Trump Orders Creation of US Sovereign Wealth Fund, Says It Could Buy TikTok (reuters.com) 119
U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Monday ordering the U.S. Treasury and Commerce Departments to create a sovereign wealth fund and said it may purchase TikTok. From a report: "We're going to stand this thing up within the next 12 months. We're going to monetize the asset side of the U.S. balance sheet for the American people," Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told reporters. "There'll be a combination of liquid assets, assets that we have in this country as we work to bring them out for the American people."
Trump had previously floated such a government investment vehicle as a presidential candidate, saying it could fund "great national endeavors" like infrastructure projects such as highways and airports, manufacturing, and medical research. Details on how exactly the fund would operate and be financed were not immediately available, but Trump previously said it could be funded by "tariffs and other intelligent things." Typically such funds rely on a country's budget surplus to make investments, but the U.S. operates at a deficit.
Trump had previously floated such a government investment vehicle as a presidential candidate, saying it could fund "great national endeavors" like infrastructure projects such as highways and airports, manufacturing, and medical research. Details on how exactly the fund would operate and be financed were not immediately available, but Trump previously said it could be funded by "tariffs and other intelligent things." Typically such funds rely on a country's budget surplus to make investments, but the U.S. operates at a deficit.
How about... (Score:1)
Trump previously said it could be funded by "tariffs and other intelligent things."
Conservative Translation: "I will wish it into being so"
Liberal Translation: "I have no fricken clue"
Re: (Score:2)
Politicians like to be vague about things and let the people read into it what they want. Trump can play that game too now that he's learned how to be a politician over the last 8 years.
I'm confused on what this fund is supposed to do any differently than all the other funds available to the federal government. If POTUS wants to build hospitals then there should be funds for that in HHS and VA. Highways and airports? There's Departments of Transportation, Commerce, and maybe also Defense, HUD, and DHS.
Re:How about... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The goal of the fund is obvious: to siphon federal money into the pockets of billionaires.
The fund will purchase a lot of DJT and Trumpcoins, obviously.
Re: (Score:3)
Remember, Trump always made the campaign promise to create the External Revenue Service, a new organization to collect the money from tariffs, duties, and revenue from foreign service. Except that we ALREADY have a department to collect this, the US Customs And Border Protection! And tariffs are collected from US residents, not from foreigners. We do not send tax police to foreign countries to collect tariffs there; instead tariffs are an extra tax paid by importers within the US. Just more proof that T
Math genius! (Score:5, Insightful)
He's ordered the creation of an investment account funded by surplus government revenue. The US runs a deficit.
So that diverted money will make the deficit worse, and I'd bet a lot of money it will 'invest' in things that put a lot of money in his and certain others pockets.
It's Trump. It's another grift. And if you don't believe it's a grift it's going to be another astoundingly bad Trump financial disaster.
List of countries with sovereign wealth funds (Score:3, Interesting)
- Is it acceptable for a country to have a sovereign wealth fund? (Yes/No)
- Can a sovereign wealth fund operate, if at all, if the country has a budget deficit for decades? (Yes/No)
- What provisions are on a sovereign wealth fund for investing in the country's own debt? Or debt from other countries? Or strategic industries?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Countries having sovereign wealth funds
- United States - State-level sovereign wealth funds for Alaska, New Mexico, Wyoming, Utah, Idaho, Texas, Alabama,
Re:List of countries with sovereign wealth funds (Score:5, Informative)
Your analysis is disingenuous right out of the box:
That is not a country having a sovereign wealth fund.
Though since you bring it up, several of those states aren't serving the basic needs of their citizens, so they have no business claiming to have excess wealth.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
> Your analysis is disingenuous right out of the box:
Disagree. Legal in multiple states. Easier to make legal at the federal USA level.
> several of those states aren't serving the basic needs of their citizens, so they have no business claiming to have excess wealth.
If the state government voted for the laws establishing the state-level sovereign wealth fund, they have already decided on how much of that fund goes towards basic needs. Citizens can always lobby for more social spending from the fund
Re:List of countries with sovereign wealth funds (Score:5, Insightful)
Sovereign wealth funds are a very good strategy for many countries to handle financial challenges. It's a socialist approach to managing public and private investments. Countries and other government entities (like the US states you mentioned) usually put them into place to manage public assets like resource (oil) extraction, but they are also often used for government and/or citizen pensions
But it's always done for one of three reasons: 1. The government has a large (and probably temporary) surplus of natural resource revenue that they want to invest for when those resources run out, 2. The government is heavily socialist and wants significant control over private markets, or 3. A country feels it's better off investing in the prosperity of other countries instead of building more prosperity at home.
