Sure, just like the hypothetical yard work has a cost. I think what you’re illustrating is that protectionism doesn’t make people poorer per se, but it’s bad when it’s abused for individual purposes rather than broader purposes.
> what you’re illustrating is that protectionism doesn’t make people poorer per se
It makes people materially poorer and redistributes wealth, typically up. That is a fair price to pay in some circumstances, e.g. bolstering defence manufacturers.
So on some dimensions, protectionism can make people better off (eg more secure). It seems your issue isn’t that it makes “everyone” poorer (there seems to be a contradiction between your previous and last statement), but more so you aren’t comfortable with how the decision is made (eg by fiat)
