You may want to re-read GP's comment because they did not indicate whether they cared if the 38% went to the government or the farmer. Reading their comment as written, they simply said they would happily pay the tariff to continue enjoying Tunisian olive oil. It's "crazy" of you to imply they don't understand how a tariff works when you're the one mis-reading what they wrote.

I did not misread. He used `undervalued` which implies that there is a difference between quality of the product and its price. Slapping on 38% tax to Tunisian olive will undermine this value proposition without improving the producer or the consumers product experience. If anything the relative price (due to the repetitively high tariffs on Tunisia vs Italy) will ruin the value to price ratio that attracts GP to the Tunisian olive oil.

Moreover, his use of the word 'happily' suggests he is not aware of the negative consequences for both the Tunisian exporter, who may have to lower prices or even reduce product quality standards to compete with the now relatively similar-priced Italian olive oil, and the American consumer, who ends up paying more without any improvement in value.

Why would someone be happy with a price increase if it is not helping the producers of the good (which his comment implies he is sympathetic to) or adding any value?

You misread.

15 dollars for a liter of my favorite Olive Oil is a trade I would happily make. I didn't say I was happy that the price increased, nor did I say that I am happy about the tariff, nor did I say that I happy relative to how I felt about the trade last week.

In a thread about tariffs, praising the value of Tunisian olive oil and lamenting the rough state of its producers while saying you’d happily pay the tax increase it seem like you misunderstand what tariffs will actually do. Based on the reception of my initial comment, I am not the only one who came to that conclusion.

Thanks for clarifying your position.

What did I write that gave you the impression that I don't know this?