News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:US Administration announces 34% tariffs on China – 20% on EU by JumpCrisscross on Wednesday April 02, 2025 @07:36PM (#43563064)
> 2) reduce trade deficits and foreign purchasing of treasuries

None of the GOP budgets reduce the deficit. Trump’s blew them out even further.

Re:US Administration announces 34% tariffs on China – 20% on EU by s1artibartfast on Wednesday April 02, 2025 @08:33PM (#43563438)
Im talking about trade deficits, not budget deficits. Im not convinced trade deficits are a bad thing to begin with, but that is a whole sperate can of worms.

My understanding is that yes, the national debt is still increasing, although the administration is counting on tariff funds to supplement revenue. Would you agree?

Re:US Administration announces 34% tariffs on China – 20% on EU by danny_codes on Wednesday April 02, 2025 @09:37PM (#43563770)
And they are trying to push through a massive tax cut. So.. yeah unclear what the goals are here
Re:US Administration announces 34% tariffs on China – 20% on EU by JumpCrisscross on Thursday April 03, 2025 @12:34AM (#43564786)
> the national debt is still increasing, although the administration is counting on tariff funds to supplement revenue

Not the debt, the deficit. The debt is the card balance. The deficit are new swipes. Nothing in the current policy package is about deficit (let alone debt) reduction.

(Valid on trade deficits. I guess we can run trade surpluses if we give up dollar hegemony. That, of course, means no more deficits.)

Re:US Administration announces 34% tariffs on China – 20% on EU by mahogany on Thursday April 03, 2025 @09:38AM (#43569431)
> My understanding is that yes, the national debt is still increasing, although the administration is counting on tariff funds to supplement revenue. Would you agree?

Let me see if I am following. The tariffs are ostensibly about spurring domestic industry so that American companies can flourish and we don’t have to pay tariffs on imports of foreign goods in the long term. Is that right? If so, then long term, aren’t we hoping that the “tariff funds” are small? But they are simultaneously supposed to supplement revenue to pay down debt too?