Business

Subterms

    Latest story

    238 Shares67 Views

    Fox Corp chief told Sean Hannity that Trump could not go on air in 2020 if he attacked network

    by

    New revelations about the tense relationship between Fox News and Donald Trump in the fall of 2020 have emerged in a trove of thousands of court documents released on Sunday as part of a massive defamation lawsuit filed against the network by voting technology company Smartmatic.One exchange showed that Lachlan Murdoch, the chief executive of Fox News parent company Fox Corp, told star anchor Sean Hannity in a 1 October 2020 text chain that Trump could not appear on Fox again if he attacked the network.“Sean, sorry, but the president is not coming back on air if he uses it to attack us,” Murdoch wrote to a group that also included his father, Rupert, and Fox News CEO Suzanne Scott. “It is the same rule we have with the other side. This is a golden rule,” signing the message with “Thx L.” (In a 1 October 2020 interview with Hannity, Trump said Fox was “a much different place than it used to be”.)Hannity’s response to Murdoch’s message was redacted. The situation got worse in the wake of the 2020 presidential election, when many Fox News supporters turned against the network, including Trump himself, leading to something of an existential crisis at the long-dominant channel.In a separate correspondence after the November 2020 presidential election, after many Trump supporters had grown angry at Fox News over its call of the state of Arizona for Joe Biden, Hannity acknowledged the anger from the president’s side. “Trump people hate Fox,” he wrote to a producer. “Hate hate hate.”While Fox publicly stood behind its Arizona call in the face of internal and external blowback, according to a 6 November 2020 email from Scott, Lachlan Murdoch said that Fox should consider reversing its call of the state of Arizona for Biden if his margin fell below 1% of the vote. “I’m not recommending we do that at this time,” Scott said.The documents released on Sunday are copies of the exhibits that were cited in previous filings between the parties. They include both longer versions of previously cited conversations and many new internal text messages and email exchanges that have not previously been made public.In a previously unreported 23 November 2020 email to his son, Rupert Murdoch suggested they chat about the viewer backlash against Fox News. “Getting killed in audience numbers,” he wrote. “All day long. We have to keep our nerve but worth a discussion. Won’t hurt subscriber revenue, but will soon cut into [advertisements].” Lachlan Murdoch wrote that he would call his father the following morning. “Agree re FNC,” he wrote. “Keeping me awake at night.”In another previously unreported 21 January 2021 email to his son Lachlan, Rupert wrote that he was “still getting criticism for [Fox News Channel]. Saying leading voices encouraged stolen election bullshit and pushed Jan 6 rally.” In the same thread, Murdoch talked about ousting business network host Lou Dobbs. “Just take him off the air and negotiate later,” he wrote. Dobbs’s show was cancelled the following month.The elder Murdoch also talked about hiring former Democratic National Committee chair Donna Brazile, saying that it’s “hard to attack a Black woman”.The documents released on Sunday also included a version of Smartmatic’s deposition of Rupert Murdoch. When asked by a Smartmatic lawyer whether he took any steps “to make sure that hosts with shows on Fox News Media did not endorse claims about the 2020 election being stolen,” Rupert Murdoch responded: “No. No.”“I was very happy [with] the way Fox News was handling it,” Rupert Murdoch said of the network’s post-election coverage.Rupert Murdoch also acknowledged that Fox News made a decision to “pivot” after the election by “moving away from our support of Trump”. But he said it was difficult to do so. “Our very large audience tended to be Trump supporters,” he said. “We didn’t want to upset them totally. That, we did before. They’d been attacking us.”Murdoch also affirmed that he believed Trump’s claims of a stolen election contributed to the January 6 US Capitol attack – though he denied it was a “riot” and said it was “intended to be just be a rally outside the Capitol”.In his own deposition, Lachlan Murdoch said he didn’t think Fox News did anything to “endorse” claims of election fraud made by Trump’s supporters. He also re-affirmed the journalistic value of covering the president’s election fraud claims. “I can’t imagine a more newsworthy story than the sitting president of the United States calling into question the election results,” he said, according a transcript of his deposition.“We did not make the allegations against Smartmatic. The president and his lawyers and associates made the allegations against Smartmatic,” Lachlan Murdoch said. “We reported those allegations, which I believe were incredibly newsworthy. So we did not make an apology for reporting the sitting president’s allegations about a voting system.”Smartmatic was indicted by the Department of Justice last month as part of an investigation into bribery in the Philippines. The company denies the charges, calling the indictment “targeted, political, and unjust”.Fox News has strenuously denied Smartmatic’s claims and said the company has vastly overstated its value.“The evidence shows that Smartmatic’s business and reputation were badly suffering long before any claims by President Trump’s lawyers on Fox News and that Smartmatic grossly inflated its damage claims to generate headlines and chill free speech,” a Fox News spokesperson said. “Now, in the aftermath of Smartmatic being criminally charged with bribery in the Philippines and the Government’s motion to include evidence of Smartmatic’s business dealings in Venezuela and Los Angeles County, we are eager and ready to continue defending our press freedoms.”Fox had petitioned the judge in the case to delay the trial, pending the criminal case against Smartmatic, but on Monday that effort was denied.“Today’s decision is an important victory for Smartmatic as we progress in our efforts to hold Fox accountable for its lies,” a Smartmatic spokesperson said. “The court made clear that Fox’s attempts to delay accountability won’t work, and its day of reckoning is coming.”Both parties are tentatively scheduled to argue their case for summary judgement next month. More

