US economy

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      No retreat on tariffs, Trump promised. Hours later, he blinked

      by

      He vowed: “My policies will never change.” He insisted: “Sometimes you have to take medicine to fix something.” He boasted: “I know what I’m doing.” And at 9.33am on Wednesday, he entreated: “BE COOL. Everything is going to work out well.”But less than four hours later, Donald Trump blinked. As the economic and political pressure became unbearable, the US president announced on social media that he would pause for 90 days higher trade tariffs for most countries, excluding China.It was a dramatic climbdown by a leader who has spent years cultivating the image of a strongman able to project indifference through every storm. White House aides immediately swung into gear, attempting to spin the retreat as the masterstroke of peerless dealmaker and genius chess player.The damage had been done, however. Damage to America’s standing as an honest broker and dependable ally. Damage to the US dollar and financial system as the world’s anchor of financial stability. And damage to Trump’s reputation on his signature issue, the economy, in the eyes of business leaders, Republicans and voters.“It’s obviously far too soon to talk about a failed presidency, but to me there are clear indications that Donald Trump’s presidency is endangered,” said Larry Jacobs, director of the Center for the Study of Politics and Governance at the University of Minnesota. “That’s an extraordinary statement for month three, but he’s taken such extreme measures and the responses are unusual, particularly for Republicans. They’re very demonstrative and they’re very directed at his power.”The past two weeks have witnessed the most volatile period for financial markets since the coronavirus pandemic lockdowns five years ago. This time, however, the cause is not a highly contagious virus but the grievances and whims of one man.On 2 April, standing in the White House Rose Garden, Trump announced sweeping “reciprocal” tariffs on dozens of countries, billing it as a “declaration of economic independence” on a “liberation day” that would restore America’s “golden age”. After decades of getting ripped off, he claimed, “it’s our turn to prosper”.The tariffs were calculated based on a country’s trade deficit with the US divided by the value of goods imported from that country. The formula was immediately criticised for inaccuracies and absurdities, such as assigning tariffs to Heard Island and McDonald Islands, which are inhabited entirely by penguins.Yet in Trump’s telling, the long-threatened tariffs were a necessary measure to restore US manufacturing and address trade imbalances. The Rose Garden event was attended by workers in hard hats and yellow construction vests – a reminder of how Trump has sought to steal Democrats’ identity as the party of the working class.Some analysts on the left and the right agree that the US industrial midwest was hit hard by globalisation with factories shuttered, communities hollowed out and jobs shipped overseas. But few believe that Trump, who for decades has believed that the US is getting ripped off, and his sledgehammer approach to tariffs are the right solution.Bill Galston, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution thinktank in Washington, said: “I have always believed that his understanding of when America was great was in the 1950s and 1960s, when 30% of the workforce was in manufacturing and when the rest of the world was flat on its back and America bestrode the world like a colossus.“His dream is to restore that America to the greatest extent possible, and he genuinely believes that high tariff walls will force people who are doing manufacturing in China and all across south-east Asia and elsewhere to come here.”Galston added: “It is, most economists would say, a fantasy that could make a difference at the margins. Right now, manufacturing employment in the United States as a share of the total is 8%, down from its peak above 30% in the 1970s, and that’s not going to be reversed.”Trump had effectively taken the world economy hostage. The repercussions were immediate and widespread, including market instability, strong international condemnation, retaliatory measures from China and deep uncertainty for businesses and consumers.View image in fullscreenLarry Summers, a former treasury secretary, described it as “the biggest self-inflicted wound we’ve put on our economy in history”. Some chief executives who had backed Trump in last year’s election expressed buyer’s remorse as their fortunes sank. Tech giants such as Apple saw their stock prices drop; analysts predicted potential price increases for iPhones by as much as 43%.In the White House, Trump’s closest advisers were rattled. Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, engaged in a highly public and insulting feud with Trump’s trade adviser Peter Navarro over the impact of tariffs on Tesla, calling Navarro a “moron” and “dumber than a sack of bricks”.Trump insisted he was right and elite opinion was wrong. As he blithely golfed over the weekend, even as markets crashed and haemorrhaged trillions of dollars, the treasury secretary, Scott Bessent, flew to Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida to plea for a strategy that could include improved trade deals with foreign countries.Republicans were anxious as they heard the complaints of constituents worried about retirement savings. Some spoke out or considered legislation to curb Trump’s tariffs power. Senator Ted Cruz, a staunch Trump supporter, warned: “Tariffs are a tax on consumers, and I’m not a fan of jacking up taxes on American consumers.”It was a notable break from a party long criticised for a sycophantic, cultish devotion to Trump on all other issues. James Bennet, a columnist for the Economist magazine, told the Guardian’s Politics Weekly America podcast: “There are limits to how far Donald Trump can go and it is conceivable that Republicans could rise up against him.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“They haven’t been willing to do it as Donald Trump has embarked on this campaign of retribution, using the justice department to punish his foes. They haven’t been willing to do it over speech issues or the deportation of completely innocent people to a prison in El Salvador. But these tariffs were a step too far for them and that’s a signal that there is the possibility of Republican resistance at some point to this administration, which is the only thing that can really restrain it.”The mounting pressure from Republicans, business leaders and financial markets stoked fears of a recession that could even tip into a depression. Finally, Trump yielded and, on Wednesday, announced a 90-day pause for most countries while inviting them to negotiate bilateral trade deals.Antjuan Seawright, a Democratic strategist, said: “He saw the pressure from not only the American people but he saw people from within his own ecosystem screaming and yelling about how bad this was. Donald Trump has a history of caving because he is a paper tiger leader in many ways and this was just further proof of that. He wants to play hardball but with a soft bat.”White House aides argued otherwise, deploying the Trump playbook learned from his lawyer Roy Cohn: always claim victory and never admit defeat. Stephen Miller, White House deputy chief of staff, tweeted: “You have been watching the greatest economic master strategy from an American president in history.”But the president himself admitted that he had been monitoring the bond market and people were “getting a little queasy” as bond prices had fallen and interest rates increased. He said: “People were jumping a little bit out of line. They were getting yippy.”Even Trump, whose second term has been characterised by audacity, impunity and brazen lies, had reached the capacity of his reality distortion field and its amplification by rightwing media. The cold facts of the market were not to be denied.Kurt Bardella, a strategic communications adviser, said: “We’re seeing now, for the first time in Trump 2, the limitations of propaganda, of drinking your own Kool-Aid. There are economic realities, market realities that are larger than the lie that they tell themselves and the American people over and over again. Their attempt to try to sell that lie to the world clearly did not work.“He can go out there all day long till he’s blue in the face and say to friendly media and his Maga puppets [that] we’re being ripped off and this will lead to the greatest economic boom we’ve ever seen – but no one else is believing it. The private sector that he has propped himself up on for so long completely rejected all of this.”Bardella, a former congressional aide, added: “For all the ‘Let’s run the government like a business’ crowd, if any business ran themselves this way there would be a vote of no confidence and that CEO would be ousted that very day for deliberately tanking that company’s own stock.”After an initial surge, the markets dipped again. While the pause has offered a temporary reprieve, a 10% blanket duty on almost all US imports remains in effect. Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, claimed on Friday that more than 75 countries have contacted the Trump administration with a view to addressing trade issues. “The phones have been ringing off the hook to make deals,” she said.But it remains uncertain whether the US will be able to secure significant concessions from other countries within 90 days. The mercurial nature of Trump’s decision-making on the on-again, off-again levies could add to the whiplash while eroding faith in the US and the reliability of the dollar.And the trade war with China continues to escalate, posing a significant threat to the global economy. Trump raised tariffs on China to 145%, prompting retaliation. US consumers are likely to feel the pain from price hikes on clothing and other products. China also threatened further non-tariff measures, such as blacklisting US companies and restricting exports of rare earth minerals.Larry Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia, said: “It’s not over at all. The worst part is probably ahead because of China. Is he going to work out a deal with all these other countries? Get real. He has scrambled everything and America is no longer trusted in any sphere now – defence, international relations, economics. It’s sad.” More

