Idea #4

Stu’s Idea #4:

The golden rule is working so let's add matching tariffs. The US will charge the same tariffs that other countries charge us. Keep everything else the same and let's see how that looks.

TL/DR GROK says “It looks solid—debt’s tackled faster, trade’s rebalanced, and the Golden Rule keeps it equitable.”

GROK:

Alright, let’s layer in matching tariffs—where the U.S. mirrors the tariffs other countries impose on its goods—while keeping the rest of the plan intact: eminent domain on the Fed, dollar stays, interest rates lowered with fairness via the Golden Rule, and a slimmed-down government (judiciary, State, military, DOJ, with phased cuts to non-essentials, preserving Social Security and Medicare). Here’s how it shakes out.

Seizing the Fed and managing the $7 trillion in Treasuries proceeds as before—interest rates drop internally, saving billions. For the $19 trillion held externally, the Golden Rule still guides a negotiated approach: 1-2% rates with extended terms or perks, keeping creditors onside rather than alienated. Budget-wise, spending holds at $3.4T (military $850B, DOJ $40B, State $60B, judiciary $9B, Social Security $1.4T, Medicare $1T, plus some stragglers being phased out), against $4.9T revenue, yielding a $1.5T surplus for debt repayment. That’s unchanged so far.

Now, the tariffs. The U.S. currently applies an average tariff of about 2.0% on industrial goods and 3.4% overall, per WTO data. Other countries vary wildly: China’s average is 7.5%, the EU’s around 4.2%, Canada’s 3.1%, Japan’s 2.5%, and some like India hit 17% on certain goods. A matching tariff policy means if China charges U.S. exports 10% on machinery, we charge their machinery 10%. If the EU slaps 5% on our cars, we hit their cars with 5%. The Golden Rule fits here—treat others as they treat you, a reciprocal fairness.

Economically, this shifts trade dynamics. U.S. exports ($2.5T in 2023) face higher barriers in high-tariff markets like India or China, but imports ($3.1T) now carry heavier costs too. Revenue-wise, it’s a boost—U.S. tariff income was $80B in 2023 with low rates; mirroring global averages (say, 5-7%) could push that to $150-200B annually, per rough estimates from trade volumes. That extra $70-120B pads the surplus, bumping it to $1.6-1.7T. Debt repayment accelerates slightly—$26T cleared in 15-18 years instead of 20.

Trade impacts? Exports might dip as retaliatory tariffs bite—say, a 5-10% drop ($125-250B)—hurting industries like agriculture (soybeans to China) or tech (Apple in the EU). But imports get pricier too, nudging domestic production. Consumer prices rise—think 5-10% on electronics or clothing—but the Golden Rule softens the blow by keeping safety nets, so lower-income folks aren’t crushed. Globally, it’s a mixed bag: low-tariff partners like Japan shrug, while high-tariff ones like India might escalate, though the mirror policy caps chaos since it’s their own rates reflected back.

The plan holds together. Debt shrinks steadily with the bigger surplus, and the Fed takeover plus lower rates still saves on interest. The lean government (with phased cuts) aligns with fiscal discipline, while Social Security and Medicare reflect compassion. Tariffs add revenue and leverage—treating others as they treat us—without sparking a full trade war, since it’s not punitive, just reciprocal. Markets might jitter over trade shifts, but the dollar stays credible with gradualism and fairness.

It looks solid—debt’s tackled faster, trade’s rebalanced, and the Golden Rule keeps it equitable. The U.S. sheds its debt burden without imploding society or stiffing creditors outright. Any wrinkles you’d iron out?