United States Economy

Subterms

    Latest story

    125 Shares28 Views

    A Pro-Trump Community Reckons With Losing a Beloved Immigrant Neighbor

    by

    Voters here in Oregon’s rural Yamhill County have backed Donald Trump for three presidential elections in a row, most recently by a six-point margin. His promises to crack down on immigration resonated in these working-class communities.Then last month ICE detained Moises Sotelo, a beloved but undocumented Mexican immigrant who has lived in the county for 31 years and owns a vineyard management company employing 10 people. Two of his children were born here and are American citizens, and Sotelo was a pillar of his church and won a wine industry award — yet he was detained for five weeks and on Friday was deported to Mexico, his family said.“Moises’s story just really shook our community,” Elise Yarnell Hollamon, the City Council president in Newberg, Sotelo’s hometown, told me. “Everyone knows him, and he has built a reputation within our community over the last few decades.”Christopher Valentine for The New York TimesThe result has been an outpouring of support for Sotelo, even in this conservative county (which is also my home). More than 2,200 people have donated to a GoFundMe for the family, raising more than $150,000 for legal and other expenses, and neighbors have been dropping off meals and offering vehicles and groceries.“Oh, my God, it’s been insane,” said Alondra Sotelo Garcia, his adult daughter, who was born in America. “I knew he was well known, but I didn’t know how big it would blow up to be.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    More stories

    • 113 Shares32 Views

      in Elections

      The Seeds of Democratic Revival Have Already Been Sown

      by

      Now is an agonizing time for Democrats. Some days are dominated by feelings of despair, others by recriminations. But in fact the Democratic Party is on the cusp of a renaissance if it plays its cards right.The claim that a revival may be near at hand might seem bizarre, given that the party is at its weakest point in at least half a century. It is all but shut out of power in the executive, legislative and judicial branches of the federal government. Its popularity is at a record low, according to a report by Third Way, a center-left think tank and advocacy organization. Since 2022, according to Gallup, more Americans identify and lean Republican than Democratic, the first time that has been true since 1991. Leading figures in the Democratic Party, such as Gov. Gavin Newsom of California, call the Democratic brand “toxic.” Democratic support has collapsed among non-college-educated voters, who make up some 64 percent of electorate. Voters are leaving blue states for red ones. And if that were not enough, based on current demographic trends, blue states will lose up to a dozen electoral votes after the 2030 census.Despite this, Democrats have an opening. The Trump administration’s wall-to-wall incompetence, and the human suffering that is resulting from it, will become more and more obvious. Disenchantment with President Trump and his party is already spreading. But can Democrats exploit the opportunity?To help figure out an answer, we conducted written interviews with 19 Democrats, from progressives to centrists. They included officeholders, analysts, strategists and state party chairs chosen because they represent a range of views and experiences and have given careful thought to how the Democratic Party needs to change. We also plowed through a stack of white papers, articles and published interviews.These Democrats agree that attacking Mr. Trump is not sufficient; the party must make a new offer to Americans. They also agree on a main theme of that new offer: making the American dream affordable for the middle class and especially the working class. But Democrats across the ideological spectrum, not just on the party’s right flank, also recognize that their economic message will fall on deaf ears if they cannot re-enter the cultural mainstream and stop talking down to ordinary people.Rahm Emanuel, a former Democratic representative in Congress and mayor of Chicago who served as President Barack Obama’s chief of staff, was blunt: “If you’re outside the mainstream on culture, the public will never trust you enough to listen to your ideas on economic ‘kitchen table’ issues.”When It Comes to ‘Prosperity’, Republicans Have an Edge. But That Hasn’t Always Been True.“Which political party do you think will do a better job of keeping the country prosperous?”