    • 175 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘It’s going to be messy’: Americans on how Trump’s tariffs are shaping their spending

      by

      A few weeks ago, Dane began stocking up on “paper products”, “cases of paper towels, toilet paper”, “piddle-pads” for their shih-tzu, and his wife upgraded from an iPhone 8 to 14.The 73-year-old in South Carolina said the purchases – which were made to get ahead of Donald Trump’s trade policies – reminded him of the early weeks of the Covid pandemic, when he scrambled to buy masks, gloves and toilet paper.“It’s scary,” Dane said. “Prices are going to go up because of tariffs … It’s going to be messy.”While campaigning last year, Trump constantly touted his love of tariffs. But it was not until his so-called “liberation day” on 2 April – where the president announced sweeping duties on incoming goods, punishing competitors, allies and small and developing countries alike – that he spooked global financial markets and provoked fears of spiralling inflation and stagnant growth.Amid a US government bond sell-off, the president paused his most eye-watering tariffs for 90 days, apart from China, whose goods are set to be hit with a 145% levy.Hundreds of Americans got in touch with the Guardian to share how the uncertainty is affecting their consumption habits.Dane, who is retired, worked as an entrepreneur with his wife most of his career before later becoming an English teacher. He said he was a Republican in the 1980s but is fearful about how the US is “not going the right way” under Trump, and is unhappy with his “dystopian” policies towards global allies, the economy, education, scientific research and more.View image in fullscreenCurrently, Dane is on a trip to Paris and plans to bring home consumer goods potentially hit by 10% tariffs on European Union imports.“We’ll probably be getting tea, bringing back some cheese, some butter,” he said. “I would love to bring back eggs but that would be a disaster. I’d have scrambled eggs in my suitcase.”Amid tariff uncertainty, Heather, a 61-year-old college professor in Texas, said she and her husband can mostly weather food cost fluctuations, but brought forward the purchase of a new car “inanticipation of price hikes”.She said they owned a 14-year-old Mini Cooper, which ran on gas, that they planned to replace with a hybrid vehicle at some point. They decided to replace their car now to avoid potential inflation – and reduce expenditure on gas.“The economic instability of the Trump administration certainly gives one pause,” she said. “It’s just so much instability, chaos and [the] unknown.”It’s a similar story for Stefanie, a 56-year-old educator and former tech worker in Nevada, who bought a Toyota Tacoma to replace her old Jeep as well as converting some investments into cash.Stefanie began strategizing about being more resilient to tariffs as soon as Trump was elected.“The one thing I learned in the first administration is to believe him: he says bizarre things, and then he does bizarre things,” she said.She’s cutting back on subscriptions and future travel plans, while stockpiling kitchen staples such as rice, cooking oils, vinegar and flour and replacing worn-out clothes including shoes and jeans, “before inflation hits”.“The supply chain is so globalized that tariffs really hit everything,” Stefanie said.But for Ishaan*, a 51-year-old engineer in Texas, the economic picture means he is abstaining from major purchases.“Everyone I know has started tightening their belts,” he said. “I am cutting out unnecessary expenses, cancelled my gym membership, focusing on savings.”The focus for Ishaan, who fears higher prices and an economic slowdown, is to build up his savings in cash. He feels “scared to invest in any stocks or bonds right now” amid market volatility.Likewise for Jonathan*, a 70-year-old in New Jersey, the financial fallout from Trump’s trade wars means he has been forced to rule out planned purchases and strip consumption back to the essentials.Jonathan said his individual retirement account (IRA) was initially “decimated” – although it ticked up slightly after Trump paused his tariffs on Wednesday. He said it was currently down about 15%.That means cancelling plans to redo the carpet in his house and replace two old televisions, Jonathan said. “In short, we’ll buy only necessities and pay bills until this stupidity ends.”Russ a 35-year-old physicist in New Mexico, said the Trump administration’s policies were “causing me to think about what kinds of spending behavior I could have done without this whole time”.He has an eight-year-old phone and nine-year-old MacBook computer that still work fine, which he will not be replacing. The prospect of runaway price rises for consumer electronics, often from China, have led him to reconsider: “Do I really need this, or do I just want this?“I see these things as being as much toys as necessities,” he said. “Maybe I’ll just go back to a dumbphone or something like that – I fantasize sometimes about not getting all these notifications all the time, like the phones we had back in 2005. But maybe that’s a Luddite fantasy.”Russ said that he was already boycotting Amazon and Target – companies that many feel have aligned themselves with Trump’s agenda such as rolling back their own DEI schemes. He’s trying to shop more at local, independent shops rather than “everything stores”, which he notes is more expensive and time consuming but ultimately worth it.“As an American citizen and registered voter, nobody really cares what you think until November of every other year, you feel kind of voiceless,” he said. “You think, well, if dollars are the only tools we have any more, then damn it, I’m going to cast those votes and allocate my spending accordingly.”View image in fullscreenLikewise, small business owner Christine* said the disruption could cause a wider re-evaluation of US consumer habits.Amid the uncertainty, Christine, 41, stocked up on supplies for her Miami acupuncture business for two years, and bought her son’s fifth birthday present – a bike – early for July. But she said she had already noticed less demand for her work.More broadly, the prospect of inflationary tariffs is accelerating Christine’s reconsideration of how much “stuff” she needs. She’s recently attended “these lovely parties” where friends bring unwanted clothes and they “switch it all around” rather than buying fast fashion.“I really resent being drafted into this mad trade war,” Christine said, “but if there is a silver lining, maybe it’s that at least some people like me will question their unsustainable capitalistic practices.”*Some names have been changed. More