    More stories

    • 175 Shares83 Views

      in US Politics

      Americans are feeling the pain of the affordability crisis: ‘There’s not any wiggle room’

      by

      Frozen dinners were useful when no one was home to cook. A fancy cheese or apple roll felt like a family treat. But not any more. “We can’t afford to do those little luxuries any more because they’re just too expensive to feed five with,” says Cat Hill. “There’s not any wiggle room.”The 43-year-old from Hornby, New York, has been hit by both higher grocery prices and rising costs for her small business running a horse stable. Under Donald Trump, she worries it may get even harder. “With this administration, it doesn’t appear to be stabilising,” she adds. “It’s hard to think about how exactly we are going to ride this out.”Hill is among millions of people feeling the pain of the US’s affordability crisis. The costs of groceries, housing, childcare, education and healthcare have become intolerable to many, who in turn put the blame on politicians. As Thanksgiving approaches, it appears that the US president is belatedly waking up to the problem and scrambling for answers.During last year’s election campaign, Trump was all too conscious of the political utility of the high cost of living. He promised voters that he would bring down prices “starting on day one”. But two days after winning, he changed course by remarking: “Our groceries are way down. Everything is way down … So I don’t want to hear about the affordability.”Much of the first year of Trump’s second term was then dominated by his trade wars, his draconian crackdown on illegal immigration, his decision to send national guard troops into American cities and the longest government shutdown in history.But voters had other concerns. Prices rose in five of the six main grocery groups tracked in the consumer price index from January to September. These include meats, poultry and fish (up 4.5%), non-alcoholic beverages (up 2.8%) and fruits and vegetables (up 1.3%).Officials at the Federal Reserve have long been clear that Trump’s tariffs caused inflation, though it is uncertain how long the effects will last. Consumer prices had been increasing at an annual rate of 2.3% in April when Trump launched the import taxes and that rate accelerated to 3% in September.Adding insult to injury, even as the shutdown deepened the financial woes of many, Trump launched remodeling projects including a gilded ballroom attached to the White House and threw a Great Gatsby-themed party at his luxurious Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida.Tara Setmayer, co-founder and chief executive of the Seneca Project, a women-led Super Pac, said: “The ads write themselves [for the midterm elections] in 2026 when you have a president who promised to make the American people’s lives better – and who was supposed to be a champion of the working class and not of the elite – bragging repeatedly from his gilded Oval Office while military families are on food bank lines.“It’s so tone-deaf and so ‘let them eat cake’ it’s hard to believe that he’s serious about this but he is and keeps constantly doing this. It screams: ‘I don’t give a damn about everyday people,’ and his base is beginning to wake up to the fact that perhaps he doesn’t care about us.”The shutdown froze the collection of the most recent data but it is clear that people feel like prices are too high. Consumer sentiment dropped to a near record low in November, going from 71.8 out of 100 in November 2024 to 51, according to the University of Michigan’s Surveys of Consumers.View image in fullscreenJoanne Hsu, the director of the survey and an economist at the University of Michigan, said that even while concerns over tariffs have started to level off, consumers are still experiencing higher prices.Consumers “are continuing to be very frustrated by these high prices”, Hsu said. “They feel like those high prices are eroding their living standard, and they just don’t feel like they’re thriving at the end of the day.”It was against this backdrop that Republicans were blindsided by this month’s elections when Democrats swept the board from New York to Virginia with a message laser-focused on affordability. Economic worries were the dominant concern for voters, according to the AP Voter Poll.Trump entered a period of denial. He posted on social media: “Affordability is a lie when used by the Dems. It is a complete CON JOB. Thanksgiving costs are 25% lower this year than last, under Crooked Joe! We are the Party of Affordability!”But he was also stung into action. He conceded that some consumer costs are “a little bit higher” and floated some half-formed ideas to ease financial pressures. He said he may stretch the 30-year mortgage to 50 years to reduce the size of monthly payments.He partially backtracked on tariffs, a core part of his economic agenda, reducing levies on imports of products such as coffee, beef and tropical fruit, admitting they “may, in some cases” have contributed to higher prices.Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, said: “The fact that Trump decided to lower tariffs on coffee and bananas is a complete admission that across the economy he is jacking up prices on millions of families. That was a big tell and Democrats should be exploiting that.“Every Democrat should be going to a supermarket pointing to bananas and coffee on social media and saying, if you see prices come down, that is Trump admitting that he’s jacking up prices everywhere: your car, your baby diapers, your other foods.”Trump also proposed a $2,000 dividend, funded by tariff revenue, for all Americans except the rich. This could take the form of a cheque bearing his signature, reminiscent of stimulus cheques he sent to millions of Americans during the Covid-19 pandemic.But Republicans on Capitol Hill were distinctly sceptical about the idea at a time when the federal government is burdened by debt, warning that the Trump cheques could fuel even further inflation.It might be too little too late. In a recent Fox News poll, 76% of respondents had a negative view of the state of the economy – down 9% since July. In a Marquette University survey, 72% disapproved of Trump’s handling of inflation and the cost of living. And in a Reuters/Ipsos poll, 65% of respondents, including a third of Republicans, disapproved of Trump’s handling of the cost of living.On Monday, Trump used a summit sponsored by McDonald’s to insist the economy was moving in the right direction and cast blame on his predecessor, Joe Biden. “We had the highest, think of it, the highest inflation in the history of our country,” he said.“Now we have normal inflation. We’re going to get it a little bit lower, frankly, but we have normal, we’ve normalized it, we have it down to a low level, but we’re going to get it a little bit lower. We want perfection.”But Trump’s troubles might be giving voters a feeling of déjà vu. Biden tried to convince Americans that the economy was strong. “Bidenomics is working,” he said in a 2023 speech. “Today, the US has had the highest economic growth rate, leading the world economies since the pandemic.”His arguments did little to sway voters as only 36% of adults in August 2023 approved of his handling of the economy, according to a poll at the time by the Associated Press-Norc Center for Public Affairs Research.Now Trump is leaning on a message that echoes Biden’s claims in 2021 that elevated inflation is simply a “transitory” problem that will soon disappear. “We’re going to be hitting 1.5% pretty soon,” he told reporters earlier this month. ”It’s all coming down.”But Jared Bernstein, a former chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisers under Biden, disputes the notion that Biden and Trump were equally guilty of downplaying inflation. He said: “We were talking past people. They’re telling people things that are false. In terms of ineffective messaging, those are equivalent. In terms of truthfulness, one is is honest and the other is false.”Bernstein, now a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress thinktank, added: “They’re making a very consequential mistake, which is strongly, loudly asserting that people are better off than they know they are. What’s fascinating about all this to me is that Donald Trump believes, correctly, that he has a superpower. He can get his followers to believe whatever reality he puts out there, and that’s worked for him for a very long time but it won’t work on this. Affordability is kryptonite to his superpower because his followers know which way is up when it comes to prices.” More

