US economy

Subterms

    Latest story

    175 Shares36 Views

    Why did young men move left in this month’s US elections? | Cory Alpert

    by

    Just a few months ago, it seemed that the political landscape was changing permanently, with young people shifting right – especially young men. Democrats spun up a vortex of efforts to win them back, but they often appeared to be flailing. This month’s elections, however, told a different story.Young men in the US face a political identity crisis. It should not be controversial to say that the world that many were promised as children has not come to fruition. Two decades of war and a turbulent economy have combined with a massively changing workforce. Young men’s disaffection should come as no real surprise.An entire ecosystem of hucksters has emerged to take advantage of these young people, peddling a dark vision that offers violence and control as a response to a changing world. Meanwhile, the Democratic party failed to imagine a political future that included these young men. In Democrats’ parlance, anyone who took one step in that direction was hopelessly lost, unable to see the beautiful egalitarian future that we could create together.There is a fine line here. I am not arguing for the redemption, welcome, or whitewashing of the people who have peddled this bleak reality. But we can and should build a political coalition that includes this generation, that doesn’t leave them out in the cold, only to find a home in the most bleak fringes of a political movement that tells them that a lust for control over other people, especially women, is the only way to find meaning.On the left, we tell ourselves the story of our own vaunted sympathy, and yet we assign only blame to the young men who do something similar, looking for community and only finding it among the most opportunistic and dangerous political movements. We have done little to welcome them in.And while Democrats had solid policies and economic plans, Republicans, backed by an army of digital content, were able to take the mantle of running on the economy and framing the left as cultural warriors out of touch with the majority of Americans.But the good news is that this month’s elections in Virginia, New Jersey and New York City show Democrats have learned a lesson.The three marquee campaigns of this year were all remarkably similar, despite coming from different parts of the ideological spectrum. Their messaging was relentlessly focused on affordability – how expensive and difficult life has become for the working and middle-class people of their communities. Their solutions covered a wide ideological range, but the focus remained the same.Most young men, like most trans people and Black people and immigrants and everyone else, are dealing with housing that has skyrocketed in price, especially compared with our parents’ generations. Instead of having one career in our lifetimes, we now have to continually seek new jobs. Living independently as an adult is much more expensive and complicated now than it has been. These affordability campaigns gave young men something to do about those pressures rather than ceding that frustration to the most cynical actors.Undoubtedly this conversation is easier to have when Donald Trump is taking three steps every day to dismantle the economy. There’s a real sense that the economy is getting worse. That it’s more difficult to pay bills and keep food on the table, especially when Republicans are, quite literally, ensuring that 42 million people cannot afford to keep food on their table by refusing to fund Snap during their government shutdown.Republicans got distracted, trying to defend Trump and also trying to repeat his playbook of tying Democrats to the culture war of the moment. But without Trump’s singular ability to control a media narrative, Republicans with far less political talent and capital floundered, making themselves look weak and silly in the process.The political miracle is that this ruthless focus on affordability and cost of living may have brought in many of those same young men who had followed Trump a year ago. In Virginia and New Jersey, men under 30 broke for their new Democratic governors, with about six in 10 supporting Spanberger, according to the AP. In New York, young men went for Zohran Mamdani over Andrew Cuomo by a margin of nearly 40 points, according to a Tufts Circle analysis.It turns out that these young men are not completely lost to us. We just failed to imagine a reality where they could be in our camp.Affordability broke through amid the longest government shutdown in US history, as consumer prices were rising ever higher thanks in part to Trump’s tariffs. For all of his bluster, eventually the economic reality becomes an unavoidable political crisis for anyone not far gone in his cult of personality who has to pay their bills.Mikie Sherrill in New Jersey, Abigail Spanberger in Virginia, and Mamdani in New York City showed us that the frustration that every working and middle-class person feels could be directed into a political coalition that sees marginalized people as people also affected by the greed and corruption that has made life unaffordable for so many.Young men, like everyone else, are looking for a politics that can make life a little better. Democrats are finally figuring out how to offer them that chance.