None of those apply to the US. It is a deeply bad idea for the US government to do this because there are no benefits, but it opens the country up to significantly more corruption risks. To have the first US president who is a felon be the first president to try this should speak volumes to anyone who isn't highly partisan.
Re:List of countries with sovereign wealth funds (Score:5, Insightful)
In the United States, socialism is only for billionaires.
Re: (Score:2)
This is true and it makes complete sense for Trump to do this since he and his supporters are ardent socialists.
Re: (Score:2)
Disclaimers: I used to live in Alaska and get the PFD. I was moving out when oil revenue was dropping and the government was being forced to either drop services or cut into the PFD. BIG scandal and disagreement. I support having similar for the federal government though.
I have to disagree with #3. A sovereign wealth fund can invest at home and still do it's purpose, without expressing significant control over private markets. It could act like a index fund, for example.
Let's add a couple more factors
Re: (Score:2)
I live in Alaska, and I claim my PFD. I look upon Norway's with envious eyes. But hey... let's buy tiktok. And $TRUMP coin. FML.
Re: (Score:2)
>>Countries having sovereign wealth funds
>> Canada
Incorrect. Only one Canadian province (Alberta) has a sovereign wealth fund which like Alaska's is funded by oil revenues.
Re: (Score:2)
What is the point you are trying to make? That the president is allowed to do this because other countries do it?
Re: (Score:2)
"What is the point you are trying to make? That the president is allowed to do this because other countries do it?"
No, other countries actually don't live from loans.
Re: (Score:2)
It makes no sense for the US. Sovreign wealth funds make a lot of sense because they can take surplus income from tax revenues and invest it in a productive country like the US. Or they can be used even out income from a limited resource so that one generation doesn't get all of the oil revenue while future generations have to make up the deficit in revenue once that literally dries up.
But the US is in a very different position because we have such a large and diverse economy that if we need dividends from
Re:Math genius! (Score:5, Insightful)
He's ordered the creation of an investment account funded by surplus government revenue. The US runs a deficit.
So that diverted money will make the deficit worse, and I'd bet a lot of money it will 'invest' in things that put a lot of money in his and certain others pockets.
It's Trump. It's another grift. And if you don't believe it's a grift it's going to be another astoundingly bad Trump financial disaster.
The entire point of Trump's second run, aside from avoiding the potential for continued legal woes, was to make sure that *ANY* money he could wring out of the US government would be directly funneled to him and those who actually have as much wealth as he pretends to have. This whole thing will be a direct conduit of taxpayer money straight to the broligarchy. They may pretty it up as infrastructure spending, but the infrastructure will end up being Musk's daydreams, Zuckerberg's Fantasyland (in the name of VR), and a deluge of other pipedream bullshit so the money can go to the uber-rich.
With Musk getting his hands directly on the Treasury, I would expect there to be "issues" with the average American receiving their tax refunds this year. They're really throwing the grift into high gear in the early days this go-round. No slowing down now.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
broligarchy
You sir/ma'am, have just introduced me to my new favourite word.
Re: (Score:2)
broligarchy
You sir/ma'am, have just introduced me to my new favourite word.
One of the other smartypants folks around here said it a week or two ago and it stuck in my cranium. Too on-the-nose for the current round of Trump clingers.
Re: (Score:2)
"He's ordered the creation of an investment account funded by surplus government revenue. The US runs a deficit."
Now that Canada, Mexico, China and the EU pay tariffs (snicker) that money will be used for it.
I guess he STILL doesn't know that his voters will pay those.
A slush fund (Score:5, Insightful)
It is the fascist wet dream. trump will use federal money to buy up assets which he will then control unconditionally. "may purchase TikTok" and any other social media he happens to desire.
Re:A slush fund (Score:5, Insightful)
And not just "assets" but what would be literally and actually "state media" like the MAGAts think PBS is.
He could not be a more obvious fascist.
He also could not be a more obvious hypocrite after all the shit talking he did about forcing the sale of TikTok, as if we needed more examples.
Re:A slush fund (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
PBS is pretty damned close to state media.
Oh no, they share FACTS and INFORMATION! They must be liberal cucks!
