Yes, that's giving him probably way, way too much benefit of the doubt, with that "sometimes".
The goal is to move that supply-demand curve in ways that industrial policy accomplishes; they're two sides of the same "very visible hand in the markets" approach.
Industrial policy--and by that I mean preferential tax treatment, subsidies, basically pouring money into an industry or business to lower the price to domestic consumers (with a knock-on effect for overseas consumers, if the WTO and such allow that kind of unfair trade practice)--bills taxpayers and chucks money at companies to keep their prices down. Who pays? Those who pay income tax. For '24 I paid a bit over $6k in income tax. (But hey, between deductions and pre-tax stuff, that's only about 56% of my actual earned income.)
A lot of lower income households pay less than $500 in federal income tax and many pay negative income tax (we like to toss payroll taxes in there for them to show how much they pay, but this is playing a political shell game--ultimately those are sequestered for Medicare and Social Security--and not overhead, either, but actual benefits payers into the programs are entitled to). They don't pay corporate subsidies. But consumers are paying, it's just showing up in the sticker price; it's showing up in the tax bill (or, since we borrow so much these days, in the interest due bill ... But again, if you're not paying income tax you're not paying the interest bill, either).
Tariffs hit costs: If the price increases and the demand's elastic for a given manufacturer's product, you'll see a sharp drop off in demand. If the curve's steep enough, you'll wind up with domestic producers able to charge enough to make the product profitable. If the overseas manufacturer keeps prices low ... It dings their profit and it's not profitable for them to stay in business, and that reduces supply that's imported ... Again, prices rise and even if demand drops off the price might be high enough to make the product profitable to produce.
"But profits are bad." I'm sorry, I'm a public high school teacher. But if I don't make a profit off of my labor, I'd quit immediately. If I didn't make enough in my pay to cover the costs of my doing business, I'd find another business or face bankruptcy. Costs of doing business? Clothing, food, shelter, transportation, whatever training I need to keep up with, whatever materials I need to provide for my students. The usual. I am an economic unit and the rules that apply to Meta don't stop applying to me. My "profits" show up as various investments (vacations, improved housing, entertainment, pet maintenance, gardening) or as cash reserves (retirement, investment in Savings Bonds, reserve account for emergencies). I'm an emotional economic unit of one, so the rules get a bit rubbery around the edges as I think, "Yeah, too much stress" or "Screw that--and if they don't like it, they can fire me ... By the time the appeal's done, I'll have completed the retirement process."
= new reply since forum marked as read