Too much money and too few places to invest it

The first two states checked out were funky. That there are $659M of wireless phone exports from Calif to China doesn't pass the smell test. It's an incredible claim requiring incredible proof but there's nothing there despite the state being colored in as suffering Extremely Significant Damage. Another state, Florida, gets off more easily and only suffers Very Significant Damage. Drilling down it turns out the goods being tariffed aren't good at all: The tariffed items are literally scrap gold jewelry and scrap metals.

California's stealthy cellphone export I'm pretty sure don't exist. I'd argue that Florida's scrap exports are resources better kept in country as feedstock to help spur on-shore manufacturing.

I'm going out on a limb and expect the remaining 48 states are showing tariffs on bulk minerals, ag products, trash, and make-believe products. Tariffs on these items are positives insofar as they keep input costs low for domestic producers.

But then your whole argument doesn't work, because it's possible to convert financial capital (e.g. land holdings or corporate shares) into economic capital (automation) by selling it and using the money to buy machines. The machines don't have to be diverted from some other use, they can be created when they wouldn't otherwise have existed.

> If the business has to pay $11 instead of $10, that extra $1 represents more resources being expended on accomplishing that task, which leaves less resources for other things.

You're assuming that money directly represents current-day resource allocation with a lack of flexibility.

Suppose there is a 25 year old guy who builds machines, gets paid a lot to do it, and currently works 40 hour weeks. If you want more machines, he has to put in more labor and you have to pay him enough for that. When you decide to do it, he instead works 60 hour weeks and gets paid even more, but only saves the money to put his kids through college or have a more secure retirement some decades in the future, or uses it to buy other labor instead of other capital.

You spent money, but that isn't an economic resource, it's a financial one. The person spending the economic resource is the person making the machines, and that isn't being reallocated from making other machines, it's being reallocated from going bowling and watching Netflix.

> That's an overly optimistic and unsupported assumption. The profitability of holding real estate will not go down relative to investing in manufacturing as a result of manufacturing costs increasing.

But that's exactly what you're arguing. You're currently making revenue equivalent to $15/hour on labor cost of $9/hour. You could make the $15/hour on automation cost of $10/hour instead if the labor cost rises to $11, and you will, because you still want the $15 which is enough more than $10 to be worth your investment.

The financial capital to pay for that has to come from somewhere, so it does, and demand for competing investments like real estate declines because the investors have to use more of their profits to pay for automation instead of having them to use for land speculation.