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
How so? It gets a very small amount of funding from the government, and in return the government ends up with zero control.
Re:A slush fund (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe he'll direct the fund to buy that fledgling site "Truth Social" for a boat-load of $$$. Who owns that? Hmm... /s)
(Remember, he now has complete immunity for any official acts while President. Thanks SCOTUS!
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe he'll direct the fund to buy that fledgling site "Truth Social" for a boat-load of $$$. Who owns that? Hmm... (Remember, he now has complete immunity for any official acts while President. Thanks SCOTUS! /s)
Indeed. Though in this case I don't think there actually are any laws that would prevent him from directing the government to invest in his company even if SCOTUS hadn't given him immunity. In a sane era, a president who did that would be impeached and removed from office, but I wouldn't hold my breath.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The word means exactly what I implied that it means.
"A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, a capitalist economy subject to stringent governmental controls, violent suppression of the opposition, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism."
Re: (Score:2)
Trump will use federal money to buy up assets which he will then control unconditionally. "may purchase TikTok" and any other social media he happens to desire.
The main problem with this idea is Trump thinking he can actually make someone sell anything. TikTok is for sale as much as Greenland. They have the option of simply stop serving the U.S., or they can close up shop completely if they want. There is no "have to" give to someone else. This isn't a company in bankruptcy with outstanding debts to pay.
Re: (Score:2)
It is the fascist wet dream. trump will use federal money to buy up assets which he will then control unconditionally. "may purchase TikTok" and any other social media he happens to desire.
I'm guessing on the last day of office, after he pardons a bunch more people for committing crimes for him, he'll sell TikTok to himself for 100,000,000 Trump coins. Of course, the trump coin will be worthless.
The media will lavish him with praise for being so altruistic, 100 million trump coins he paid, they'll say.
Re: (Score:2)
I checked your cites;
"the fund's classification as a sovereign wealth fund is contentious"
"a French public sector investment bank"
"Many companies are excluded by the fund on ethical grounds"
"Its purpose is to invest in strategic Italian companies to help them to compete"
"catalyse capital into the country and support its growth needs across sectors of importance"
No mention of buying TikTok because Dear Leader wants it.
Because nothing says free market... (Score:5, Insightful)
...like the US government owning a service like this.
The law that Congress passed was to force the Chinese government to not own it. If the free market isn't willing to step in to a platform with millions upon millions of users then the US government shouldn't either.
Re:Because nothing says free market... (Score:4, Informative)
...like the US government owning a service like this.
The law that Congress passed was to force the Chinese government to not own it. If the free market isn't willing to step in to a platform with millions upon millions of users then the US government shouldn't either.
The law says the owners of TikTok (technically not the Chinese government, but whatever) must sell to a US entity or shut down.
The Chinese owners of TikTok have not (yet) sold the platform because they don't want to, not because they can't find a buyer.
Re: (Score:2)
...like the US government owning a service like this.
The law that Congress passed was to force the Chinese government to not own it. If the free market isn't willing to step in to a platform with millions upon millions of users then the US government shouldn't either.
Then China will pass a law requiring the U.S. to divest TikTok and we'll sell it back to them -- profit!!! /s
Sovereign Wealth Fund Without a Surplus? (Score:5, Insightful)
Sovereign wealth funds are for managing surplus revenue of a country. The US has a deficit. So in this case it could never be anything more than a meaningless and slight change to the federal government's accounting ledgers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You can do like the UK and have a sovereign poverty fund (AKA national debt) funded by economic incompetence
OK, you already have one, and It is a safe bet that Trump would win in an incompetence competition.
Re: (Score:2)
"It is a safe bet that Trump would win in an incompetence competition."
It's not even a competition.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Don't get me wrong, Trump could create a sovereign wealth fund and it would be very useful. To Trump and his cronies. In this case the problem isn't that Trump's proposal is laughably idiotic, it's that the idea is another laughably obvious mechanism to pad Trump's and his allies' pockets.
Re: (Score:1)
His smooth brain fans will read this story and think "Take that libs!"
Re: (Score:2)
His smooth brain fans will read this story and think "Take that libs!"
Well, Biden reportedly liked the idea of a sovereign wealth fund too, so it isn't a uniquely Trumpian bad idea. I'm sure almost any president would have liked to have their own slush fund. But IMHO no other president thought they could get away with it.
Re: (Score:3)
His smooth brain fans will read this story and think "Take that libs!"