    • 125 Shares50 Views

      in US Politics

      Meet the conservative lawyer causing headaches for major news networks

      by

      In just 14 months, Daniel Suhr, the 40-year-old president of a two-person, Chicago-based, conservative legal organization called the Center for American Rights, has emerged as a thorn in the side of the major US broadcast news networks at a time when they face both financial and political vulnerabilities.Suhr has had a key ally in Brendan Carr, who was hand-picked by Donald Trump to serve as the chair of the powerful Federal Communications Commission (FCC) as the Trump administration has sought new avenues to take on the mainstream media. Carr has resuscitated several complaints that were filed by Suhr and dismissed at the end of Joe Biden’s administration and has seemingly factored in Suhr’s suggestions when reviewing media mergers.One of those complaints, in October 2024, dealt with the editing of a 60 Minutes interview with then vice-president Kamala Harris. It preceded by about two weeks a $10bn lawsuit by Trump against CBS that made similar claims and upended the political-media world for the next nine months. Suhr’s complaint led to CBS’s unprecedented decision to release the full, unedited transcript and video library from the Harris interview under pressure from Carr. And when Carr’s FCC ultimately approved Paramount’s long-delayed merger with Skydance Media in July, it included conditions that Suhr had asked for: the appointment of an ombudsman to handle complaints of bias at CBS News and the elimination of all diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.“I think the commission did a great job in the final order,” Suhr said in a recent sit-down with the Guardian. “The commission’s order said that Paramount committed to news that was ‘fair, unbiased, and fact-based.’ I think those are great words. I would love to see all of our news be fair, unbiased and fact-based. I think that articulation of the standard is in many ways the fruition of what started with the one complaint.”It’s all a bit of a whirlwind for Suhr, who filed his first media complaint in September 2024. Critics of the way that Carr has used the commission’s limited regulatory oversight over the content of television networks to exert pressure have some questions – and some concerns – about how Suhr suddenly became such a key player in the administration’s regulatory apparatus, even as they say he’s very pleasant to deal with.“When you talk to him, he seems like a very reasonable, very articulate, smart guy,” said Gigi Sohn, a longtime consumer advocate who was nominated by former president Joe Biden to serve on the FCC but did not ultimately do so. “It’s just kind of curious that this person has come out of nowhere and is so active and is so tied with the chair. I think it raises questions that should be answered.”One of those questions is whether Suhr is taking his cues directly from Carr, who shares his belief that the mainstream media is biased in favor of Democrats.Over coffee recently in Washington DC, where Suhr had traveled to attend a dinner hosted by the conservative Federalist Society, he sought to explain how exactly his organization became a central actor in the conservative case against alleged bias in the media – and how he became what Sohn called “a cog in the Carr wheel”, though Suhr sees it differently.While Suhr said he’s a “big fan” of Carr, he pushed back on the notion that he works hand-in-glove with him. “I don’t run my complaints by [Carr] ahead of time,” he said. “I don’t run my complaints by his staff ahead of time.”Still, it’s undeniable that Suhr “has the ear of FCC Chairman Brendan Carr on a number of policy issues,” as former telecommunications association executive Ted Hearn wrote last week, noting that he had endorsed the $34.5bn merger between Charter Communications and Cox Communications.Suhr said he has only met Carr once – though he did not disclose that his one meeting had occurred just hours before meeting with the Guardian for an interview. Carr posted a photo of the two of them on X, writing that Suhr is “doing fantastic work advancing the public interest in media policy”. (Carr did not respond to a text message seeking further comment about