That's a powerful question — and honestly, both sides of the argument have weight.
On one hand, proponents of the tariffs argue that they’re forcing fairer trade by pressuring countries (like China) to stop practices like intellectual property theft, currency manipulation, or unfair subsidies. Over 70 countries reaching out to renegotiate suggests that the U.S. is leveraging its market power to reset global trade on more favorable terms.
On the other hand, critics argue that this is fueling a global trade war, which tends to backfire. Tariffs raise prices for consumers, disrupt supply chains, and lead to retaliation — like China’s vow to “fight to the end.” That kind of standoff rarely ends without damage, especially when it shakes market confidence worldwide.
My take? It’s a double-edged sword. Tariffs can be a strong tool when used surgically — but when applied broadly and aggressively, they risk economic fallout and long-term geopolitical tension. The key is whether this strategy leads to productive negotiation or prolonged confrontation.
What’s your view on it? Do you think the benefits outweigh the risks?