      Source: GallupBy The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares98 Views

      in Elections

      A Road Map for Undoing the Damage of the Big, Awful Bill

      by

      In the 30 years I have been a part of fiscal policymaking I don’t think I have ever seen a legislative push as impressive as the passage of President Trump’s big, dubious tax and policy bill.Don’t get me wrong: The consequences for health insurance, poverty, climate change and macroeconomic stability, in roughly that order of importance, will be horrendous. The Medicaid and other health care changes would undo about three-quarters of the coverage expansion from President Barack Obama’s Affordable Care Act and Medicaid expansion. The law repeals much of what Joe Biden did for climate change in the Inflation Reduction Act. The tax provisions sustain most of the cuts from Mr. Trump’s first term and add in several others for good measure.But before Democrats — and hopefully some Republicans — even try to fix the damage, they should learn the lessons of how the Republicans got all this done, working against tremendous odds on a much faster timetable than the major legislative accomplishments from Mr. Trump’s three predecessors.The first lesson is that ideas really do matter. This legislation did not happen because the public or lobbyists were clamoring for it. Instead Donald Trump and congressional Republicans wanted it and were willing to overcome public disfavor and opposition from vested interests.Sure, special interests were at play in ways big (preserving workarounds to limits on state and local tax deductions) and small (getting new tax breaks for Alaskan whaling captains). But no major lobbying groups were asking for the broad contours of this legislation. The health care industry, which is expected to lose about half a trillion dollars, and the energy industry, which is losing huge tax breaks and subsidies, put up a fight. Their opposition, like that of other industries, went nowhere. And neither did Elon Musk’s — further evidence that oligarchy is the wrong lens through which to view this political moment.The second lesson is that while ideas matter, expert ideas do not necessarily matter. Past fiscal debates have divided economists and policy wonks. In President Trump’s first term, some economists would write opinion articles or go on TV news programs defending his tax cuts as adding to growth while other economists (including me) would write rebuttals.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 175 Shares156 Views

      in Elections

      Trump May Get His ‘Big Beautiful Bill,’ but the G.O.P. Will Pay a Price

      by

      And so will many voters.There will be many short- and long-term consequences if Republicans succeed in passing President Trump’s signature policy bill, as they aim to do before the July 4 holiday, David Leonhardt, the director of the Times editorial board, tells the national politics writer Michelle Cottle in this episode of “The Opinions.”Trump May Get His ‘Big Beautiful Bill,’ but the G.O.P. Will Pay a PriceAnd so will many voters.Below is a transcript of an episode of “The Opinions.” We recommend listening to it in its original form for the full effect. You can do so using the player above or on the NYT Audio App, Apple, Spotify, Amazon Music, YouTube, iHeartRadio or wherever you get your podcasts.The transcript has been lightly edited for length and clarity.Michelle Cottle: I’m Michelle Cottle and I cover national politics for Times Opinion. So with the July 4 weekend looming, I thought we’d talk about a different kind of fireworks: that is, President Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” and as always, I hope the air quotes there are audible for everybody.But that bill looks like it is on track for passage. From Medicaid cuts to tax breaks for the rich, it is a lot. Thankfully with me to talk about this is David Leonhardt, the fearless director of the New York Times editorial board, who has some very pointed thoughts on the matter. So let’s just get to it. David, welcome.David Leonhardt: Thank you, Michelle. It’s great to be talking with you.Cottle: I’m so excited, but warning to all: We are recording on Monday midday and even as we speak, the Senate is brawling its way through to a final vote. So the situation is fluid and could change the details by the time you all hear this.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Fed’s Interest-Rate Approach Keeps It on Collision Course With Trump

      by

      The central bank signals little urgency to cut interest rates despite demands from President Trump for lower borrowing costs.Just hours before the Federal Reserve was set to announce its latest decision on interest rates on Wednesday, President Trump unleashed a barrage of attacks on its chair, Jerome H. Powell.“I call him every name in the book trying to get him to do something,” Mr. Trump said at an event at the White House, where he bashed Mr. Powell for not slashing interest rates.“I’m nasty, I’m nice — nothing works,” he lamented as he called Mr. Powell a series of names, including “stupid” and “Mr. Too Late.”The central bank’s resolve in the face of what has been an unrelenting pressure campaign from the president was on full display on Wednesday. Policymakers held interest rates steady for a fourth straight meeting, and nearly half of them signaled in new projections less scope to cut interest rates this year in anticipation of resurgent inflation. The Fed’s benchmark interest rate is currently in a range of 4.25 percent to 4.5 percent.Mr. Powell was also unwavering in his message that the Fed could afford to take its time on interest rate cuts and would stick to a “wait-and-see” approach until officials had more clarity about how Mr. Trump’s policies were affecting the economy.That could take months, keeping the White House and the Fed on a collision course that economists say stems directly from Mr. Trump’s policies, including his global trade war.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Business Lobbyists Scramble to Kill $100 Billion ‘Revenge Tax’