    • 163 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump was playing chicken with tariffs. Then he chickened out | Steven Greenhouse

      by

      By imposing punitively high tariffs, Donald Trump was playing a high-stakes game of chicken with the US’s trading partners – but it was Trump who chickened out and suspended his tariffs just hours after they took effect. The president couldn’t ignore the worldwide economic havoc that he had caused singled-handedly – stock markets were plunging, business executives were panicking and consumers were seething.Eager to persuade manufacturers to build new plants in the US, Trump said on Monday that many of his tariffs would be permanent. But for Trump, permanent evidently meant two days.Once again, Trump showed that his second term is one of fiat, flub and flip-flop, of bluster and blunder, of shooting first and aiming later. It’s also a mix of cutting, gutting and cruelty.And foolery. Trump’s tariffs are worse than, as the Wall Street Journal put it, the “dumbest trade war in history”: they are the dumbest economic policy that any US president has ever adopted. His tariffs quickly caused vast and totally unnecessary damage to stock markets, industries and diplomatic relations across the globe. Before Trump unexpectedly suspended the tariffs, US stock markets had lost more than $10tn in value, and stock markets overseas plummeted, too. Millions of retirees had seen their 401(k)s plunge in value, consumers were facing substantially higher prices and many workers were already losing their jobs as Trump’s tariffs sent shockwaves through the global economy.Trump’s embarrassing climbdown on tariffs was one of the rare times he bowed to common sense. If only he would do the same when it comes to his dangerously myopic cuts to scientific research, environmental protection and foreign aid.Trump has not climbed down, however, in his showdown with China. In a fit of pique over China’s retaliatory tariffs, Trump has imposed stratospheric 145% tariffs on China. Attention Walmart shoppers: that is going to more than double the price of many things you buy.When it came to tariffs, Trump made some basic political fumbles. Not only did he go golfing and speak at a million-dollar-a-head fundraiser as this economic disaster unfolded, but he failed to give a coherent explanation for his screw-everyone-else tariffs. Trump and his team pointed to a potpourri of often-conflicting goals: to erase trade deficits, to collect trillions of dollars for the treasury, to bring back manufacturing jobs, to give Trump negotiating leverage to crack down on fentanyl and immigration and reduce other countries’ tariffs.Let’s not delude ourselves. There are two main reasons for Trump’s tariffs: first, to satisfy his never-ending thirst for vengeance against those he feels have wronged him (which seems to mean every country in the world except Russia) and second, to fulfill his desire to wield a club over everyone and everything. By using staggeringly high tariffs as a weapon, Trump has been acting like a mob enforcer, telling every business in town: I’m going to clobber you with my baseball bat unless you do what I want.There’s another reason for Trump’s tariffs: his ignorance about how the world’s economy works. Trump’s “liberation day” speech on tariffs gave the looney, but unmistakable, impression that he believes that Vietnam, for instance, is looting and pillaging the US by selling more sneakers and other goods to the US than the US sells to Vietnam. Trump thinks this even though millions of Americans are delighted to buy well-made sneakers from Vietnam (which would cost consumers far more if they were made in the US).With his grievance-driven, zero-sum worldview, Trump no doubt believes that other