    Cory Alpert is a PhD researcher at the University of Melbourne looking at the impact of AI on democracy. He served in the Biden-Harris administration for three years More

    More stories

    • 175 Shares59 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

    • 175 Shares88 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

    • 163 Shares104 Views

      in US Politics

      Lawyers for Fed governor accuse Trump administration of ‘cherry-picking’ facts in fraud case

      by

      Lawyers for Lisa Cook, the Federal Reserve governor, called Trump administration allegations of mortgage fraud against her “baseless” on Monday and accused the administration of “cherry-picking” discrepancies to bolster their claims.After accusing Cook of misrepresenting multiple residences as her primary residence to get a better mortgage rate, Donald Trump briefly fired Cook from her role as a Fed governor and as one of 12 voting members of the Federal Reserve board that sets interest rates. The supreme court reinstated her back into her position and will be hearing arguments over Cook’s removal in January.In the letter, addressed to Pam Bondi, the US attorney general, and Edward Martin, the deputy attorney general, Abbe Lowell, Cook’s lawyer, outlined for the first time Cook’s detailed defense against the accusations. Lowell said that the dispute involves three of Cook’s properties: a home in Ann Arbor, Michigan, a condo in Atlanta, Georgia and a home in Cambridge, Massachusetts.Lowell said Cook’s primary residence is in Ann Arbor, where she has been a professor at Michigan State University since 2005. While she has been on unpaid leave from the position as she serves on the Fed board, she intends to return to Ann Arbor once her post ends, the letter said.Cook was raised in Milledgeville, Georgia – a town outside of Atlanta. In 2021, Cook purchased a condo in Atlanta to have a place that is close to her family. Though one line on the mortgage application for the property lists it as a primary residence, Lowell argues that it was clearly “inadvertent” and was an “isolated notation”.Any proof of criminal wrongdoing must show that Cook had intentionally misrepresented the property to defraud lenders. But other loan documents show Cook said the home was a vacation home, and nowhere else did she say it was her primary residency. In annual financial disclosures, Cook has listed the condo accurately as a “personal residence”, Lowell writes.For her home in Cambridge, which Cook purchased before she moved to Ann Arbor, Lowell writes that she has consistently listed the home as a second home and rental property for mortgage documents.In his letter, Lowell specifically calls out William Pulte, a Trump ally and director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), for using his role to help target Trump’s political enemies. Pulte has also targeted Letitia James, New York’s attorney general, and Democratic Senator Adam Schiff, two vocal critics of Trump, for similar accusations of mortgage fraud.“The complete package of Governor Cook’s materials clearly demonstrate that this does not amount to the type of criminal wrongdoing that Director Pulte and the president state it to be,” Lowell writes. “Governor Cook’s loan documents made clear her intended uses and, therefore, were not submitted with an intent to mislead the lender or anyone else.”Lowell also said that while Pulte said that anyone, Republican or Democrat, should be held accountable for mortgage fraud, recent reporting has found that four members of Trump’s cabinet, including Scott Bessent, the treasury secretary, also had similar discrepancies on their mortgage documents.“His actions undercut his words. If one seemingly facial contradiction about several property documents were the basis for the mortgage fraud he claims, then one would expect that he would have made referrals to [the justice department] based on the same types of documents about others who appear to have similar or analogous primary residences for more than one home,” Lowell writes. “Yet, director Pulte has ignored many of those allegations”. More

    • 200 Shares170 Views

      in US Politics

      Seth Meyers: ‘Trump has no idea what regular people are going through and he doesn’t care’

