The financial position we should we take to protect our families now that Trump won big

So, what financial position should we take now that Trump won the election, has the Supreme Court leaning right, has most of the Governors, held onto the House, won back the Senate, and won the popular vote? To answer this, I’m going to force myself to look at things in order and then try to boil each one down to a “one-liner.” Here we go.

Who is Trump? Well, as I look at his entire life, I can summarize him this way:

“Trump is a pro-growth businessman who regularly used leverage (debt) throughout his career.”

That’s my first one-liner. Let’s move on.

What is Trump proposing? He correctly believes that we grow the economy by reducing the money bureaucrats siphon out of the productive economy. During his campaign he proposed a long list of tax cuts including extending the Tax Cut and Jobs Act tax cuts, allowing companies to immediately expense capital improvement and R&D expenses, eliminating taxes on tips, exempting firemen, active military personnel, and police officers from paying taxes, eliminating taxes on overtime pay, eliminating taxes on social security benefits, decreasing capital gains tax rates, lowering corporate tax, etc. He doesn’t believe that tariffs are taxes so increasing tariffs doesn’t conflict with cutting taxes in his mind. Therefore, I can summarize what he proposes this way:

“Trump believes in dramatically cutting taxes.”

We’ll hold that one-liner along with the first one-liner for later. Let’s move on.

What will cutting taxes do?

“Cutting taxes will reduce the tax revenues for the government.”

That was an easy one-liner. Let’s move on.

What will less tax revenues mean?

“Less revenues mean that the government will need funding from some other source.”

That was another obvious one-liner. Let’s move on.

Where will the government get that funding?

Our government always spends way more than it takes in (deficit spending). So, it borrows the rest from other countries and pays those countries interest. Countries need U.S. dollars because the world uses dollars as the world’s reserve currency as per an international agreement cemented after WWII (1944 Brenton Woods Conference). The dollar being the world’s reserve currency is a huge advantage to the us. And since everyone trades in dollars and store dollars, they need our dollars. And so selling treasuries is how our government has always made up the deficit between tax revenues and overspending, until recently. Something horrible happened during the Ukraine war. Biden broke those international agreements, kicked Russia off the SWIFT system that allows countries to trade back and forth in dollars, and weaponized the world’s reserve currency by stealing $300 billion of Russia’s reserves, reserves denominated in U.S. dollars. Yes, we all oppose Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, but the U.S. also invades other sovereign nations. Anyway, the rest of the world’s countries naturally got worried when they saw what Biden did. If the U.S. could just steal the reserves of other nations, the U.S. might one day steal their money. They decided to all meet in Russia (BRICKS Summit) last month and work together to trade in their own currencies and de-dollarize. This means much less demand for our dollars and thus less ability for us to borrow from others. Without other countries lending us money, our Federal Reserve is going to have to print all the dollars needed to cover our deficit. And the deficit is huge (about $2 trillion/ year and growing). This means that our federal government spends $2 trillion more than it collects in taxes each year. And Trump’s tax cuts will increase this gap. Soon, every dollar we pay in taxes will only cover the interest on our growing $36 trillion dollar debt. That means our entire government will be funded by printing dollars out of thin air. It’s time for a one-liner:

“Our government will soon be funded solely by printing dollars.”

So, what’s the problem? Can’t we just print as many dollars as we need? The answer is yes, we can. But every dollar we print reduces the purchasing power of all other dollars in the world, including the dollars in your pocket and in your bank accounts. Inflation (inflating the money supply) means that your money buys less and less and less over time. Anyone who has shopped for groceries over the past few years knows this. And worse, inflation is cumulative. Even though the inflation rate might come down, inflation doesn’t. Price increases are simply tacked on to past price increases. And this will get worse with the very unlikely and rare combination of Biden breaking our international agreements followed by Trump’s tax cuts. Time for another one-liner:

“The government will find difficulty in paying for its overspending by borrowing due to Biden’s piracy and so will be forced to debase our currency.”

But can’t Elon Musk cut government enough so that it spends less than it collects in taxes? I can write another article to support my thinking on this, but my short answer is “No way.” The problem with having a bloated government is that it is just that… it’s bloated. And the thing that is wrong with it also makes it powerful. It’s too big. OK, one-liner time:

“Elon Musk can’t cut government faster than our national debt is growing.”

