top | item 43636634

(no title)

magicloop | 10 months ago

That's fair but I suggest that they are actually deficit hawks for the long term. In the short term, they've got financing troubles hence they care about the yield.

discuss

order

anigbrowl|10 months ago

What if (and I realize this is an extremely pessimistic take) their plan is to just default on the debt and rely on military blackmail? Sure, there's a Constitutional prohibition on questioning the validity of USA debt, but the administration shrugs at the Constitution on a weekly basis. The endless whining about how 'unfairly' other nations are treating the US, 'ripping us off', 'laughing at us' etc is a precursor for aggressive action, and I think it's quite likely that at some point they'll come out and say 'we don't have to pay debts to countries that have been scamming us the whole time.' About one quarter of the population will support MAGA no matter what, and if things get bad enough the administration can just announce they've been 'forced' to take over Greenland and Canada.

A flashing negative warning sign of this would be issue of new kinds of Treasury securities with new complex rules.

staunton|10 months ago

That sounds like it would completely destroy the US economy and government budgets (at which point the only thing left to do is to establish a war economy under authoritarian rule and continue war? I don't even know, it sounds completely bananas...)

Hikikomori|10 months ago

Didn't they just announce a 1 trillion budget for defense?

gsanderson|10 months ago

Yep, apparently that's in the works. They aren't going to reduce the deficit or debt. It soared during Donald's first term and will again.

outer_web|10 months ago

Subtext: $1T executive slush fund.

matwood|10 months ago

[deleted]

watwut|10 months ago

Deficit hawks would not lower taxes for richest segment, which were sure money in exchange of maybe money. Nor would they slash IDS

No, they are nor deficit hawks. They don't care about deficit, except when trying to blame it on someone else.

cogman10|10 months ago

There are very few politicians that are actually deficit hawks. The majority that claims that position are actually entitlement hawks. That is, they use fear of the deficit to talk about the need to reign in social security, medicare, medicaid, food stamps, and any other form of government assistance regardless the size or impact on the government budget.

Meanwhile the DoD, CIA, FBI, NSA, DEA, DHS, and ICE have never had a politician seriously consider reducing their funding.

cogman10|10 months ago

Gotta be honest, I think it's more likely that Trump just has a strange fixation on tariffs. I don't really think there was a whole lot of planning around them other than "I want them".

How he's deployed them and spoken/written about them makes me think he thinks it's a good way to strong arm countries and he wanted to strong arm everyone.

gsanderson|10 months ago

I think it's because it's one thing he can control all by himself. Look at all the attention he's receiving. The "will he/won't he" reality TV. Put a tweet saying X%. No, they won't be cancelled. Yes I'm suspending them for 90 days. And so on.

__mharrison__|10 months ago

That's obvious. You can find news clips from the late 80's/early 90's where he is mouthing off about tariffs. That rut is eroded deep in his brain...

danaris|10 months ago

He definitely does, and has since at least the '80s.

That and his self-image as The Best Negotiator (while his actual "negotiating tactics" are really just mob-boss intimidation and bullying) are a huge part of what's going on here.

johnnyanmac|10 months ago

Well congress has until July to reign them in before they (and the people) lose even more money in their savings. They better be swift.

drumdance|10 months ago

Trump has had a bizarre fixation on trade deficits since the eighties. Back then he blamed Japan. Now it's China. It's his one and only ideological commitment.

csomar|10 months ago

> I think it's more likely that Trump just has a strange fixation on tariffs

It's the only "powerful" thing he can use that doesn't require him going back to congress.

seanhunter|10 months ago

Everyone’s a deficit hawk in the long term. It’s easy to talk tough on reducing dept at some non-specific time in the distant future probably after you leave office.