countries are unfairly taking advantage of the US whenever we trade with them – and he wants to get even.Trump thinks that trade deficits are evil. If Trump had taken a class with Robert Solow, a Nobel Prize-winning economist at MIT, he might have heard Solow’s wisdom about why there’s no big worry about bilateral trade deficits: “I have a chronic deficit with my barber, who doesn’t buy a darned thing from me.”That Trump got to impose his calamitous tariffs at 12.01am on Wednesday reflects the dismal quality of his cabinet and advisers. Too many are lackeys who automatically cheer whatever he does, while some others, like the treasury secretary, Scott Bessent, no doubt realized that his tariffs were dumb and disastrous, but they’re too cowardly to tell the Tariff King. The tariffs would inevitably increase inflation and probably push the US into recession. Even though Republicans have vowed never to raise taxes, Trump’s tariffs are unarguably a tax, a regressive tax and the largest tax increase in 60 years. Trump’s tariffs were bound to destroy smoothly running supply chains and hurt untold numbers of US companies. They were also a disaster for relations with our allies. They were already triggering massive retaliation.If Trump had some smart, principled advisers, they might explain to him that many obstacles might prevent his tariffs from achieving their goals. With the nation’s low 4% unemployment rate, it will be hard to find workers to do the manufacturing jobs that Trump wants to bring back, especially when he’s rounding up and expelling many immigrant workers. Moreover, US corporations have largely lost the technological knowhow to compete in various industries and that complicates hopes to bring back far more factories.Then there’s another big problem – the chaotic Trump is the worst possible president to persuade companies to build factories in the US to produce goods they now obtain from abroad. King Donald the Capricious does not exactly exude the air of stability that executives insist on before they decide to make big investment decisions, like building new factories.Trump trumpeted his tariffs in part to show strength, but he ended up in an embarrassing retreat (he did maintain a 10% tariff on many countries). Trump is eager to get China to heed his wishes, but China, the world’s leading manufacturing country, can now see that Trump will back down when the heat is too great.China doesn’t have clean hands on trade. It improperly subsidizes many industries to help them outcompete manufacturers in the US and elsewhere. China also has ambitions to vastly increase its manufacturing capacity – a strategy that could kill off important industries in the US, Canada, Europe, Japan and other countries. If Trump were smart and strategic, he – instead of alienating those countries with his tariffs – would have formed an alliance with those countries to pressure China. But now those countries are too angry at the Trump to do that.Trump, never one to admit defeat, insists that his climbdown was a victory, that the mess he made was marvelous strategy. He says many countries are eager to make deals with him. “I’m telling you, these countries are calling us up, kissing my ass,” he said on Wednesday. “They are dying to make a deal.”Our allies are no doubt furious with Trump. Not only were they already angry that he stabbed Ukraine in the back and sidled up to Putin, but they’re unhappy that his tariff foolishness violated numerous international agreements and sought to blow up a smoothly running trade system. And then Trump ridicules them by saying they were rushing to kiss his behind.I hardly ever agree with Elon Musk, but he was right that Trump’s tariffs were the work of morons who were “dumber than a sack of bricks”.