      by

      Late-night hosts discussed Donald Trump’s out-of-touch comments on grocery prices, the longest-ever government shutdown and a dramatic White House press conference on Ozempic.Seth MeyersSeth Meyers continued to analyze the results of Tuesday’s elections on Thursday evening, examining what fueled major victories for Democrats in Virginia and New Jersey. “If you do look inside the numbers, you’ll see that it wasn’t just anti-Trump backlash that fueled Democrats’ wins,” the Late Night host said. “Voters are also furious about the economy,” especially record-high grocery prices.“So the same thing that we were told was an issue in the last election was still an issue in this election because nothing has been fixed,” Meyers continued. “And voters are right – grocery prices are going up, everything from coffee to bananas to beef.” In fact, beef prices have never been higher. “Soon it’s going to get so bad that Trump’s going to start pushing Americans toward vegan options,” Meyers joked.But “don’t worry, Republicans, Trump is in touch with the common man,” he added. “That’s his gift. He knows what it’s like to go to the grocery store and feel the pain when you open your wallet and hand the cashier your ID and – wait, what?”Speaking from the White House, Trump claimed that “all we want is voter ID” at the grocery store. “You go to a grocery store, you have to give ID.”“Yeah, everyone knows you get carded at the grocery store,” Meyers deadpanned. “Trump has no idea what regular people are going through and he doesn’t care.”In fact, Trump insisted that grocery prices were going down in his recent interview with CBS News’s 60 Minutes. “You can lie about immigration, you can lie about the stock market, you can even lie about what wars you ended because most Americans will say ‘I didn’t even know that Thailand and Finland were at war,’” said Meyers. “But you can’t lie about the prices people see with their own eyes at the grocery store.”Stephen ColbertOn the Late Show, Stephen Colbert checked in on the government shutdown, now the longest in US history at 38 days. “The shutdown has already wreaked havoc on air travel, and that havoc is about to get even reekier,” he said, as air traffic controllers aren’t being paid and many aren’t showing up to work.So many, in fact, that the Federal Aviation Administration has directed airlines to cut 10% of their flights at the busiest airports. “So unfortunately it may be time to try your new favorite airline: the bus,” Colbert joked. “If you’re traveling for Thanksgiving, you might want to leave now.”Colbert also touched on the major victories for Democrats on election day, which Trump referred to in a press conference as “an interesting evening and we learned a lot”.“That sounds like what you’d say after a Tinder date where someone had to go to the hospital,” Colbert laughed.In other news, Fifa – “whose job, you’ll recall, is to take bribes and regulate soccer”, Colbert joked – announced a new peace prize to be awarded at the World Cup draw in Washington. “Yes, the Fifa peace prize: it’s given exclusively to world leaders who stop wars using only their feet,” Colbert said.“So it really looks like a made-up award just to give Trump something,” he noted, though when asked to confirm that Trump would be given the award, Fifa president Gianni Infantino demurred, saying: “On the 5th of December, you will see.”“Man, it is going to be hilarious when they give it to Obama,” Colbert laughed.The Daily ShowAnd on the Daily Show, Jordan Klepper recapped a dramatic White House press conference in which Trump announced a plan to cut the price of Ozempic and other pharmaceutical weight-loss drugs. “It’s all part of his campaign promise and his one consistent principle of ‘no fatties’,” Klepper joked.The press conference was “an event that turned into a major Hipaa violation”, as Trump announced the price cuts by singling out members of his administration who did or did not take weight-loss drugs.“Joking aside, obesity is a serious issue,” Klepper said. “So, this could be a benefit. Dr Oz, you’re a doctor, theoretically. Give us a reasonable expectation of success here.”Oz, the TV doctor turned Trump’s administrator for Medicare and Medicaid Services, boasted that Americans would “lose 135bn pounds by the midterms”.“Why the midterms?” Klepper wondered. “Did they add a swimsuit competition to those?“Look, I’m no mathematician,” he continued. “But 135bn pounds divided by 340 million Americans means we each have to lose … 400lb by the midterms. And I know that sounds like a lot, but remember: that’s just the average! Some people will lose 300lb, while other people will lose 500lb. Some of us will lose no pounds at all, which will be offset by everyone losing 800lb.“The point is, regardless of how much you lose, Donald Trump will be tracking it and announcing your personal results at a press conference.” More

