Hacker News Reader

Comment by esseph | Hacker News Reader

My theory is that he wants to use the sale of US fossil fuels to pay off the debt. Maybe that's bogus, just my uneducated opinion!

(I also think it's incredibly shortsighted)

View on HN

Exporting fossil fuels nets the government <$150 billion per year, while the federal government's debt is >$37 trillion (and growing by trillions per year). It's impossible to expand the sale of fossil fuels enough to make any kind of noticeable dent in the debt.

While 150 Billion isn’t going to solve our deficit issue it will help. By comparison that is almost 3 times the total $$ of military assistance we have provided to Ukraine since the invasion began.

This illuminates how little has been provided to Ukraine more so than the benefit of increasing government revenue by such a modest amount.

It wouldn't cover half of the deficit he's added just this year.

most of that money wasn't cash assistance but the retail value of old military equipment we sent them as a write down, equipment that was already paid for by taxpayers.

In terms of being able to pay off a debt, having more resources (power from wind and fossil fuels) is strictly better than less (just the fossil fuels).

So that's not even remotely economically sound or logical.

In conclusion you're probably right.

I suppose hypothetically if he significantly increased royalties/export fees/whatever and joined OPEC to manipulate the price of oil, it might help.

Obviously that would be crazy.

> if he significantly increased royalties/export fees/whatever and joined OPEC to manipulate the price of oil, it might help

Joining OPEC would subject the United States to production quotas. We're the world's largest oil producer. But we're also the largest consumer.

But, like, even in that eventuality, it would be better for the US to have a bunch of wind power so we can export more oil.

I agree! I'm just brainstorming at this point but it's basically like guessing in a game of Texas Holdem.

>> My theory is that he wants to use the sale of US fossil fuels to pay off the debt

If that were the case, he should be happy for alternative energy projects to free up some fuel for sale.

Why would hamstringing a domestic clean energy project be a good idea in that case? The less gas we use domestically, the more we can sell on the international market.

Eliminating funds for bike paths doesn't make sense either but it's policy.

Singing to the choir on that one.

He passed a major bill that drove up the debt massively recently, he clearly has zero interest in reducing the debt, just convincing rubes that he does.

He doesn't even have to convince his rubes of anything anymore. He can just go "the debt is fixed" and they all instantaneously believe it is. Straight out of Orwell's.

If he cared about the debt he wouldn't have added $4 trillion extra to the debt with the ridiculous One Big Beautiful Bill.

The only debts he want to pay off are those in his personal accounts.

Which would mean US need to consume less so there’s more left to export…

Don't overthink it. I'd bet people in his admin and adjacent to it benefit from the existing fossil fuel regime and will do anything to stall progress on renewables

Trump is a monster who would throw his own children into a furnace if it made him richer.

> Trump is a monster who would throw his own children into a furnace if it made him richer.

While I agree in broad details, his kids seem to be the only people to whom he has any sense of loyalty. Everyone else is expendable.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com