      by

      Critics contend that the measure will scare off the foreign investment that President Trump wants to attract.Business lobbyists are working to kill a measure in the Republican tax policy legislation that would punish companies based in countries that try to collect new taxes from American firms.The push comes as Senate Republicans are preparing to unveil their domestic policy bill on Monday, which will ultimately need to be passed and merged with the legislation that the House passed last month. That bill imposes a so-called revenge tax on foreign companies that try to enforce the terms of a 2021 global minimum tax agreement or impose digital services taxes on American technology companies.The legislation would substantially increase the tax bills for many foreign companies that operate in the United States, raising more than $100 billion over a decade. Critics argue that the provision would chill foreign investment at a time when the Trump administration is trying to attract international money.“I think the president has been pretty unequivocal on where he stands on wanting more investment into the U.S. from international companies,” said Jonathan Samford, chief executive of the Global Business Alliance, which lobbies on behalf of international businesses in the U.S.Mr. Samford added that the measure “directly contradicts the president’s investment vision.”The legislation is poised to reignite international tax and trade wars that have been on hiatus as policymakers around the world grapple with how to overhaul the global tax system. It has also stoked anxiety among Wall Street investors and is expected to be a topic of discussion as leaders of the Group of 7 countries gather in Canada this week for a summit.Since taking office, President Trump has made clear that he wants nothing to do with a 2021 deal brokered by the Biden administration that aimed to rewrite the rules of how the world’s largest companies would be taxed around the globe. That deal, which was agreed to by the G7, created a new global minimum tax rate of at least 15 percent that companies would have to pay, regardless of their headquarter location. The aim was to prevent countries from lowering their tax rates as a way to attract multinational corporations, creating a “race to the bottom” in taxation that left nations with fiscal shortfalls.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Trump’s Pledge to Not Tax Overtime Could Become Federal Law

      by

      When President Trump first floated the idea of “no tax on overtime” at a campaign rally last year, he did not elaborate on how it would work. Could anyone who works more than 40 hours a week claim a tax break? Would overtime pay really be completely tax-free?The answer to both questions, as it turns out, is no.Under the sprawling domestic policy bill that Republicans pushed through the House and are preparing to steer through the Senate, the tax break would be limited. It would be available only to Americans who, under federal law, must be paid at a time-and-a-half rate for working any time exceeding 40 hours in a week. That’s a broad group that includes almost all Americans who are paid an hourly wage, but many salaried workers would not be eligible.And the tax relief would not be total. Americans would still owe payroll taxes, and potentially state income taxes, on their overtime pay. Federal income taxes would be eliminated on those wages, but only on the earnings attributable to the 50-percent bump in pay — only a third of the money made while working overtime.Even with those limitations, both critics and supporters of the idea believe the tax break could reshape the American labor market. The White House Council of Economic Advisers expects that the policy will motivate Americans to work more and help strengthen the economy.Skeptics think the change would primarily drive people to reclassify their earnings or even change jobs in order to file for overtime. They worry that if enough people sought jobs that offer overtime, wages in those positions could eventually fall.“Ultimately, it’s going to create unintended consequences that incentivize certain behaviors in the labor market and thus create winners and losers from that,” said Emmet Bowling, a labor policy analyst at the American Action Forum, a conservative think tank. “Hourly jobs might become more desirable because of this tax deduction.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Trump’s Tariffs Expected to Drag Down the Global Economy

