Core Viewpoint - The risk of a collapse in U.S. national debt is a significant concern, with the Trump administration's strategies to address it drawing widespread attention. The Treasury Secretary has asserted that a default on U.S. debt is impossible, while the government has implemented three main measures: increasing tariffs, soliciting donations from the public, and establishing a "Department of Government Efficiency" to cut spending [1]. Group 1: Tariff Increases - The increase in tariffs is a response to the global trade war initiated by the Trump administration, which has reportedly led to a rise in U.S. fiscal revenue. In June, the fiscal surplus exceeded $27 billion, a 301% increase year-over-year, marking the first surplus over $100 billion since 2017 [3]. - However, the long-term impact of tariff increases is limited, as the costs are ultimately borne by U.S. consumers and importers. This approach does not fundamentally improve the fiscal situation, making it unrealistic to rely on tariffs to reduce the national deficit [3]. Group 2: Public Donations - The Trump administration's initiative to solicit public donations for debt repayment has gained attention, reviving a program from 1996 that allows citizens to contribute towards reducing national debt. Despite the program's revival, it has raised only $67.3 million over nearly 30 years, which is negligible compared to the current national debt of over $36.72 trillion [4]. - Given the rapid increase in national debt, which grows by approximately $55,000 every second, the donations collected are insufficient to make a meaningful impact on debt reduction [4]. Group 3: Government Efficiency Department - The establishment of the "Department of Government Efficiency" aims to cut government spending, but it faces significant challenges. Many government departments are not cooperating, hindering the department's effectiveness [6]. - Additionally, the introduction of the "Big and Beautiful" bill, which is expected to add $3.4 trillion in debt, creates a contradiction between spending cuts and increased expenditures. Even if the efficiency department successfully reduces some unnecessary spending, it is unlikely to close the substantial debt gap [6]. Conclusion - Overall, the effectiveness of the Trump administration's three proposed measures—tariff increases, public donations, and spending cuts—has been minimal. The enormity of the national debt and its continuous growth render these strategies ineffective, raising concerns about the potential consequences of the looming debt crisis [6].