Suhr.)Asked about it later, Suhr explained the visit as just a “get-to-know-you” session – they didn’t talk about pending cases, which means there won’t be an official notice of their meeting – just a photo that Carr posted on X.In late September 2024, Suhr filed a complaint against ABC over its handling of the presidential debate it hosted between Trump and Harris. There was also a complaint against NBC over a pre-election appearance by Harris on Saturday Night Live,which Suhr argued was a violation of the equal time rule.Both complaints were closed at the end of Biden’s term by then-FCC chair Jessica Rosenworcel and then reopened by Carr – though the chair chose not to bring back a petition to deny a local Fox station a license because of the Fox News Channel’s coverage of the 2020 election.“The dismissals by the FCC were so obviously correct under established precedent that I became a little curious about who would be dumb enough to file these things,” said Robert Corn-Revere, a first amendment litigator for the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, when asked how he first became aware of Suhr. “There is no reason whatsoever for these proceedings to still be open and there was never a basis for them to be open in the first place.” (“[Corn-Revere] is entitled to his opinion,” Suhr responded. “I think our results speak for themselves.”)When ABC indefinitely suspended late-night TV host Jimmy Kimmel’s show on 17 September Suhr was all over that as well. Earlier that day, he had filed a complaint to the FCC seeking consequences for ABC unless Kimmel’s show was taken off the air. That followed another complaint about two weeks earlier accusing Kimmel of using his show to benefit Democrats.Critics wonder whether Carr is keeping the complaints open to serve as a potential pressure point for networks – like NBC owner Comcast – that might need the FCC’s blessing for future transactions.Despite their issues with Suhr’s filings, which often allege violations of the FCC’s poorly defined “news distortion” standard, both Sohn and Corn-Revere acknowledged that there is nothing unusual about an outside organization filing motions that are aligned with an FCC chair’s priorities. But, Corn-Revere said, “I’ve just never seen it to be this sort of open and obvious as is going on now.”While he’s relatively new to taking on the media, Suhr is no stranger to politics. After graduating with a law degree in 2008, Suhr spent several years managing the Federalist Society’s law school chapters before joining the administration of Scott Walker, the Republican former Wisconsin governor . He then became a public interest lawyer, working for an organization called the Liberty Justice Center before forming the Center for American Rights with his partner Patrick Hughes. It was Hughes, who leads CAR’s board, who first suggested that Suhr should look into ways to combat what he saw as mainstream media misinformation after watching the ABC News-hosted presidential debate in September.“It was an unfair debate – the moderators were clearly in favor of the Democrats – and it made me think: ‘How can this be?’” Hughes recalled. “And so I said to Daniel: ‘We’ve got to do something about this. What are the standards under which the FCC regulates this?’ Because it can’t be right.”Hughes said he’s been pleased with the impact that Suhr has been able to have. “He’s brilliant,” he said. “He’s a terrific person and a fabulous lawyer and he’s doing a great job.”Sohn agreed that Suhr has “obviously been very successful” in his efforts.Suhr’s complaint against CBS is still open, even though the relief sought – forcing the network to release the 60 Minutes transcript – was already granted months ago. When asked recently why the FCC has not acted on complaints, Carr said they are still being investigated.Either way, Suhr is feeling better about CBS News these days, particularly after the selection of Bari Weiss as editor-in-chief and the appointment of a prominent Washington conservative, Kenneth R Weinstein, as ombudsman.“We appreciate the change that is happening. We applaud it. We’re going to continue to be vigilant for consumers, but so far I’ve been thrilled,” Suhr said. “We just want journalists to be better journalists.” More