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

    • 188 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Jimmy Kimmel: ‘Somehow Donald Trump has managed to transform the stock market into Kanye West’

      by

      Late-night hosts recap Donald Trump’s escalation of a trade war that many expect will lead to a global recession.Jimmy Kimmel“What a crazy country we live in. It’s hard to remember what things we used to be worried about,” said Jimmy Kimmel on Tuesday evening, as the markets once again roiled with Trump’s escalation of his tariffs on nearly all countries. “The Dow, the Nasdaq, the S&P all down again today. Somehow Donald Trump has managed to transform the stock market into Kanye West.”Trump, meanwhile, didn’t seem bothered by the worst week on Wall Street since March 2020. Instead, he posted on Truth Social that he would undergo his annual physical examination at Walter Reed medical center on Friday. “I bet it’s going to be an excellent report,” Kimmel deadpanned. “Let me guess: his physical strength and stamina are extraordinary, his blood pressure is astonishing and he is by far the healthiest president to successfully tank the world economy overnight.“I will say, after all he’s put us through, it will be nice to know that on Friday, somebody will be squeezing his balls for a change,” he added.In light of the economic downturn, Kimmel referenced an old quote of Trump, saying: “There’s a lot of opportunity in the bad times.”“And now there’s nothing but opportunity as far as the eye can see,” Kimmel joked. “It’s a Chernobyl of opportunity right now.”On Tuesday, Trump heaped even more tariffs on Chinese imports, effectively a 104% tax on all goods. “How’s he even coming up with these numbers?” Kimmel fumed. “‘What do you think about a tariff of 100% on China? Not enough! Make it 104!’”In response, the Chinese ministry of commerce said the tariffs were “mistake on top of a mistake” – “which is also what Trump said when Eric was born”, Kimmel quipped.Stephen Colbert“The tariffs are already hitting Americans right in the joystick,” said Stephen Colbert on the Late Show. Gamers were supposed to be able to order Nintendo Switch 2 consoles on Wednesday, but now the company has delayed orders to the US because of Trump’s tariffs.“What am I supposed to do without a new Mario game?” Colbert wondered. “Take a bunch of mushrooms and jump on turtles in real life? That’s what got me banned from the petting zoo.”The markets had a brief upturn on Tuesday, when rumors circulated that Trump may back down from his trade war. Asked by reporters if he would back down or if the tariffs were permanent, Trump answered paradoxically: “It could both be true.”“No, you can’t say it’s temporary and it’s permanent,” said Colbert. “That’s like being asked to call heads or tails and saying ‘I call coin.’”But around noon local time on Tuesday, the White House confirmed that they would levy a 104% tariff on all Chinese imports starting at midnight on Tuesday, “and the market stepped on a rake and then stepped down a mineshaft”, said Colbert. “One hundred and four percent Chinese tariffs are going to make everything more expensive – iPhones, laptops, those wonderful knockoff toys you can find only at the gas station like New Style Ninja Tortoise.”As for the Chinese ministry of commerce’s response – “the US threat to escalate tariffs on China is a mistake on top of a mistake” – Colbert had a wisecrack: “Coincidentally, it’s also what it’s called when Don Jr gives Eric a piggyback ride.”Seth MeyersOn Tuesday, Trump welcomed the World Series champion Los Angeles Dodgers to the White House, and praised star player Shohei Ohtani with “he’s got a good future, I’m telling you”.“Not exactly a bold prediction – ‘I think that guy who won three MVP awards is going to turn out to be a pretty good ballplayer,’” Seth Meyers joked on Late Night.In other news, Elon Musk and the so-called “department of government efficiency” (Doge) are reportedly working with Boeing to resolve delays in the new model of Air Force One. “Because nothing inspires confidence like hearing ‘Boeing built this in a hurry,’” Meyers joked.On Friday, Trump headlined a fundraiser at Mar-a-Lago that cost $1m a plate. “Unfortunately, due to the price of groceries, they only broke even,” Meyers quipped.And according to a new analysis by the Washington Post, Trump has spent one-third of his days in office at his golf courses. “And I think we might be better off if we could somehow get that up to three thirds,” said Meyers.The Daily Show“It’s been one week since Donald Trump announced his bold vision for destroying the economy,” said Desi Lydic on the Daily Show. “And guess what? His plan is working.”Lydic pointed to a graph of the Dow Jones since Trump took office, which plunged precipitously after the president announced his tariffs. “I’m not an economist, but it’s probably a bad sign when the chart itself looks like it jumped off the roof,” she said. “Look at that drop! Six Flags is going to make a roller coaster of that.”“The president may have singlehandedly tipped us into a global recession,” Lydic continued. “And with so much uncertainty, the world is glued to the financial news networks, who are surely focusing on this story 24/7, right Fox Business?”In fact, Fox’s business network focused on the LA Dodgers visiting the White House, and not Trump’s 104% tax on Chinese imports. “This is getting really serious. We’ll know exactly how serious one we get China to do the math for us,” Lydic joked. “But point is: Trump is out of control right now. I’d say he’s like a bull in a china shop, but at 104%, I can’t afford to say that.” More

    • 188 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Two visions within Trump world are battling for primacy. Which will win? | Ben Davis