The U.S. dollar has already lost 99% of its purchasing power in the past 100 years. What you could buy for a dollar back then, now takes $100. And the very odd combination of Biden followed by Trump will increase the speed at which the dollar heads to zero, just as all fiat currencies have gone throughout human history. Time for another one-liner:

“The purchasing power of our dollars is going to go down, faster.”

And so finally, how should we position ourselves to best protect our families? The answer is to get out of the dollar, drain your savings accounts, and buy assets. Here is a short list in order

  • In the very short term, buy crypto currencies that have a cap on the number in existence. Furthermore, Trump said he will create a strategic reserve of Bitcoin. But don’t stay with this trade very long. It is pure speculation.

  • Equities. Stock in a company is partial ownership in that company and all its assets. During the hyperinflation in Germany’s Weimar Republic, stocks were a good inflation hedge.

  • Precious metals, especially gold. All the gold ever mined in human history fits into two Olympic-sized swimming pools. It is getting more expensive to find and get out of the ground. Also, the world’s central banks don’t store Bitcoin or stocks or diamonds. Their vaults are full of gold.

  • Real estate. They aren’t making any more. You get to tell the IRS that your real estate is depreciating, while in reality, it is appreciating. Trump explained this to Hillary Clinton in their presidential debate. And real estate pays a monthly dividend… rent.

For more wealth storage ideas, read Wealth Storage for Home Inspectors - InterNACHI®

Time for a one-liner:

“Invest in things that can’t be printed.”

Now let’s make a summary using all our one-liners in order:

Trump is a pro-growth businessman who isn’t opposed to debt. He believes in dramatically cutting taxes. Cutting taxes will reduce revenues for the government. Less revenues mean that the government will need funding from some other source. Our government will soon be funded solely by printing dollars because it will find difficulty in paying for its overspending by borrowing, due to Biden’s piracy. The Federal Reserve has no choice. It will be forced to debase our currency. Elon Musk can’t cut government faster than our national debt is growing. And the purchasing power of our dollars is going to go down. So, invest in things that can’t be printed.

Nick Gromicko, 11/7/24

7 Likes

Nick… Thanks for your thoughts.

1 Like

I think this is the key here. I see Trump as someone who will forgo long term effects in exchange for quick short term gains. Especially since he has to rebuild and solidify his legacy in just 4 short years. Hopefully he doesn’t get too careless and the guardrails in place keep him somewhat contained.

3 Likes

I see the Democrats as people who will inflict short-term pain for enduring long-term pain. Handing out short ladders to everyone with the exception of the donor/ruling class.

The last Democrat who who tried not to do this was actually a Republican, Bill Clinton. He would be considered right wing today.

2 Likes

Out of curiosity, would this advice and list have been different had Kamala won? If so, what would be the differences?

1 Like

You are falling into the false zero-sum paradigm that if you reduce $1 in taxes it increases debt by $1. If you reduce taxes and the velocity of money does not change in a stagnant economy, then you increase debt. However, in a vibrant, growing, economy, when I use a $1 to buy something, the company that received that $1 buys more supplies or equipment and hires more workers, and so forth. Those vendors and workers have more income, buy more stuff, and so forth. The speed at which that $1 changes hands is called the “velocity of money.” The faster the money moves the more tax revenue for the government.

2 Likes

A drop in the bucket compared to the $2 trillion the debt is growing by every year. Musk can’t help fast enough either. It’s a snowball at this point.

A big difference. She said specifically that she was going to crash the stock market by taxing unrealized gains. She even admitted she would force the most sales of stock to pay for those taxes by targeting the rich who have the most stocks. Remember, if the rich have to sell stocks to pay tax on unrealized gains, it crashes the market for all of us. We’re all in the same stock market. Even Mark Cuban, her supporter explained this.

And being a government insider, she’d outlaw crypto. No way would she permit a free competitor to the dollar or worse, a central bank digital currency where she could watch every single transaction you make to not only tax it, but approve or disapprove every purchase you make.