    • 163 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      US supreme court to hear oral arguments on legality of Trump imposing tariffs

      by

      Donald Trump’s sweeping tariffs on the world will be scrutinized by the US supreme court today, a crucial legal test of the president’s controversial economic strategy – and his power.Justices are scheduled to hear oral arguments today on the legality of using emergency powers to impose tariffs on almost every US trading partner.In a series of executive orders issued earlier this year, Trump cited the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, a 1977 law which in some circumstances grants the president authority to regulate or prohibit international transactions during a national emergency, as he slapped steep duties on imports into the US.The supreme court – controlled by a rightwing supermajority that was crafted by Trump – will review whether IEEPA grants the president the authority to levy a tariff, a word not mentioned in the law. Congress is granted sole authority under the constitution to levy taxes. The court has until the end of its term, in July 2026, to issue a ruling on the case.Lower courts have ruled against Trump’s tariffs, prompting appeals from the Trump administration, setting up this latest test of Trump’s presidential power. The supreme court has largely sided with the administration through its shadow docket to overrule lower courts.Should the supreme court ultimately rule against Trump’s use of IEEPA to impose tariffs, it will force the White House to go back to the drawing board and reconsider how to enforce an aggressive economic policy which has strained global trade ties.Should the court side with the administration, however, it will embolden a president who has repeatedly claimed – despite warnings over the risk of higher prices – that tariffs will help make America great again, raising “trillions” of dollars for the federal government and revitalizing its industrial heartlands.Trump himself has argued the court’s decision is immensely important. The case is “one of the most important in the History of the Country”, he wrote on social media over the weekend, claiming that ruling against him would leave the US “defenseless”.“If we win, we will be the Richest, Most Secure Country anywhere in the World, BY FAR,” Trump claimed. “If we lose, our Country could be reduced to almost Third World status – Pray to God that that doesn’t happen!”But some of his senior officials have suggested that, if the court rules against their current strategy, they will find another way to impose tariffs. Treasury secretary Scott Bessent, who plans to attend the oral arguments in the case, has said the administration has “lots of other authorities” to do so.According to the non-partisan Tax Foundation, Trump’s tariffs amount to an average tax increase per US household of $1,200 in 2025 and $1,600 in 2026.A coalition of 12 states and small businesses, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oregon and Vermont, have sued the Trump administration to block the tariffs.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionSeveral other small businesses also filed suit against the Trump administration to block the tariffs. The cases, Learning Resources, Inc v Trump and Trump v VOS Selections, were consolidated by the court.“No one person should have the power to impose taxes that have such vast global economic consequences,” Jeffrey Schwab, Liberty Justice Center’s senior counsel, said in a statement on the lawsuit filed on behalf of small businesses against the tariffs. “The Constitution gives the power to set tax rates – including tariffs – to Congress, not the President.”About 40 legal briefs have been filed in opposition to the tariffs, including from the US Chamber of Commerce, the largest business lobby group in the US.The US Chamber has urged Congress to reclaim its constitutional role in setting tariffs, stating in a letter on 27 October to the US Senate: “American families are facing thousands of dollars in higher prices as a result of these increased taxes. Small businesses, manufacturers, and ranchers are struggling with higher costs, with additional economic pain likely in the coming months.”The US Senate voted 51 to 47 last week to nullify Trump’s so-called reciprocal tariffs, with four Republicans joining Democrats in the vote, though the House is not expected to take similar action.But despite opposition in the Senate, the House of Representatives is unlikely to take similar action. House Republicans created a rule earlier this year that will block resolutions on the tariffs from getting a floor vote. More