    • 175 Shares111 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump’s ‘affordability’ efforts are a mess of absurdity and magical thinking | Steven Greenhouse

      by

      When running for president last year, Donald Trump wooed and wowed voters by vowing to reduce prices “starting on day one”. But once he was inaugurated, he seemed to pay precious little attention to prices and affordability.All that changed, however, when inflation-weary voters thrashed Trump and the GOP on election day this month – within days, the Trump administration launched a slapdash effort to focus on affordability. Unfortunately, the campaign is a hot mess: a pile of absurdity, contradictions, magical thinking, scapegoating and good ol’ Trumpian dishonesty, with Trump repeatedly blaring that “prices are down”.Two days after election day, Trump got his administration’s affordability drive off to a disastrous start when he said, “Our groceries are way down. Everything is way down … So I don’t want to hear about the affordability.”With those words, billionaire Trump – who spends a lot of time palling around with fellow billionaires – showed utter contempt for the millions of Americans who struggle with affordability every time they go the grocery store. Trump told them they got it all wrong. He told them that they shouldn’t bother him about the trivial issue of affordability when he has bigger things to worry about, such as, perhaps, his obsession with winning the Nobel peace prize. Trump in effect said: I don’t feel your pain.Trump’s statement about everything being “way down” was absurdly obtuse and dishonest. How in the world could every price be way down when his cherished tariffs were pushing up prices? Banana prices are up 6.9% over the past year, beef is up 14.7% and coffee up 18.9% (in part because of the huge, punitive tariffs Trump placed on Brazil’s coffee and beef). Between January and September, prices rose in five of the six main grocery groups tracked in the Consumer Price Index, including meats, poultry and fish (up 4.5%); non-alcoholic beverages (up 2.8%); and fruits and vegetables (up 1.3%).Despite these numbers, Trump keeps pushing his big lie about affordability. Since election day, he has said there’s “virtually no inflation”, “prices are way down” and “it is far less expensive under Trump than it was under sleepy Joe Biden”. Trump said all this even though prices overall have unarguably risen since Biden left office. Right now, inflation is running at a 3% annual clip, which is 50% higher than the Federal Reserve’s 2% goal. In another falsehood, Trump boasted that gas prices have fallen to nearly $2 a gallon, even though his Department of Energy says they average $3.19.Hit in the head by reality (and declining opinion polls), some Trump aides evidently told the Maga king that his “prices are down” rhetoric made him sound dangerously out of touch with typical Americans, many of whom are angry about prices continuing to climb after Trump promised to bring them down. Trump’s advisers seized on one quick fix to reduce some prices: roll back some of Trump’s beloved tariffs. That sensible idea contradicted Trump’s absurd assertion that new tariffs wouldn’t raise prices for US consumers.With some tariffs being rolled back on coffee, beef, tomatoes and bananas along with other tropical fruit, Trump will no doubt trumpet to the world that he’s cut prices as soon as those foods start declining in price. That would be like an arsonist boasting that he put out a fire that he had started.When Trump spoke last Monday to a “summit” of McDonald’s executives and franchisees, he once again showed that he’s out of touch – with typical Americans and the truth. He said, “This is … the golden age of America because we are doing better than we’ve ever done as a country.” He sought to calm angry consumers by adding: “Prices are coming down and all of that stuff.” That’s easy for a billionaire to say, but it’s hard for millions of Americans not to fret about prices “and all of that stuff” and not just because 42 million Americans faced having their food stamps cut off and 24 million face having their health premiums soar, often by over $1,500 a year, because Trump and the Republican-led Congress will not extend Obamacare subsidies.Sorry, Mr President, but Americans strongly disagree with your claim that it’s a golden age. According to a Pew poll in October, 74% of Americans think economic conditions are fair or poor, while just 26% think they are good or excellent. What’s more, according to a CNN poll last month, 61% of Americans say Trump’s policies have “worsened economic conditions in this country”.Scott Bessent, Trump’s treasury secretary, recently contradicted Trump’s boasts of a golden age. Bessent said that far from booming, some parts of the US economy “are in recession”. The manufacturing sector that Trump vowed to save appears to have contracted eight months in a row and lost about 33,000 jobs since January. Pointing to this economic weakness, Bessent called on the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates – a move that would help affordability.Seeing the huge public dismay about affordability, Trump has resorted to one of the oldest tricks in the book. He promised to, in effect, buy off disgruntled Americans, in this case, with “a dividend of at least $2,000 a person (not including high income people!)”. For many struggling Americans, that must sound like manna from heaven, but it’s unlikely that Congress, already alarmed about huge budget deficits, will enact that idea.Trump’s statement that the $2,000 won’t go to “high-income people!” feels like a confession that his “big, beautiful bill” gave far too much in tax cuts to the rich and too little to everyone else. It also shows that the public’s complaints are hitting home that Trump has become the president by, for and of the billionaires.In a recent speech, Bessent said that the administration is “improving affordability” by holding down spending, noting that this helps hold down interest rates. But Trump’s proposed $2,000-a-person payment would undercut all that. It would increase federal spending and thereby push up interest rates and probably inflation, too, by putting more money in consumers’ pockets.In another supposed fix for affordability, Trump put forward the hare-brained idea of creating 50-year mortgages, with the notion that this would help reduce monthly mortgage payments. But the truth is that 50-year mortgages, compared with 30-year mortgages, would do little to lower monthly mortgage payments. They would often reduce payments by just $100 or $200 a month. The bad news is that 50-year mortgages would, as David Dayen has written, often more than double the already huge amount of interest that homeowners pay and would greatly slow their accumulation of equity.In their affordability campaign, Trump and his truth-challenged crew are yet again blaming Biden for the country’s economic problems, including rising prices. JD Vance said: “We inherited a disaster from Joe Biden,” while Kush Desai, a White House spokesperson, said, “Cleaning up Joe Biden’s inflation and economic disaster has been a top focus for President Trump since day 1.”This is absurd, untruthful rubbish. As I’ve written, Biden handed Trump a very strong economy, with inflation way down, economic growth strong and unemployment low. But Trump’s policies, especially his tariffs, have created an economic mess, pushing up prices and slowing GDP growth.Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, says that 22 states are already in recession, with their economies damaged by Trump’s tariffs. Zandi fears that if big states like California and New York tumble into recession, the US could slide into a broad economic slump. During recessions, consumers overall have less money to spend, and inflation typically declines. Unfortunately, with Trump’s much-ballyhooed affordability campaign likely to do little to hold down prices, his most effective “tool” in achieving increased affordability could prove to be pushing the nation into recession.That’s something that struggling Americans really can’t afford.

