Reducing the deficit. Credit changes how private money is made through the monetary system. Fiscal policy directly creates and destroys dollars in the economy–it's fare more powerful.
Just households. The inverse of what Germany did.
Say a system had X capacity and 100% utilization. Now someone wants to build a data center that consumes 0.1X power. Demand is now 1.1X and to prevent the system from going over capacity 0.1X of pre-existing demand has to be destroyed.
Subsidizing other users makes the problem worse because they will increase their energy usage in response to the lower prices.
Every household gets X gallons of water a month at a regulated rate. After that, everyone competes equally.
Regulation and increased taxes/fees just make everything more obtuse and expensive, not better or simpler.
But you're right, we could also solve this problem very simply, without gradiated utility rates, by taxing the crap out of corporate profits and redistributing them to everyone else. This would punish corps who aren't building data centers, but if you don't mind turning the whole country into an AI server farm, I guess that would work too.
Money does, in fact, create generating capacity, as expensive, idling energy sources are turned up.
2016's $585bn DoD budget [1] bought what $817bn does today [2]. 2027's NDAA requests $1.1 trillion [3]. On top of like $100bn–on par with Saudi Arabia's military budget–we gave to ICE.
I'd generally consider myself a defence hawk. I think we should support Ukraine. I value our commitments to Korea and Taiwan. But what in the actual fuck are we doing blowing an already-bloated deficit on checks notes a WW2 battleship.
[1] https://dodcio.defense.gov/Portals/0/Documents/Library/2016%...
[2] https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm
[3] https://comptroller.war.gov/Portals/45/Documents/defbudget/F...
Or taxes raised. I'm personally a fan of adding a few and then doubling all tax brackets.
Changing stupid energy policy that is propping up oil demand.
When China is selling batteries and solar below cost or at tiny profit, the federal government is effectively giving the subsidy to other countries.
When wind is the cheapest with the highest ROI we should be doing more of it.
I don't know if the new Congress is going to be able to put a stop to this.
Do some positives. Work with Congress to arrive at a sane resolution to the US economy's persistent reliance on undocumented labor. (The policy of deporting all immigrants, legal or not, is inflationary.) Implement a healthcare backstop policy to guarantee access to healthcare for all citizens. (Health insurance premium inflation is running around 2x+ overall inflation.)
There are a lot of options.
Rates can be raised, and demand cooled, without raising unemployment.
Sort of [1]. Labor-force participation stayed flat until federal lay-offs and tariffs hit [2].
The problem is it requires the economists to realise they've dedicated their education and professional careers to the economic equivalent of the heliocentric model.
Gross private domestic investment contributed more to output growth than personal consumption expenditure in two out of the last three quarters [1].
Reduce marginal investment, e.g. by raising the cost of borrowing for folks building datacenters, and you that demand goes away without any major shock to current employment.
[1] https://apps.bea.gov/iTable/?reqid=19&step=2&isuri=1&categor...
That's the point. They shift their investment into Treasuries instead of buying up land and turbines and power and GPUs. Also, as the rate goes up it gets harder to make the math math. So e.g. large construction projects get paused, et cetera.
Sometimes. Sometimes it shuffles them to other work, often less resource-intensive work. There is a lot of latent demand for construction.
We have precedence for supply shocks being cooled by rate hikes without causing an unemployment spike.
Cue companies like Microsoft and Oracle laying off even more workers to make room for the higher AI budgets.
We've seen a lot of the first in 2026 -- wage increases have dropped significantly below the rate of inflation.
In the private sector. The public sector (and what I'd call non-discretionary hiring, e.g. in healthcare) makes the response a bit more inelastic.
Elaborate?
Do you mean raising taxes and cutting spending?
The levers they can pull include using diplomacy to end of the stalemate at the strait of Hormuz that is increasing energy and shipping costs. Scrapping excessive import taxes (tariffs) inflicted since "Freedom day" could help some, though prices have a ratcheting effect and retailers are likely to pocket the difference to pad their profits.
They noodle tiny decimals of percents such the financial network effects make them richer.
That’s work to them. Zero meaningful contribution. They're TV personalities who offer nothing more to humanity.
It's like chemotherapy: it works, but it destroys so much of the rest of your body in the meantime that sometimes you wonder if the pain is worth the gain.
Trump & Congress have access to much less painful means to lower inflation, but they've refused to act.