Trump's Tariffs Seriously Reducing The National Debt

[kyzr]

The Supreme Court on Tuesday granted the Trump administration’s request to hear its appeal of lower court rulings that many of President Donald Trump’s wide-ranging tariffs are illegal.
The Supreme Court also agreed with the administration’s request to consider the appeal on a faster-than-normal timeline.
The court, in an order, said it would hear oral arguments in the first week of November. It allotted one hour for that session.
The court consolidated two separate cases in which plaintiffs – seven small businesses and a dozen states — have successfully challenged the legality of the tariffs at issue.
The Trump administration, in asking for the expedited appeal in one of the cases, has warned that the Treasury Department could be forced to refund between $750 billion and $1 trillion in collected tariffs if the Supreme Court waited until next June to issue a decision that agreed with lower court judges that the duties are illegal.
The law on trump invoking emergency authority is crystal clear. The lower courts got it right. Regrettably, the law doesn't matter to the conservatives on this court.

"I heard that all parties agreed to set the hearing for November.

 

[candycorn]

If democrats hold the government hostage by not passing any of the appropriations bills, then the government will keep using CR, after CR, after CR, so no budget cuts would be realized. Democrats are obstructionists. Thune needs to go nuclear.

LOL....

Well...according to the post you JUST MADE above...if nothing changes, we have the same expenditures we had the year before. Right? That is what a CR does.

Now the OP--written during the current CR under which the government has remained open--says the tariffs are "seriously" reducing the deficit.

So please explain to us how, if nothing changes, the deficit will grow under the same CR we have now when the OP says it's shrinking under the same CR.

I always win our arguments but I do like a challenge. You failed to provide one this time skippy. Do better.

 

[Delldude]

Is this a lie? I bet it's not true. I bet the tariffs are not going to pay down the debt. I call BS

 

[beagle9]

No serious person actually believe the Trump tariffs are reducing the national debt, that is ridiculous. Current deficits are approaching $2 trillion each year and the revenue from tariffs does not come close to that. At best you could claim that increase tariff revenue will reduce the growth of the debt but it sure as hell is not going to reduce it.

Reducing the growth is reducing it. Duh !!

 

[initforme]

Some of that money can go to farmers and into social security and medicare. Tariffs will help those wonderful programs. Good work.

 

[Delldude]

Some of that money can go to farmers and into social security and medicare. Tariffs will help those wonderful programs. Good work.

Trump indicated possibly doing that........for farmers.

 

[initforme]

Trump indicated possibly doing that........for farmers.

Thats great. And putting additional dollars into medicare and social security only makes sense.

 

[task0778]

Reducing the growth is reducing it. Duh !!

Bullshit. There's a difference reducing the growth of the debt and reducing the debt itself. The debt itself will never be reduced until the day comes when revenue exceeds spending for any fiscal year. When the debt goes from $30 trillion to less than $30 trillion in a given year, that is reducing the debt. But in a given year when the debt goes up from $30 trillion to $30.5 trillion instead of $31 trillion, that is not reducing the debt. That is merely reducing the growth of the debt, which isn't the same thing. Those who say tariffs reduce the actual debt are lying unless revenues exceed spending. Which BTW is not happening, that's cuz we're spending close to $2 trillion more than we're taking in and tariffs are sure as hell not going to equal anywhere close to $2 tril per year.

 

[beagle9]

Trump indicated possibly doing that........for farmers.

Definitely needs to shore up SSI for seniors, and put an end to politician's using the issue as a political football by claming every cycle that the program is going broke, and yada yada yada yada yada. If Trump wants to truly end corruption, then he needs to attack it everywhere that it lives within these government run programs.

MAGA should be a solution to the problem's that we have been having with many government run programs, and the stopping of the entrenched abuse by political leader's for political purposes.