      by

      The start of the second Trump administration has been chaotic, to put it mildly. It is difficult for Americans to understand what exactly the administration is trying to do and how it will affect them. It has been simultaneously a colossal remaking of the US state and the entire global order, but also seemingly haphazard, with significant policy decisions such as spending cuts and tariff rates clearly made with little thought or preparation. Analysts and commentators of all stripes have speculated on the motives and strategy behind the Trump administration’s huge overhaul of society. But what is the Trump administration’s plan for the US?The primary moves the administration has made are major cuts to federal government capacity through the “department of government efficiency” (Doge) and now an unprecedented tariff regime that has sent financial markets into a free fall. Some view these changes as part of a grand overarching strategy to rebuild some version of an imagined past America: globally hegemonic and able to exercise power nakedly over other countries, economically self-sufficient with a large manufacturing base, and a reassertion of the previous social norms and order around gender, race, and sexuality. But a deeper dive into the Trump administration’s explanation of their policies and vision reveals that rather than a single, coherent ideological project, the Trump administration is sclerotic and being used as a vehicle for more than one competing ideological project.While the first Trump administration had no real ideological project, with Donald Trump’s surprise win being based on a personalist coalition without the backing of an organized movement, and different factions within the administration battling for control over policy and favor from the president, the second Trump administration was backed and is staffed by two major ideological projects, representing different segments of capital: the oft-discussed “national conservatism” of the Claremont Institute, the Heritage Foundation and Project 2025, and tech capital, which has used Trump as a vehicle for its own priorities.These two overarching political projects and visions both see Trump as able to advance their goals, but these projects are competing with each other. Both have accepted that Republicans will lose the midterms in 2026, as the president’s party nearly always does, and are thus trying to radically reshape society in that time in ways that can’t easily be reversed. They have deeply different visions for the future, and whether one wins out or both of their incompatible sets of policies are carried out will have enormous implications for the lives of Americans and people around the globe.On tariffs, the administration has offered multiple, mutually exclusive visions: with some viewing tariffs as primarily a way to rebuild US manufacturing by incentivizing producers to build in the US; some viewing tariffs as primarily a way to raise revenue, cut the deficit, and in the long-term replace the income tax entirely; and some viewing tariffs primarily as a negotiating tool to force countries to make concessions to the US on a variety of issues.Trump personally has suggested that the US become an autarky, with no trade of any kind with the outside world. It’s unclear which of these will be the plan because they each have dramatically different implications for how the tariffs are structured in the long-term, how long they will last, and their effects on US workers.In the first two views, the tariffs are a part of the national conservative project of returning the US to a previous social order. They view the nation-state as the primary actor in a zero-sum anarchic global order of competing nation-states seeking to dominate each other. Tariffs are then a way of reasserting US national power relative to other states. This fits in with Trump’s rhetoric about the US, taking the country back and reasserting American nationhood, and is the primary way analysts and commentators have viewed the administration.The tech capital that oversees Doge, however, has a different project entirely. Elon Musk, who has personally overseen the large-scale slashing of the federal government, rejects tariffs entirely. The Doge project and the tariff project are at odds. The Doge project is cloaked in the rhetoric of retro America First nationalism that would seem on its face (and is understood as by its supporters) to be precisely the opposite of what it is in practice: the outmoding of the nation-state entirely.It’s notable that the first target for Doge’s cuts were not the New Deal programs conservatives have long wanted to cut, but instead the cold war-era nodes of American state power: scientific research, funding for education and the arts, foreign aid, and other programs that were created to allow the US to outcompete the Soviet Union and other countries. Musk does not care about American great power competition, such as with China, as Trump does. Indeed, Musk has close ties with the Chinese state.For Musk and his cohorts, the US must progress past the nation state model – where the state exist to project power against other nation states and part of this bargain is keeping a certain social compact of living standard with citizens – to the vendor state model where international firms are paramount and states exist instead to compete for their favor. The Doge project of Silicon Valley technolibertarianism aims to sublimate the state to capital entirely and to outsource state capacity to transnational tech firms. This is, rather than an end of globalization as the national conservatives want, the final conclusion of globalization, where international capital exists above and beyond the bounds of the nation-state.This is the reason large swathes of tech capital reversed course on Trump during the Biden administration and became his biggest financial backers. For them, Trump exists as a vehicle for their overall project.Both of these projects are disastrous for the American people on their own, but both being partially implemented in opposing ways is even worse and will lead to disaster for US workers and our society’s basic capacity to function.While the tariffs by themselves are devastating to US consumers and could lead to a major economic crisis, the Doge cuts strip state capacity that would be needed to implement the most positive vision of tariffs returning manufacturing jobs. While tariffs drive up prices on things like semiconductors or electric vehicles, the government is simultaneously slashing the programs designed to encourage these goods to be manufactured domestically. And while the Doge cuts have slashed the state and led to the direct capture of swathes of the state by tech capital, their overall project of global tech hegemony cannot progress in a world where international trade has broken down completely.Trump and the national conservative’s dream of a return to a pre-financialization manufacturing-based economy, where the US has security through economic self-reliance, and the tech right’s commitment to creating shareholder value at all costs, and whose entire model is based entirely on the result of financialization, are incompatible and on a collision course. Different sections of capital – tech on the one hand, and the revanchist small capital class who form national conservatism’s base on the other – have different and competing interests and control of different sections of administration policy. The consequences of this intranecine competition are enormous, but either way, the next four years look dire for the American working class. The damage may take generations to fix.