      Steven Greenhouse is a journalist and author, focusing on labor and the workplace, as well as economic and legal issues More

    • 138 Shares74 Views

      in UK Politics

      Why interest rates are likely to be cut after the Budget

      by

      The small drop in the inflation rate – from 3.8 per cent to 3.6 per cent – announced on Wednesday morning is the latest indication that a fourth interest rate cut of the year is expected before the end of 2025.The Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee voted to hold rates at 4 per cent at the start of November, but there is one final vote to come in 2025 – on 18 December.While the BoE governor Andrew Bailey spoke of wanting to see more data before committing to further cuts, the confirmation that inflation has eased slightly is the latest, and biggest, indicator that a rates cut is required to get the economy moving once more.There is one more major event on the horizon before the vote: Rachel Reeves’ Budget. But expectations are for this to be similarly disinflationary, meaning a rates cut appears almost a certainty.Data showing a stagnant economyAfter two months at 3.8 per cent – September’s data was lower than the 4 per cent expected – we’ve now seen inflation drop back to the level last seen in June, confirming analysts’ expectations that inflation has peaked. One slight concern will be over food prices, which are rising again after a one-month drop. The Food and Drink Federation noted that “manufacturers are paying nearly 40 per cent more for ingredients and energy than they were in January 2020”, explaining the huge uptick in prices. But the wider inflationary picture points to a rates cut.It’s not just inflation that the BoE look to though, and elsewhere the signs also show that a kickstart is needed.The housing market has been far from firing on all cylinders, with many industry experts noting that buyers and sellers alike are holding off for more certainty around any tax implications, given the past few months has seen everything from reports over a Mansion Tax to the Conservatives claiming they would eliminate stamp duty altogether – a move backed by Kirstie Allsopp.More recently, economic data showed the UK’s GDP growth slowing to just 0.1 per cent across the past three months, with production output in particular dropping.Factor in job vacancies falling to the lowest level of the year and the rate of unemployment hitting 5 per cent for the first time since Covid and it’s clear that businesses are no longer investing to the levels required, just as much as people are not moving or spending as much as needed.Get a free fractional share worth up to £100.Capital at risk.Terms and conditions apply.Go to websiteADVERTISEMENTGet a free fractional share worth up to £100.Capital at risk.Terms and conditions apply.Go to websiteADVERTISEMENTBudget details are keyGiven the factors highlighted above, it would have been unsurprising had the BoE pre-empted some of that most recent data by cutting rates on 6 November. Indeed, they almost did – the vote was split 6-5, with governor Bailey casting the deciding vote to stick rather than twist.Perhaps the biggest reason behind that apparent caution was the Budget, and the lack of clarity over what to expect.That said, tax rises on individuals and more costs for businesses are generally disinflationary.“The upcoming Budget is likely to involve measures specifically designed to push down on inflation in things like energy prices, while the overall degree of fiscal consolidation is also likely to weigh on growth and inflation in the medium term,” explained Luke Bartholomew, an economist at Aberdeen.As noted though, it’s not totally clear what’s coming and any surprises could still have the opposite effect.( More