Well, Biden reportedly liked the idea of a sovereign wealth fund too, so it isn't a uniquely Trumpian bad idea. I'm sure almost any president would have liked to have their own slush fund. But IMHO no other president thought they could get away with it.
Well, to be fair, it's a hard sell to tell the American People: "We're going to create a spending fund to use up all our surplus money." Especially when we have the every few weeks threat of a full-blown government shutdown because we're about to slam once again into the debt ceiling.
It takes a special level of dumb to try and shove that idea into existence within our current federal government. And for some strange reason, we went ahead and elected that level of dumb.
Re: (Score:2)
I like the idea of one.
I think social security should have essentially been purchasing whole US index instead of treasury notes with its surplus over the last decades.
I don't think it should pick winners and losers, but invest in the broad US economy as a whole.
Re: Sovereign Wealth Fund Without a Surplus? (Score:2)
Paying citizens is that. They then spend the money, which benefits working people.
Re: (Score:1)
Sovereign wealth funds are for managing surplus revenue of a country. The US has a deficit. So in this case it could never be anything more than a meaningless and slight change to the federal government's accounting ledgers.
I'm surprised you don't see it.
Musk has unfettered access to the federal payment system now. He's also systematically shutting down this-that-and-the-other federal departments and programs. What logically follows is that funding for all that can now be diverted, sans-oversight from Congress or anyone else. Trump orders money spent on $SOMETHING, Musk just jacks into the payment system and grabs the funds """freed up""" by shuttering all those departments and services; it becomes a fait accompli at that poi
Re: (Score:2)
Sovereign wealth funds are for managing surplus revenue of a country. The US has a deficit. So in this case it could never be anything more than a meaningless and slight change to the federal government's accounting ledgers.
I'm surprised you don't see it. Musk has unfettered access to the federal payment system now. He's also systematically shutting down this-that-and-the-other federal departments and programs. What logically follows is that funding for all that can now be diverted, sans-oversight from Congress or anyone else. Trump orders money spent on $SOMETHING, Musk just jacks into the payment system and grabs the funds """freed up""" by shuttering all those departments and services; it becomes a fait accompli at that point. Hell, Musk could just embezzle federal funds and presumably no one would be able to stop him or even know it's happening. The entire Federal Budget could be completely bankrupted and no one would be the wiser until Federal workers and anyone else who gets checks from the government discovered that their paychecks were bouncing.
I've been wondering if our federal tax returns would even show up, but you propose a much more interesting scenario. Tax return checks that bounce. That could cause a true circus.
Re: (Score:2)
I've been wondering if our federal tax returns would even show up, but you propose a much more interesting scenario. Tax return checks that bounce. That could cause a true circus.
Do you remember the stimulus checks that George W issued? Mine bounced. Yes, really.
I re-submitted it and it was paid, but it still cost me the $25 returned check fee.
Re:Sovereign Wealth Fund Without a Surplus? (Score:5, Interesting)
Taxes on rents do not exhibit deadweight loss, thus they have no Laffer Curve, it means they do not effect the strength of the economy. This is because rents are nonproductive (by definition) and are effectively already "taxing" productive enterprise, so taxing them simply diverts them from whoever was collecting them before (which is a nonproductive act) to the government. In fact, taxes on rents can have NEGATIVE deadweight loss because they are potentially offsetting other taxes that DO have a Laffer curve.
The economically optimum thing would be to create a sovereign wealth fund, fund it by taxing the shit out of rents, enjoy the improved economy that results, and distribute any surpluses as public works and/or a dividend like the Alaska permanent fund (which taxes resource extraction rents). This tax-rents-to-fund-UBI was proposed by Henry George in the 1870s and is basically the core of Georgist economics. It was also proposed by other first-wave progressives including Winston Churchill with this "people's budget" that would come from taxing land rents. In reality, it's not going to happen, because if they were going to tax rents, they would already be doing it.
Re: (Score:2)
The economically optimum thing would be to create a sovereign wealth fund, fund it by taxing the shit out of rents
Perhaps, but to clarify for others who might not know, the term "rent" here has quite a different meaning than the term in common use. "Rent" in this context is any government-granted monopoly that enables ongoing extraction of payments without doing work or otherwise adding value. Rental real-estate can indeed fit this definition, but only the part of it that applies to the land, not to any improvements, (e.g. buildings). This is what led Henry George to propose land value taxes, which are like property
Re: (Score:2)
Sovereign wealth funds are for managing surplus revenue of a country. The US has a deficit. So in this case it could never be anything more than a meaningless and slight change to the federal government's accounting ledgers.
