Consume Product

>Foreign products become more expensive and then domestic products increase in turn;

No they don't. That's the point. The domestic product retains the competitive advantage against the foreign product, which leads to increased market share. If a domestic company wants to raise prices to match the foreign prices in order to increase profit, the run the risk of domestic competition, which WILL happen, because the nature of markets and business always pushes prices as low as they can until the product becomes a loss.

This is already happening, but because foreign countries have essentially 1/10th the labor costs of domestic companies, they have captured the market on all labor intensive goods that require low to no skill. It is an unfair advantage, which is why American companies build labor infrastructure off shore - to save on labor costs to be able to compete not only domestically but internationally.

A tariff places a cost on foreign made goods, and when that tariff is high enough, it eliminates the labor advantage of offshore enterprise and encourages domestic production. This is why it's called protectionism - you are protecting your national industries from cheap foreign goods. Every country on earth does it to the U.S. because we hold a massive market share for many goods and services.

In the 90s, business interests pushed for trade agreements with third world countries so they could save on labor costs and increase both competitive advantage and profit. That's why the U.S. was gutted of its manufacturing industry. There is a gook somewhere that will work in a factory for $2 a day and sew your adidas track suit.

Will prices rise? In the short term, possibly until the market regulates to the new conditions, but the other upside of protectionism is that the money spent on labor remains domestic and is distributed nationally to be spent nationally. That means the guy who sews your adidas sweatpants keeps his money in the U.S., buys U.S. goods, which stimulates the domestic economy (literally the exchange of money) instead of it being syphoned out of the country to be spent in other economies which do not benefit American workers.

As an example, if I buy my neighbors oranges, and he buys his neighbors shoes, and that person buys my screwdrivers, the money acts as it should - as a transfer of wealth between people in a closed system. Nobody actually loses in this scenario and the "economy" is strong as everyone gets what they need. Alternatively, if the person who I buy oranges from lives in Cambodia, he buys HIS neighbors goods, removing that capital from the local economy which makes everyone without access to that economy poorer. This is why (((internationalists))) don't care about local economies and are okay with globalism - they have access to all economies on earth, while the local worker only has access to his own.

In short, protectionism should create a "rising tide" in our national economy as wages increase, jobs are created, and capital remains within the closed circuit of local economies.

>China has silicone, we don't, so we need to trade with them or not having any computer chips.

This is a ridiculous statement. Silica is one of the most common elements in universe. The U.S. invented the computer chip. The reason why it's outsourced is precisely because of the reasons I stated above.