    • 188 Shares153 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump accused of caving to big business after deal to cut Swiss tariffs to 15%

      by

      Donald Trump agreed to cut US tariffs on Switzerland from 39% to 15% as part of a new trade pact, lowering duties that strained economic ties and hit Swiss exporters.The two countries have signed a “non-binding memorandum of understanding”, the Swiss government announced, following bilateral talks in Washington and intense lobbying by Swiss firms.Critics seized on the announcement as evidence that the White House had put corporate interests ahead of those of struggling Americans, as inflation continues to increase the cost of living nationwide.“While prices for American families are going way up because of Trump’s chaotic tariffs, it’s the billionaires and giant corporations cozying up to Trump that get relief,” Senator Elizabeth Warren, a Massachusetts Democrat, said.Leading Swiss executives met Trump at the White House earlier this month. Rolex, the luxury Swiss watchmaker, also invited the president and a string of his officials to the US Open tennis final in September.Upon arrival, Trump “did ask in jest whether he would have been invited had it not been for the tariffs”, Jean-Frédéric Dufour, the Rolex CEO, later disclosed. This was “a moment that brought a round of laughter all around”, he added.Dufour denied that Rolex had engaged in “any negotiation” with the US over tariffs. The White House dismissed Warren’s criticism as “asinine conspiracy theories”.Trump was gifted a golden table clock by Rolex, which was later spotted on his desk in the Oval Office. Another firm is said to have donated an engraved gold bar.The US trade representative, Jamieson Greer, also confirmed the breakthrough on Friday, telling CNBC, the financial news network, that both sides had “essentially reached a deal”.The Trump administration agreed to limit US tariffs on Switzerland and Liechtenstein “to a maximum of 15%” under the deal, according to a statement from the Swiss government.This brings US tariffs on Switzerland in line with those on the European Union – allowing Swiss exporters the same treatment as rivals in neighboring countries.In return, Switzerland will reduce tariffs “on a range of US products”, the statement said. “In addition to all industrial products, fish and seafood, this includes agricultural products from the US that Switzerland considers non-sensitive.”Swiss officials also committed to granting a series of quotas for US goods that can be exported to Switzerland on a duty-free basis, including 500 tonnes of beef, 1,000 tonnes of bison meat and 1,500 tonnes of poultry.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“The date for implementing these market access concessions will be coordinated with the US to ensure that customs duties are reduced at the same time,” the statement said.This is the latest “framework” trade deal to be struck by Trump and his administration. Unlike formal free trade agreements, which are substantial and can take years to negotiate, these pacts have typically been narrow in focus and light on detail.The precise timing of the implementation, and when the new tariffs and quotas will be enforced, has yet to be finalized.“They’re going to send a lot of manufacturing here to the United States – pharmaceuticals, gold smelting, railway equipment,” Greer claimed on CNBC, “so we’re really excited about that deal and what it means for American manufacturing.”The Swiss government said companies in the country were “planning to make direct investments” in the US worth $200bn “by the end of 2028”. More

    • 125 Shares87 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump administration moves again to dismantle top US consumer watchdog

      by

      The Trump administration has launched its most direct attempt yet to shut down the top US consumer watchdog, arguing the current funding mechanism behind the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is unlawful.Attorneys for the administration claimed in a court filing that the agency “anticipates exhausting its currently available funds in early 2026”, setting the stage for it to be dismantled.The CFPB is legally barred from seeking additional funds from the Federal Reserve, its typical source of funding, the attorneys suggested.Donald Trump’s officials have tried persistently to close the agency, attempting to fire the vast majority of its workforce. These efforts sparked months of legal wrangling.The CFPB has returned more than $21bn to US consumers since it was set up, in the wake of the financial crisis, to shore up oversight of consumer financial firms.The justice department’s office of legal counsel issued an opinion claiming the CFPB cannot draw money from the Fed currently, claiming the “combined earnings of the Federal Reserve System” refers to profits of the Fed, which has operated at a loss since 2022.Several federal judges have previously rejected that argument used by companies attempting to dismiss lawsuits brought by the agency, reported Politico.Russell Vought, the White House office of management and budget director, said in October that he plans to shut down the agency, and that this would take up to three months.The claim was criticized by Democrats, given previous contrary statements from the administration, and court decisions blocking the agency from being shut down.“These comments are particularly concerning given that a federal court has specifically blocked you from illegally shutting down the agency,” wrote Senate banking committee Democrats in a letter to Vought. “Your continued attempts to shutter the CFPB are illegal, and American families stand to pay the price.”Vought has already suspended most of the agency’s work, as the full DC circuit court of appeals is deciding whether to take the case as a lower court order blocked the firings of about 90% of the agency’s staff.The CFPB did not immediately respond to a request for comment. More

