6000亿变空头支票！特朗普算计遭盟友拆台，36万亿国债没人接盘？

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the implications of the Trump administration's approach to managing the U.S. national debt, which amounts to $36 trillion, by applying strategies reminiscent of personal bankruptcy restructuring, including interest rate cuts and tariffs, leading to potential backlash from allies and a weakening of the dollar's credibility [2][22]. Group 1: Economic Strategies - The Federal Reserve's interest rate cuts are interpreted as a routine monetary easing, but they reflect Trump's strategy of creating crises to force policy concessions [4][8]. - Trump's historical approach during the 1990 economic recession involved leveraging bankruptcy protection to negotiate lower interest rates, a tactic he appears to be replicating on a national scale [4][6]. - The proposed interest savings of $300 billion from rate cuts are minimal compared to the $7.5 trillion expenditure of the "Great Beautiful Act," indicating a focus on long-term debt management rather than immediate savings [8][10]. Group 2: Tariff Policies - Tariffs are framed as a means of economic colonialism, where the U.S. imposes unilateral tax increases while demanding market access for its goods, creating a disadvantage for developing countries [10][12]. - The strategy includes pressuring allies like Japan and South Korea to invest in U.S. industries, particularly in the semiconductor sector, while maintaining control over the investment decisions [12][14]. - The imposition of tariffs is expected to ultimately burden U.S. consumers, as the increased costs are likely to be passed down, potentially limiting the effectiveness of interest rate cuts [14][20]. Group 3: International Relations and Investment - Recent investment commitments from allies, such as the EU's $600 billion and Japan's $550 billion, are criticized as lacking substance and unlikely to materialize as actual investments [16][18]. - The agreements often involve loans rather than direct investments, raising concerns about the actual economic benefits for the U.S. and the risks borne by the allies' companies [18][20]. - The diminishing economic appeal of the U.S. is highlighted by allies' reluctance to fully commit to investment agreements, reflecting a shift in global economic dynamics where countries prioritize their own interests [20][22].