 

[beagle9]

Bullshit. There's a difference reducing the growth of the debt and reducing the debt itself. The debt itself will never be reduced until the day comes when revenue exceeds spending for any fiscal year. When the debt goes from $30 trillion to less than $30 trillion in a given year, that is reducing the debt. But in a given year when the debt goes up from $30 trillion to $30.5 trillion instead of $31 trillion, that is not reducing the debt. That is merely reducing the growth of the debt, which isn't the same thing. Those who say tariffs reduce the actual debt are lying unless revenues exceed spending. Which BTW is not happening, that's cuz we're spending close to $2 trillion more than we're taking in and tariffs are sure as hell not going to equal anywhere close to $2 tril per year.

One step at a time right ?

First you stop the growth, then you attack the amount by using the same simple standards as a great run business or properly run household use, otherwise where proper budgeting and fiscal responsibility is constantly being applied.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

So the fat orange slob now has to take tariff revenue and give government handouts to people whose lives are being ruined by his tariffs.

How embarrassingly stupid.

If you dont see how embarrassingly stupid that is, then you are stupid.

And if you do see it and defend the orange slob anyway, then you are brainwashed and are in a cult.

 

[Delldude]

Definitely needs to shore up SSI for seniors, and put an end to politician's using the issue as a political football by claming every cycle that the program is going broke, and yada yada yada yada yada. If Trump wants to truly end corruption, then he needs to attack it everywhere that it lives within these government run programs.

MAGA should be a solution to the problem's that we have been having with many government run programs, and the stopping of the entrenched abuse by political leader's for political purposes.

DOGE found issues in SSI that should help plus many of the things DOGE found haven't been initiated yet.

There's a cold hard fact about SSI and that's in the future the swell of boomers won't be drawing on it enmass any more. That's probably why raising the age hasn't been dealt with.

 

[kyzr]

LOL....Well...according to the post you JUST MADE above...if nothing changes, we have the same expenditures we had the year before. Right? That is what a CR does.

A CR is typically only for a month or two until the Appropriations Bills get passed, not for a year.

Now the OP--written during the current CR under which the government has remained open--says the tariffs are "seriously" reducing the deficit. So please explain to us how, if nothing changes, the deficit will grow under the same CR we have now when the OP says it's shrinking under the same CR.

1. There is no current CR. Democrats want to add $trillion and Republicans said "pound sand". That is why therer will be a government shutdown Wednesday 10/1.
2. Tariff revenue is about $400b a year, so by definition it reduces the budget deficit irrespective of the budget.

I always win our arguments but I do like a challenge. You failed to provide one this time skippy. Do better.

Don't spike the ball on the 5-yd line candy dear. I always win.

 

[Delldude]

A CR is typically only for a month or two until the Appropriations Bills get passed, not for a year.

1. There is no current CR. Democrats want to add $trillion and Republicans said "pound sand". That is why therer will be a government shutdown Wednesday 10/1.
2. Tariff revenue is about $400b a year, so by definition it reduces the budget deficit irrespective of the budget.

Don't spike the ball on the 5-yd line candy dear. I always win.

Don't think the Dems have the upper hand here.

 

[MagicMike]

Time for another lefty meltdown and denials. Winning. One thing I love about the left is they never get tired of losing. It's just a way of life for them. Trump's tariffs have been a good thing for a number of reasons. The left keep complaining about tariffs raising prices and yet we never actually see raised prices. They're always right around the corner.

Trump is bringing in so much revenue from tariffs that it’s seriously reducing the $37 trillion national debt​

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/trump-bringing-much-revenue-tariffs-182932609.html

This article doesn't mention the crippling effect of the tariffs on the economy.
Why not?

 

[Delldude]

This article doesn't mention the crippling effect of the tariffs on the economy.
Why not?

You didn't see the post from Jerome Powell saying that's not happening,?

 

[MagicMike]

You didn't see the post from Jerome Powell saying that's not happening,?

He is wrong. Ask a farmer.

 

[Delldude]

He is wrong. Ask a farmer.

He is right. Farmers have been affected by other issues.

 

[justoffal]

The consumers are paying the tariffs.

Actually the vendors have been eating the tariffs proving that there was wiggle room...they are still making profits.

 

[justoffal]

Many would just "sit out", the GDP coulddrop you dumb OX. Like back when top rate was 90%. GOVT revenue was still only 20%*GDP.

Lafffer curve.... accurate