    • 175 Shares105 Views

      in UK Politics

      Half of employers could raise prices if cost of hiring goes up in Budget

      by

      Britons might need to be poised for fewer jobs or higher prices once more next year, after a new survey of business owners suggested almost half of them (49 per cent) would be considering hiking them if employment costs are raised again in the Budget.Most firms have been hit at least once this year and several of them from multiple angles, following changes to the minimum wage, National Insurance contributions, rules around packaging costs, the end of business rates relief for some industries and the prospect of lower overseas sales due to tariffs.Those cost pressures, along with widespread uncertainty over what is coming in this month’s Budget, has left some firms holding off on hiring additional workers, even as interest rates have slowly lowered across the year.Now research by Employment Hero and a survey of 1,000 business leaders by One Poll shows that pricing and employment plans are both in the firing line if Rachel Reeves delivers further disappointment.Along with the 49 per cent considering raising, a third (33 per cent) also said they would delay further hiring if the cost of employing people rises again. Almost one in four (24 per cent) also said they would consider making redundancies from existing roles.More than half (59 per cent) of business owners suggested they don’t feel Budget decisions consider the needs of small businesses, while a whopping 86 per cent said they were “concerned” over what the Budget would mean for the company over the longer term.The British Chambers of Commerce (BCC) have repeatedly warned the government against any further raises of business taxes, saying firms couldn’t continue to shoulder more and more of the burden to fix the economy.While Ms Reeves has cited the need for economic growth, experts have argued that her policies are taxes are stifling it.Rising prices contributes to increased inflation, which has been a major issue in the UK over the past few years. While the rate was lower than expected at 3.8 per cent in September, it remains well above the 2 per cent target and an inflationary Budget could add to the damage.While the numbers over potential price rises will be of concern, other data may point to a limiting effect in what actually transpires.Business insurance provider Simply Business released a report on Monday showing fewer small firms who had planned to raise prices in spring actually did so – fewer than half, compared to 74 per cent who had planned to do so.However, that in turns means that absorbing extra costs means profitability shrinks, placing further pressure on those who would normally provide jobs.“The Chancellor has an opportunity to address these challenges by reducing the cost of doing business and providing a platform for growth. Small business owners are calling for the government to reduce Corporation Tax for small profits (15 per cent), reverse or reduce employer NI increases (14 per cent), and provide more support for energy bills (14 per cent),” said Julie Fisher, UK CEO of Simply Business.Kevin Fitzgerald, UK managing director at Employment Hero, added: “When you tax small businesses, you tax everyone. It creates a domino effect – higher costs lead to higher prices, fewer jobs and less money in people’s pockets. Small businesses employ the majority of our workforce. Make life harder for them, and you make it harder for Britain to grow.“The Autumn Budget is an opportunity to learn from past mistakes.” More

    • 150 Shares143 Views

      in US Politics

      Growth in global demand for ‘green’ office buildings slows amid Trump policies

      by

      The growth in global demand for “green” office buildings has slowed after Donald Trump’s assault on environmental protection policies caused a slump in interest in the US, according to a survey of construction industry professionals.Building occupiers and investors across North America and South America expressed significantly lower growth in demand for green commercial buildings, a shift that “seems to be in response to a change in US policy focus”, according to a survey of members of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (Rics). Reported demand across the rest of the world also fell, albeit not as sharply.Residential and commercial buildings together accounted for 34% of global carbon emissions in 2023, according to the UN Environment Programme. The majority of those emissions came from heating, cooling and powering buildings, although about a fifth came from construction.The UN said there was a “critical need for accelerated action in the buildings sector to meet global climate goals”. However, the Rics survey suggested global construction industry professionals were experiencing slower growth in demand.Green buildings can use a range of techniques to cut their environmental impact, ranging from using materials that reduce high-carbon concrete, to cutting water use, cutting heat lost through windows, and using renewable energy. Energy efficiency improvements in particular also help to cut operating costs.Nicholas Maclean, Rics’s acting president, said: “It seems to me that what we’re seeing at the moment might be a blip.“The people who are going to end up using these buildings want them to be sustainable. Everybody, frankly, knows this is the right thing to do.”He added that green office buildings tend to have a “competitive advantage” in attracting higher rents, because of demand from large-scale corporate tenants, in particular.There were still more US respondents to the survey who reported growth in interest in sustainable commercial buildings. However, the balance of building professionals across the continent reporting higher demand fell sharply, from 25% to 11%.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionOutside North and South America, the balance reporting growth in demand was 40%, still down from 48% in 2021, the first year of the survey, but far above the US.Kisa Zehra, Rics’s sustainability analyst, said government policy and regulations have a “huge impact on the confidence of the market”. The Trump administration has made a concerted effort to dismantle a huge range of environmental protections put in place by Republican and Democratic predecessors, undermining confidence in green standards.Rics also highlighted a decline in the number of construction industry professionals who measured their projects’ embodied carbon, such as that emitted in making materials such as steel, glass and concrete, or in the construction process itself. Forty-six percent of construction professionals reported not measuring embodied carbon, up from 34% the year before. Only 16% of respondents said carbon measurement meaningfully informed material choices in project design. More