    • 125 Shares152 Views

      in US Politics

      Americans ‘dumbfounded by cruelty’ of Trump officials slashing Snap benefits

      by

      Across the country, Americans who depend on government help to buy groceries are preparing for the worst.As a result of the ongoing federal government shutdown, Donald Trump has threatened to, for the first time in the program’s more than 60-year history, cut off benefits provided by the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance program (Snap). A federal judge last week prevented the US Department of Agriculture from suspending Snap altogether, but the Trump administration now says enrollees will receive only half of their usual benefits.The Guardian wanted to know how important Snap was to the approximately 42 million people enrolled in the program. Many of those who responded to our callout were elderly, or out of the workforce because of significant mental of physical health issues, and worried that a cutoff of the benefit would send their lives into a tailspin.“I am housebound because I need a couple of spinal cord surgeries so this is really gonna hurt me because I cannot work, and thereby earn money to put food on the table,” said Taras Stratelak, a retiree in southern California.Referencing a refrain of Trump and the GOP as they have downsized federal aid programs, Stratelak wrote: “I guess I’m lazy, or maybe I’m waste, fraud and abuse.”Wisconsin resident Betty Standridge, 56, said she had been hospitalized for a month, and was relying on Snap to afford pricier groceries that she now would have to go without.“Losing my Snap benefits means I will not be able to replenish my food for the month, therefore I will do without things like fresh produce, milk, eggs,” she said.Donna Lynn, a disabled veteran in Missouri, said a cutoff of benefits would force her into making tough choices.“It comes down to paying for my medications and my bills or buying food for myself and for my animals. So I pay for my medications and bills and get what food I can for my animals, Aad if I have money left over, then I will eat,” Lynn said.“This is how the government treats their veterans – it’s very sad.”Zachariah Kushner, a disabled 36-year-old living in Charleston, West Virginia, put the consequences of a benefit cut succinctly: “I won’t be able to buy food! What do you expect?”The government shutdown began on the first day of October, after Democrats and Republicans in Congress failed to agree on spending legislation to continue funding. While the GOP has demanded passage of a bill to fund the government through 21 November, Senate Democrats have refused to provide the votes needed for the legislation to make it through that chamber, insisting that Trump extend tax cuts that have lowered the monthly premiums of Affordable Care Act plans.While the USDA claims that it must cut off Snap because it no longer has money to fund it, experts disagreed, and a federal judge last week sided with two dozen states who sued to keep it paying out funds.A NBC News polls released on Sunday found 52% blamed Trump and his allies for the shutdown, as opposed to 42% who fault the Democrats.Many of those who wrote in to the Guardian aligned with those findings.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionSandra, a retiree in Milwaukee who declined to give her last name, feared the benefit cut was the start of an attempt to dismantle Snap, which was set up by Congress in 1964. “My sense is Trump will try to make Snap benefits permanently end during the shutdown,” she said. “I’m dumbfounded by the cruelty.”Steven of Wisconsin, 59, said he is recovering from surgeries, and has been unable to work for the past year because of his health. “I’ve already reduced my intake since before Snap was cut. Now it means no milk, no eggs, no vegetables, and definitely no meat,” he said.Referring to the climactic second world war battle, he said: “It’s like the siege of Stalingrad, but from your own government.”Twenty-eight-year-old Thomas, an unemployed Philadelphia resident, felt similarly let down.“I’ve paid an awful lot of taxes over the years, I don’t feel bad about getting something back for it in my time of need,” he said.Grand Rapids, Michigan resident Bill predicted he “will have to go without many things that I ordinarily purchase” and borrow money from his family.“How do I feel about it? I curse Donald Trump and his entire party of sycophants and lickspittles to the seven[th] circle of hell, now and for all time,” the 71-year-old said. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Zohran Mamdani represents the future of the Democratic party | Robert Reich

