一般情况下，首相的单一言论不会对特定行业造成如此毁灭性打击。因为高市涉台错误言论突破底线， 即便后续在国会答辩中试图模糊立场、拒绝撤回错误言论，最终还是引发日本观光业的"多米诺骨牌 式"崩盘，中国游客核心客源大幅流失，行业损失预估突破2万亿日元。所以这次观光业崩盘的冲击力这 么强，对日本相关产业链的冲击不小，这也是高市错误言论引发经济反噬的直接体现。 第二是核心客源断崖式下滑。像跨境旅游市场的波动通常不会这么快传导至终端业态，但高市错误言论 后，中国游客赴日意愿急剧降温，数据显示今年冬季到明年早春，中国前往大阪的机票预订量同比暴跌 55%到65%。大型商场、免税店的中国游客消费额较往年同期下滑超七成，不少门店因营收惨淡被迫缩 短营业时间，这次客源流失被视作日本观光业过度依赖中国市场的短板暴露，也重创了行业复苏信心， 对日本零售、交通等关联产业造成了连锁打击。 第三是中小从业者生存绝境。观光业的寒冬直接压垮了大量中小经营者——大阪某民宿老板透露，近期 入住率不足10%，已连续三个月亏损，每月要承担近百万日元的房租压力；冲绳多位导游因无团可带， 被迫转行打零工。日本观光协会统计显示，当前全行业已有超2000家中小 ...

Group 1 - The article criticizes the U.S. tariff policy as a unilateral and reckless approach that undermines international trade order and serves political interests [1][10] - The U.S. has imposed various tariffs on imports from China and other countries, including a 20% tariff on all Chinese goods and 25% on steel and aluminum [2][3] - The implementation of "reciprocal tariffs" has led to significant increases in tariffs on imports from various countries, with rates reaching as high as 125% for certain goods from China [3][4] Group 2 - The article argues that the "reciprocal tariff" calculation method is flawed and does not accurately reflect trade imbalances, as it is based on arbitrary parameters set by the U.S. [4][5] - The U.S. tariff policy is said to violate World Trade Organization (WTO) principles, including the most-favored-nation treatment and non-discrimination rules [5][6] - The article highlights that the U.S. trade deficit is a structural issue that cannot be resolved through tariffs, as it is influenced by comparative advantages and international division of labor [7][8] Group 3 - The article notes that since the onset of the trade war in 2018, the overall U.S. trade deficit has not decreased, but rather has been redistributed among trading partners [8][9] - It emphasizes that high tariffs will not effectively fund domestic tax cuts, as tariff revenue is minimal compared to income and sales taxes [9][10] - The article warns that the tariff policy is likely to increase inflationary pressures in the U.S., ultimately burdening consumers [10][11] Group 4 - The article discusses the political pressures facing the U.S. tariff policy, with increasing opposition from both parties and concerns about its economic impact [10][11] - It highlights the potential for significant market volatility and economic downturns as a result of the tariff measures, with major financial institutions adjusting their growth forecasts [11][12] - The article concludes that the high tariffs may distort global resource allocation and weaken the U.S. industrial base, contradicting the political promises made by the Trump administration [12][13]