fines for vague behaviors not even they can define (see the EU's DSA which is exclusively used against monopolizing American companies while completely ignoring monopolist and predatory EU ones like Booking.com).

I don't really have any idea if tariffs are good or bad. What I do know is that just announcing that they will go into effect with very little notice and then they won't go into effect and then they do but then they are decalared illegal because they weren't passed through the official methods isn't good.

Economists universally think tariffs are dumb policy.

https://kentclarkcenter.org/surveys/steel-and-aluminum-tarif...

Literally 100% of the 50 expert economists polled by the Kent Clark Center think tariffs overall make Americans worse off.

Nobody in politics can say this simple truth because the rust belt states are critical swing states.

> The only difference is to what degree they wield the tariff hammer, and in which direction it is swung.

Which is a huge difference. Targetted tariffs can induce compliance with desired trade practices and influence purchasing towards more desirable sources.

Global blanket tariffs on products without domestic sources of substitute goods is effective for increasing domestic prices and encouraging foreign producers to enhance their ex-US trade networks.

If you wanted to encouage local manufacturing, you would add tariffs on finished goods, but leave raw materials untariffed. You might consider tariffing raw materials with ample local capacity. You might carefully consider tariffs for machine tools and other finshed goods which are necessary for manufacturing where there's not current local production capacity.

You might consider reciprocal tarrifs that were actually reciprocal tariffs... you tarrif me, I tariff you. Not tarrifs on countries that have an export surplus because they can't afford to import goods from the US.

> The only difference is to what degree they wield the tariff hammer, and in which direction it is swung.

You are ignoring a massive difference. Trump wants balanced trade with each individual country. Pretty much everyone else who wants the US to reduce or eliminate its trade deficit just wants that to apply to total trade, not to each individual country.

The main reason money was invented was so you don't have to have balanced trade with each individual trading partner.

What is booking.com doing that violates DSA?

> The only difference is to what degree they wield the tariff hammer, and in which direction it is swung.

I mean that's the point, no? Swing the hammer carefully at a nail or with maximum force at your own leg?

Or to drop the metaphor - much of the difference between good and bad policy is a difference in degree. So your counterargument here is valid against "all tariffs are bad" but I believe the point most are making is "the current admin's use of tariffs is bad" which makes your counter appear as a bad-faith mischaracterization.

> The Biden admin went after Canada repeatedly for unfair trade practices […]

What were these practices?

The other difference is the legality of it. Trump is trying to do all this at his personal order, without Congress. And he's trying to jump through all kinds of shenanigans to do so.

For example, he declared a state of emergency about fentanyl, and used that as cover to create tariffs toward every country on earth. That, obviously, has nothing to do with fentanyl; it's just a smoke screen.

He wants to rule by decree. Biden didn't do that. (OK, didn't do it to anything like the same degree. I'm sure someone can find an example where he did. It still wasn't like this.)

> completely destroys small business

Citation needed, I'm in the EU and there is small business