But wait until all the other countries pay all the U.S. tariffs, then we'll be rolling in cash.
Sarcastically noting that importers pay tariffs and usually pass those costs onto local consumers. In any case, the Administration will be getting poor(er) suckers to pay for things to support tax breaks for the rich.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not that far from how our food supply is managed but don't tell anyone what they'll fuck with it and we will all starve
Seems consistent. (Score:3)
A sovereign wealth fund would be fine (Score:4, Insightful)
I would love for example to see United States by stock in companies instead of handing out subsidies. If Intel wants 60 billion of my tax dollars they can have it in exchange for stock and we get a say and how the company is run.. just like any other stockholder.
But that's not how this is likely to play out. It's just going to be another wealth transfer from me and you to Trump and his buddies.
Mark my words the main goal they have is to eliminate income tax for themselves and make you pick up that tab. Look at your taxes from last year. Now double it. That's the Trump tax plan. Everything else is in service to that
Re: (Score:3)
literal fascist-communism
HJAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHA
Tell us more about how little you know about what words mean. You used all three of those words incorrectly.
Re: (Score:1)
Look, I know more about fascism and communism than you. That's a fact. But anyway, why don't you define it? Enlighten us with your definition .. and I'll explain how it fits here perfectly. In fact it fits better than anything else. Also, stop trying to distract from the fact that the RESULT will be government oppression of enterprise and spread of its propaganda. That part is undeniable, so why don't you focus on that instead of bullshit? We know it's in your playbook to detract from the issue by bringing
Re: (Score:2)
The only fact is that you are know-nothing know-it-all.
Of course. (Score:2)
Starve everything meaningful and buy a social media company. From the people who brought you the profitable enterprises Truth Social and X. All else aside, this is a dumb idea.
Musk (Score:2)
Fund buys T's sh*t coin & make him rich (Score:2)
Big Brain Move (Score:5, Insightful)
Contrary to his statements and those of his cult followers, Trump is not a good business man. It's proven he would be richer today had he let his initial fortune ride in the S&P 500. https://www.forbes.com/sites/d... [forbes.com]
Re: Big Brain Move (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Big Brain Move (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
He thinks like a seven year old. A very angry seven-year old that like to beat up on five year olds at that. Off course he isn't a good businessman. And now he is thrusting the US into another depression, as tariffs are was triggered the great depression.
Musk/Trump will be right up there with Smoot/Hawley; interesting the R's introduced S/H and the D's opposed it...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The Smoot/Hawley tariffs were higher than Trumps, but Trump is threatening to go higher and certainly has to if he wants Canada to crumble since 25% won't do it. Also, it is much easier for Canada to simply trade across the ocean and forget about the US. 57% of the aluminum that America uses comes from Canada and that already looks like it is going to go to Europe instead. 25% of the oil America uses also comes from Canada and it won't be hard for Canada to find other buyers.
Last I saw it was more like 60%, mostly to refineries in the Midwest all the way to Texas and Rocky Mountains, which will raise prices, especially in the Rocky Mountain and upper Midwest refinery areas. I suspect it will be hard to replace that crude easily with imports from elsewhere without significant logistical issues given the pipeline infrastructure. If the tariffs remain in place and Canada retaliates against US farm exports as planned those areas could get hit with a double whammy.
Re: Big Brain Move - Left out link (Score:2)
Re: Big Brain Move (Score:2)
Socialism (Score:4, Insightful)
This is literally socialism, isn't it? What a fucking retard.
Re: (Score:2)
This is literally socialism, isn't it?
No.
What a fucking retard.
When you use a hard R in this millenium you are revealing yourself to be a spoiled child.
When you call fascism socialism, you are revealing yourself to be a spectacular idiot. But then, you did that earlier as well [slashdot.org] so no surprise here.
Re: (Score:2)
Government owned social media platform for US citizens to use?
Managed by Trump/Musk who only support "freedom of speech" until you disagree with them.
Sounds worse than socialism - more like some dsytopian totalitarian state. Even China & Russia haven't gone that far.
Re: Socialism (Score:2)
"Government owned social media platform for US citizens to use?
[...]
Sounds worse than socialism - more like some dsytopian totalitarian state. Even China & Russia haven't gone that far."
