this post was submitted on 09 May 2025
680 points (99.6% liked)

politics

23428 readers
2414 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The Trump administration’s tariff scheme appears less and less likely to bring manufacturing jobs back to U.S. shores.

Businesses across the country are crunching the numbers and realizing that, despite Donald Trump’s insistence, they can’t balance out his tariff hikes across the supply chain.

“Some manufacturers who had plans to open factories in the country say the new duties are only adding to the significant obstacles they already faced,” Bloomberg reported Friday.

That’s because the supply chain to produce those goods in the United States simply isn’t there, requiring companies to import raw materials and factory equipment—which Trump’s tariffs have made unaffordable—from abroad.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

the government doesn’t need to match spending with revenue.

Governments can spend at a deficit, but there’s a limit to how much debt they can accumulate. Other countries have found that out. US was in a special position in the economy as the largest economy, a strong position in international trade and a lot of dollar investment or dollar based trading. We could get away it’s more, but at some point it still hits a limit and falls apart.

We’re already at a point where debt payments are one of the biggest pieces of the federal budget, blocking out better uses for that money. We keep stealing from the future and eventually we’ll get there to find everything gone.

And that’s before you have an incompetent leader destroying all that dollar influence, everything that made that special economic situation possible. We’re fucking around with that special economic position and will come out of this subject to the same deficit limits as any other country. Well find out our accumulated debt is beyond prudence for a “normal” economy and we’re no longer special enough to ignore that

We were in a counterintuitive position where spending more money for things like infrastructure and chips act was ok because of our special economic situation plus it’s an investment in the future that should have paid off. Whereas the orange fools approach to spending less money just risks our special economic situation that lets us get away with fucking around, plus points to a future of despair: it turns into losing more money in the future

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yup, that was the "can't do it too much" part. :)

Any of it would be relevant if I thought trump or the Republican party cared about those consequences.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

The worse part of it is

There’s an impact to doing so to much, but that probably won’t come to a head for a few years.

That’s the potential economic catastrophe. So far we haven’t had to face many consequences of excessive debt accumulation, but if those idiots succeed in destroying the special circumstances that let us get away with more fiscal recklessness than other countries, that reckoning could happen very suddenly.

It’s a similar feel to climate tipping points. It’s unique enough situation that we really don’t have a good way to predict the likelihood, the timing, the severity, but we’re not just playing with fire, we’re running around holding a tank of burning napalm over our heads claiming: no big deal, no one’s been burnt yet