When the creditors are bond holders and the Social Security fund, what is the mechanism for getting the creditors to take less?
The point of this is the press asks questions and gives a Hobson’s choice for responses. Which ever choice DJT (on anyone they wish to demean) makes, they print it as his idea when in fact he is given a stupid choice to begin with. Did the interviewer note that about half the debt is owed to the US Trust funds? IOW, the government is already doing exactly what they suggest DJT wants to do, simply by cutting or stringing out Social Security and other benefits already. Bet they did not cover that one.
Basically Trump is taking about a bankruptcy proceeding
This is exactly what Obama did to the bond holders of GM and Chrysler, right?
Anyone remember the NY SLIMES raking Hussein for that?
The truth is... it was ALWAYS eventually going to come to this.
That debt will NEVER be repaid.
In the end, most of it will be written off, mark my words.
Make a deal to pay off Treasury bond holders at less than 100%. OK. But that will be the last Treasury bond ever sold. We will be on a cash basis after that.
What is he thinking?
Any loyal Trumpsters getting nervous yet?
How about selling land the government keeps locked up away from the citizens who ARE the rightful owners?
How about oil leases for land rights and the same for the Atlantic coast?
There are plenty ways for cutting the ND.
Let’s boot foreigners off the tax payer’s backs, too.
Is he advocating that investors in Treasury securities take a haircut? That’s not exactly the way to inspire confidence in investing in the U.S. because you’re basically saying that investing in U.S. treasuries is a bad risk.
He is correct is saying that we will be in deep doodoo if interest rates rise a couple of %.
Donald Trump is a man who successfully used bankruptcy laws to preserve his own wealth. He clearly doesn’t understand the dire consequences for the US government to do the same.
The Tariff
We reaffirm our belief in the protective tariff to extend needed protection to our productive industries. We believe in protection as a national policy, with due and equal regard to all sections and to all classes. It is only by adherence to such a policy that the well being of the consumers can be safeguarded that there can be assured to American agriculture, to American labor and to American manufacturers a return to perpetrate American standards of life. A protective tariff is designed to support the high American economic level of life for the average family and to prevent a lowering to the levels of economic life prevailing in other lands.
In the history of the nation the protective tariff system has ever justified itself by restoring confidence, promoting industrial activity and employment, enormously increasing our purchasing power and bringing increased prosperity to all our people.
The tariff protection to our industry works for increased consumption of domestic agricultural products by an employed population instead of one unable to purchase the necessities of life. Without the strict maintenance of the tariff principle our farmers will need always to compete with cheap lands and cheap labor abroad and with lower standards of living.
The enormous value of the protective principle has once more been demonstrated by the emergency tariff act of 1921 and the tariff act of 1922.
We assert our belief in the elastic provision adopted by congress in the tariff act of 1922 providing for a method of readjusting the tariff rates and the classifications in order to meet changing economic conditions when such changed conditions are brought to the attention of the president by complaint or application.
We believe that the power to increase or decrease any rate of duty provided in the tariff furnishes a safeguard on the one hand against excessive taxes and on the other hand against too high customs charges.
The wise provisions of this section of the tariff act afford ample opportunity for tariff duties to be adjusted after a hearing in order that they may cover the actual differences in the cost of production in the United States and the principal competing countries of the world.
We also believe that the application of this provision of the tariff act will contribute to business stability by making unnecessary general disturbances which are usually incident to general tariff revisions.
When you get someone to accept less than what they are honestly owed, then that is only acceptable in bankruptcy.
Trump is basically saying the US should go bankrupt.
He is talking out of his ass.
Government needs to spend less. Period.
Trump said he “might” try something like that. What is wrong with bandying around ideas? It is obvious the uniparty has no idea how to solve the problem. AND THAT IS THE PROBLEM! Government doesn’t know how to live like families must.
When sane families have a problem they discuss ALL the alternatives (even idiotic ones) then reach a consensus. Since when is it prudent for a family or a business to continuously spend more than it takes in?
I think Trump is on the right track.
Foreign countries default on us many times over....and we give them MORE money.
There’s a few problems with that the way I see it. The debt was created at a near zero interest rate. So what to do, give the Fed a haircut on a near zero interest rate? OK, then what? The principle is still outstanding. Just the debt from deficit spending is nearing 100% of GDP, where does that money come from?
You may say too bad to the Fed, you have to eat it. Then what happens? Those electrons or greenbacks are already in the money supply. Now you stand a good chance of unleashing the inflationary pressure that have been held in abatement while the Marxist Muslim has been in power. Even If inflation doesn’t go hyperbolic you still stand a grave possibility of strong inflation.
Inflation is nothing more than stealth tax on productivity. Unless we can negotiate from a strong position with the ability to pay down some principle you are at the mercy of the Fed and the globalists.
What should happen is for the fes to stop all grants to states, states in turn reduce their grants to localities, and those stae and local govnments to give their creditors haircuts, as required.
We are bankrupt. This is the type of stuff that happens when you’re bankrupt. Trump’s just the messenger - its about to get fiscally ugly.
There’s lots of ways to decrease debt.. my guess is Trump will use them all. Trump knows the national debt at current levels is a ticking timebomb.
For the past eight years the press has ignored the debt as it has climbed by many trillions. Now Trump is getting them to talk about it while the gay Muslim is still president.
One of Trump’s biggest mistakes was saying he wouldn’t make any cuts to entitlements. Of course that’s most of the budget. You can’t address the budget deficit and debt unless you tackle social security, medicare and medicaid. It’s tough though because anyone who says they will cut it will get killed, yet it has to be done.
Giving the debt a haircut will of course hit social security the most.