What? China absolutely has gone that far. TikTok is the US version of the censored social media service for Chinese residents.
Russia I'm not up on, they have state media though. I just don't know about social media there.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Norway is not socialist. They have a fund.
Trump will purchase TikTok and declare a NP (Score:2)
Trump will the the US government acquire TikTok and declare it to be a US National Park.
Fascist-Communism = "Sovereign Fund" (Score:2)
A "sovereign fund" is literal fascist (police state) - communism (suppression of enterprise). If the government owns financial interest in a company, they will act to suppress competitors via the actions of one, or all three, of its branches. Furthermore it will become a grift and propaganda pot for the ruling party.
Re: (Score:2)
If the government owns financial interest in a company, they will act to suppress competitors via the actions of one, or all three, of its branches.
Not necessarily. There are plenty of examples of government-owned corporations that "compete" alongside private corporations, without "suppressing" the latter. Usually the corporations are created to fulfill a national interest that the private sector can't or won't. For example, public broadcasters like the CBC in Canada or the BBC in the UK.
However, I would agree that one must be cautious about government-owned corporations, and ensure they don't cause the harm you mentioned.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, the BBC isn't owned by the government.
https://www.londonmuseum.org.u... [londonmuseum.org.uk]
The BBC was established by a Royal Charter as a public corporation in 1927.
The BBC isn't technically owned by the government, and the charter gives it editorial independence.
But the government still has influence. Ministers are involved in choosing the BBC's chair. And the government periodically reviews and renews the charter, which sets out the BBC's mission.
Most of the BBC's funding comes from the public, who pay a licence fee for its content. How much you pay to watch, and therefore how much funding the BBC receives, is also decided by the government.
Re: (Score:2)
A "sovereign fund" is literal fascist (police state) - communism (suppression of enterprise).
Those are not what those words mean.
Fascisms are police states, but there are other kinds of police states.
Communism isn't about suppression of enterprise, it's about who owns enterprise.
It would help your accuracy if you knew what words meant before you used them. There are a lot of resources available to you for this purpose.
Re: (Score:2)
"Communism isn't about suppression of enterprise, it's about who owns enterprise."
That lunatic sentence right there is why I don't argue with morons. If government makes it so that an individual or private entity can't own a profitable enterprise, then it is suppressing enterprise.
Re: Fascist-Communism = "Sovereign Fund" (Score:2)
"If government makes it so that an individual or private entity can't own a profitable enterprise, then it is suppressing enterprise."
No, it is suppressing private ownership. It doesn't inherently prevent the enterprise. Those two things are different and you have been brainwashed into thinking otherwise by those who benefit from corporatism.
Small Government FTW (Score:2)
Thank God Republicans stick to their guns.
Tariffs = US tax (Score:5, Informative)
There seems to a widespread misunderstanding, and/or propaganda attempt, that tariffs are paid by the targeted country, but they are not - they are an import tax paid by the US importer. The goal is to make foreign goods more expensive, to reduce imports (address trade imbalance) or punish the exporting country (by reducing their ability to export. by reducing demand).
Anyways, at the end of the day tariffs are just an import tax, paid for by the consumer in form of increased prices. Trump is proposing that these import tariffs, collected by the US government from the importer, and ultimately paid for by US consumer, will fund his "sovereign wealth fund", so it's just a 25% sales tax that will go into a slush fund that Trump/Musk will control.
Content (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Zuckerberg is already on-side. Rational posts are quietly choked while right wing fascist drivel is appearing in everybody's news feed. Trump is a drooling moron with serious psychological problems, but he understands the importance of controlling information.
This is the whole point of getting elected (Score:2)
Use the taxpayers' money to buy Trump steaks and Trump t-shirts!
What's good for the Saudis.. (Score:2)
All of the SWFs that have gone bust were due to political instability. This should be fine.
The wealth of the United States is mostly in the hands of a few billionaires. Unless Trump is planning to tap that resource, he's got no money to start an SWF with. Tax the billionaires -> SWF. Tax stock buybacks -> SWF. Tax generational wealth -> you get the idea.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh wait, maybe the tariffs could be the source. So the billionaire's money is safe. The burden goes back to the people/public.
It's called... (Score:2)
Australia has one of these (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: "State controlled media" (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Kleptocrats are raiding taxpayer funds like its their baby sister's piggy bank.
Re: (Score:2)
He who controls the spice controls the universe.