So my list wouldn’t include equities or crypto if she won.

1 Like

More revenue for many state governments for sure, as they charge sales tax which is a tax on transactions, not profit or income.

Every sale is income and hopefully profit for someone that is (of course) taxed by the federal government (as well some states).

One of Trump’s first priorities is to reduce energy costs, which is key to rolling back some of the recent inflation and making everyone more confident about the future. Part of that is allowing more drilling / exploration, but also making it easier to export natural gas and build nuclear power plants. Another top priority (of course) is to at least slow down with the goal of stopping the printing of money, which we can do by reducing government waste (including entitlements) while growing the economy.

No, sales aren’t federally-taxable income ever. Yes, sales hopefully, but not always, lead to taxable profit.

The only thing I see Trump doing that is deflationary is eliminating tax on overtime. In my own construction company, my employees said they would work more overtime if that comes to pass. So it increases productivity, producing more products and services, and that is deflationary.

A.I. is also deflationary as it increases production, but I left that out of the article as it had nothing to do with the difference in candidates.

Inflation is going to make a comeback.

1 Like

I agree, and soon the interest paid on the debt will be more than the Military budget.

I wonder if Musk would be willing to take a page out of the Clinton playbook to balance the budget, after all, he’s arguably one of the smartest people alive today and the Clinton plan not only worked, it paid down the debt, unfortunately Bush erased it all with his tax cut and sunk us back into deficit spending.

I doubt Musk would, as it would raise his own taxes, not that he would miss a few hundred million dollars.

But hope springs eternal. :grinning:

1 Like

seriously? (well, he did sign it. Credit given there)

https://www.cato.org/commentary/no-bill-clinton-didnt-balance-budget

Newt Gingrich and company — for all their faults — have received virtually no credit for balancing the budget. Yet today’s surplus is, in part, a byproduct of the GOP’s single-minded crusade to end 30 years of red ink. Arguably, Gingrich’s finest hour as Speaker came in March 1995 when he rallied the entire Republican House caucus behind the idea of eliminating the deficit within seven years.


Skeptics said it could not be done in seven years. The GOP did it in four.

Now let us contrast this with the Clinton fiscal record. Recall that it was the Clinton White House that fought Republicans every inch of the way in balancing the budget in 1995.

Tom Delay was right: for Clinton to take credit for the balanced budget is like Chicago Cubs pitcher Steve Trachsel taking credit for delivering the pitch to Mark McGuire that he hit out of the park for his 62nd home run.

2 Likes

This is my support for cutting corporate taxes. Booming economy erases many errors.

An equally if not more powerful influence was the booming economy and huge gains in the stock markets, the so-called dot-com bubble, which brought in hundreds of millions in unanticipated tax revenue from taxes on capital gains and rising salaries.

Then using that logic, the great economy touted under the previous Trump administration was brought about because of the Dem controlled congress, and the disasterous economy under Biden was the fault of a Rep Congress.

It depends. But you and I were both adults during the Clinton years and Gingrich had a mandate. I remember it pretty well.

1 Like

Taxes were increased, not cut, during the Clinton Boom.

You conveniently left an equally important part of the paragraph out of your quote above.
The Budget and Deficit Under Clinton - FactCheck.org

The Clinton years showed the effects of a large tax increase that Clinton pushed through in his first year, and that Republicans incorrectly claim is the “largest tax increase in history.” It fell almost exclusively on upper-income taxpayers. Clinton’s fiscal 1994 budget also contained some spending restraints.

The stock market gains of the 90s (dot com) was only marginally better than the recent market gains, yet we have nearly a 2 trillion dollar deficit today.

We need to either raise taxes, lower spending, or both, which is what Clinton did, followed by Bush lowering taxes. See the chart below for the consequences of the actions of both Presidents.

But regardless, thanks for making my point about how revenue from increased taxes can help lower the deficit. :wink:

As a start, how about:

Cut government across the board by 10%.

Tax everyone at 10% no deductions.

2 Likes

I’m game Larry.

But I had heard about this. flat tax in europe failed - Google Search

Possibly the no deductions you mentioned could be the remedy for those wanting to cheat the system.