      by

      The only upside to living through this dark time is it pushes us to rethink and perhaps totally remake things we once thought immutable.Like the Democratic party.In case you hadn’t noticed, the current Democratic party is dysfunctional, if not dead.Better dysfunctional than a fascist cult like Donald Trump’s Republican party. But if there were ever a time when America needed a strong, vibrant Democratic party, it’s now. And we don’t have one.The brightest light in the Democratic party is Zohran Mamdani, the 34-year-old member of the New York state assembly who has a good chance of being elected the next mayor of New York City when New Yorkers go to the polls a week from Tuesday.Mamdani is talking about what matters to most voters: the cost of living. He says New York should be affordable for everyone.He’s addressing the problems New Yorkers discuss at their kitchen tables. He’s not debating “Trumpism” or “capitalism” or “Democratic socialism”. He’s not offering a typical Democratic “10-point plan” with refundable tax credits that no one understands.He’s proposing a few easy-to-understand things: free buses, free childcare, a four-year rent freeze for about 2 million residents, and a $30 minimum wage. He’s aiming to do what Franklin D Roosevelt did in the 1930s: fix it.You may not agree with all his proposals (I don’t), but they are understandable. And if they don’t work, I expect that, like FDR, he will try something else.The clincher for me is that he’s inspiring a new generation of young people. He’s got them excited about politics. (My 17-year-old granddaughter is spending her weekends knocking on doors for him, as are her friends.)You don’t have to reach too far back in history to find Democratic politicians who have inspired young people. Bernie Sanders (technically an independent) and AOC. Barack Obama. (I was inspired in my youth by Bobby Kennedy – the real Bobby Kennedy – and Senator Eugene McCarthy.)And Mamdani.What do all of them have in common? They’re authentic. They’re passionate. They care about real people. They want to make America fairer. They advocate practical solutions that people can understand.View image in fullscreenNonetheless, Mamdani is horrifying the leaders of the Democratic party. Chuck Schumer still hasn’t endorsed him. Bill Clinton has endorsed Andrew Cuomo, who is spending what are probably the last days of his political career indulging in the kind of racist, Islamophobic attacks we’d expect from Trump.Meanwhile, the editorial board of the New York Times counsels “moderation”, urging Democratic candidates to move to the “center”. Tell me: where is the center between democracy and fascism, and why would anyone want to go there?In truth, the Times’s so-called “moderate center” is code for corporate Democrats using gobs of money to pursue culturally conservative “swing” voters – which is what the Democratic party has been doing for decades.This is part of the reason America got Trump. Corporate Democrats took the party away from its real mission: to lift up the working class and lower-middle class and help the poor. Instead, they pushed for globalization, privatization and the deregulation of Wall Street. They became Republican-lite.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIn 2016 and again in 2024, working and lower-middle class voters saw this and opted for a squalid real estate developer who at least sounded like he was on their side. He wasn’t and still isn’t – he is on the side of the billionaires to whom he gave two whopping tax cuts. But if the choice is between someone who sounds like he’s on your side and someone who sounds like a traditional politician, guess who wins?Trump also fed voters red-meat cultural populism – blaming their problems on immigrants, Hispanic people, Black people, transgender people, bureaucrats and “coastal elites”. Democrats, meanwhile, gave voters incomprehensible 10-point plans.The Times tries to buttress its argument that Democrats should move to the “center” by citing Democrats who won election last year in places Trump also won.But that argument is bunk. Democrats won in these places by imitating Trump. One mocked the term “Latinx” and was hawkish on immigration. Two wanted to crack down harder on illegal immigration. Two others emphasized crime and public safety. Another bragged about taking on federal bureaucrats.This isn’t the way forward for Democrats. Red-meat cultural populism does not fill hungry bellies or pay medical bills or help with utility bills or pay the rent.Mamdani poses a particular threat to New York’s corporate Democrats because he wants to tax the wealthy to pay for his plan to make New York more affordable to people who aren’t wealthy.He aims to generate $9bn in new tax revenue by raising taxes on the city’s wealthiest residents and businesses. He’s calling for a 2% tax on incomes more than $1m, which would produce $4bn in tax revenue. He wants to increase the state’s corporate tax rate to 11.5% to match New Jersey’s, generating about $5bn annually.He’s right. The wealthy have never been as wealthy as they are now, while the tax rate they pay hasn’t been as low in living memory.Inequalities of income and wealth are at record levels. A handful of billionaires now control almost every facet of the United States government and economy.Even as the stock market continues to hit new highs, working-class and lower-middle-class families across America are getting shafted. Wages are nearly stagnant, prices are rising. Monopolies control food processing, housing, high-tech, oil and gas.The time is made for the Democrats. If the party stands for anything, it should be the growing needs of the bottom 90% – for affordable groceries, housing and childcare. For higher wages and better working conditions. For paid family leave. For busting up monopolies that keep prices high. For making it easier to form and join labor unions.Pay for this by raising taxes on the wealthy. Get big money out of politics.This dark time should wake us up to the bankruptcy of the corporate Democratic party.It should mark the birth of the people’s Democratic party. Zohran Mamdani and others like him are its future.

      Robert Reich, a former US secretary of labor, is a professor of public policy emeritus at the University of California, Berkeley. He is a Guardian US columnist and his newsletter is at robertreich.substack.com. His new book, Coming Up Short: A Memoir of My America, is out now More