      by

      Economic growth will slow this year and next as the trade war hampers development in the United States and around the world, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development said.President Trump’s trade war is expected to slow growth in the world’s leading economies, including the United States, this year and in the years to come, unless world leaders can resolve their differences over trade.The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development slashed its outlook for global output to 2.9 percent this year, from 3.3 percent in 2024, the organization said in its economic report released on Tuesday.Economic growth in the United States is expected to be particularly weak, the organization said, rising 1.6 percent this year, a drop from the 2.2 percent projected in March, and 1.5 percent in 2026, down from its previous estimate of 1.6 percent. The U.S. economy grew 2.8 percent in 2024.“Through to the end of 2024, the global economy showed real resilience,” said Mathias Cormann, the organization’s secretary general. “But the global economic environment has become significantly more challenging since.”In the first three months of the year, economic growth in the countries monitored by the organization, which is based in Paris, “dropped abruptly” to 0.1 percent from the last three months of 2024, which is “the slowest rate of growth since the peak of the Covid-19 pandemic some five years ago,” Mr. Cormann said.Since taking office, Mr. Trump has imposed tariffs, then halted them for several weeks, then reinstated some, in the hopes of winning new trade deals with countries ranging from once-close allies like Canada, Mexico and the European Union, as well as longtime rivals like China.The lack of certainty coming from that on-again, off-again strategy, combined with frequent changes in how high the tariffs will eventually be, has roiled markets and disrupted the flow of goods and services around the world. From January to March, many companies rushed goods to the United States, hoping to avoid the higher tariffs, many of which are now set to take effect in July.Even if the Trump administration increases tariffs on most of America’s trading partners by just 10 percent, it would shave off 1.6 percent of economic growth in the country over two years, the report said. Growth on a global scale would contract nearly a full percentage point in the same time span.Further pressure is coming from the need for leading economies, such as those in the European Union, to increase military spending while also investing in the transition to a green economy, the report said.The economies of the 20 countries using the common euro currency are projected to grow to 1 percent in 2025 and 1.2 percent in 2026, in line with the O.E.C.D. forecast from March. China’s economy is expected to see 4.7 percent growth this year, and 4.3 percent in 2026, down 0.1 percent from the organization’s spring projection.Economists in the organization urged countries to reach agreements on trade and to increase investment to revive economic growth.“Our key recommendation, to all governments, is to engage with each other to address issues in a global trading system cooperatively,” Mr. Cormann said. More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Stanley Fischer, Who Helped Defuse Financial Crises, Dies at 81

      by

      He was the No. 2 at the Federal Reserve and the I.M.F. during periods of economic turmoil, and he mentored future economic leaders, like Ben Bernanke.Stanley Fischer, an economist and central banker whose scholarship and genial, consensus-seeking style helped guide global economic policies and defuse financial crises for decades, died on Saturday at his home in Lexington, Mass. He was 81.The cause was complications of Alzheimer’s disease, his son Michael said. Mr. Fischer served as the head of Israel’s central bank from 2005 to 2013, as vice chairman of the Federal Reserve Board from 2014 to 2017 and as the No. 2 officer at the International Monetary Fund from 1994 to 2001, when that agency was struggling to contain financial panics in Mexico, Russia, Asia and Latin America.As a professor at M.I.T., he was a thesis adviser or mentor to an extraordinary range of future leaders, including Ben S. Bernanke, later chairman of the Fed; Mario Draghi, president of the European Central Bank; and Kazuo Ueda, governor of the Bank of Japan. His former students also included two people who chaired the U.S. Council of Economic Advisers, Christina D. Romer and N. Gregory Mankiw, as well as Lawrence H. Summers, who served as secretary of the Treasury and president of Harvard University.“He had a role in shaping a whole generation of economists and policymakers,” Mr. Bernanke said in a February 2024 interview for this obituary. That included spurring Mr. Bernanke’s initial interest in macroeconomics and monetary policy.In 1998, The Times described Mr. Fischer as “the closest thing the world economy has to a battlefield medic.” He helped negotiate a rescue package for Russia by cellphone while standing atop a sand dune on Martha’s Vineyard, where he was on vacation. We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More