      Ben Davis works in political data in Washington DC. He worked on the data team for the Bernie Sanders 2020 campaign More

    • 150 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      Rightwing group backed by Koch and Leo sues to stop Trump tariffs

      by

      A libertarian group backed by Leonard Leo and Charles Koch has mounted a legal challenge against Donald Trump’s tariff regime, in a sign of spreading rightwing opposition to a policy that has sent international markets plummeting.The New Civil Liberties Alliance filed a suit against Trump’s imposition of import tariffs on exports from China, arguing that doing so under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) – which the president has invoked to justify the duties on nearly all countries – is unlawful.The group’s actions echo support given by four Republican senators last week for a Democratic amendment calling for the reversal of 25% tariffs imposed on Canada.Last Wednesday’s amendment passed with the support of Mitch McConnell, the former Republican Senate majority leader, and his fellow GOP members Rand Paul, Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski, who argued that tariffs on Canada would be economically harmful.The action from the alliance has the potential to be even more emblematic, given its backing from Koch, a billionaire industrialist, and Leo, a wealthy legal activist who advised Trump on the nomination of three conservative supreme court justices during his first presidency, which has given the court a 6-3 rightwing majority. The group received money from organisations affiliated with Leo and Koch in 2022.The alliance has tabled its action on behalf of Simplified, a Florida-based home goods company whose business is heavily reliant on imports from China. It argues that the president has exceeded his powers in invoking the IEEPA to justify tariffs.“This statute authorizes specific emergency actions like imposing sanctions or freezing assets to protect the United States from foreign threats,” the alliance said in a statement. “It does not authorize the president to impose tariffs. In its nearly 50-year history, no other president – including President Trump in his first term – has ever tried to use the IEEPA to impose tariffs.”The alliance also argues that power to impose tariffs lies not with a sitting president, but with Congress, and warns that those imposed by Trump could run afoul of US supreme court rulings.“His attempt to use the IEEPA this way not only violates the law as written, but it also invites application of the supreme court’s major questions doctrine, which tells courts not to discern policies of ‘vast economic and political significance’ in a law without explicit congressional authorization,” its statement said.Mark Chenoweth, the alliance’s president, said the court in Pensacola – where the suit has been filed – would have to observe this legal precedent.“Reading this law [IEEPA] broadly enough to uphold the China tariff would transfer core legislative power,” he said. “To avoid that non-delegation pitfall, the court must construe the statute consistent with nearly 50 years of unbroken practice and decide it does not permit tariff setting.”The suit argues that there is no connection between the fentanyl epidemic – which Trump has cited as a reason for invoking the emergency powers – and the tariffs.“The means of an across-the-board tariff does not fit the end of stopping an influx of opioids, and is in no sense ‘necessary’ to that stated purpose,” the complaint filed on behalf of Simplified argues.“In fact, President Trump’s own statements reveal the real reason for the China tariff, which is to reduce American trade deficits while raising federal revenue.”The legal case adds to rumbling disquiet on tariffs among some of Trump’s usually vocal supporters, including the billionaire hedge fund manager Bill Ackman.Paul, a senator from Kentucky who has been one of the most consistent congressional anti-tariff voices, told the Washington Post that other Capitol Hill Republicans shared his concern.“They all see the stock market, and they’re all worried about it,” Paul said. “But they are putting on a stiff upper lip to try to act as if nothing’s happening and hoping it goes away.”Speaking in support of last week’s Democratic amendment, sponsored by the Virginia senator Tim Kaine, Paul said: “I don’t care if the president is a Republican or a Democrat. I don’t want to live under emergency rule. I don’t want to live where my representatives cannot speak for me and have a check and balance on power.”Trump attacked Paul and the three other Republican senators who backed the amendment and suggested they were driven by “Trump derangement syndrome”.In another sign of Republican concern, the GOP senator from Iowa Chuck Grassley – along with a Washington Democrat, Maria Cantrell – introduced a bill that would limit Trump’s ability to impose or increase tariffs by requiring Congress to approve them within 60 days. The White House budget office said on Monday that Trump would veto the bill. More

    • 250 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Here’s one key thing you should know about Trump’s shock to the world economy: it could work | James Meadway

      by

      It’s less than a week since Donald Trump’s sensational announcement that he was unilaterally ending the world’s trading system with the imposition of a 10% minimum tariff for trading with the US – and a very much higher rate for those countries unfortunate enough to have the US as a major export partner. Long-term allies such as Japan and South Korea have been hammered with tariffs of around 25%, while export-dependent poorer countries such as Vietnam, which sells about a third of its exports to the US, have been hit with tariffs in excess of 45%. A further round of global debt crises is possible as heavily indebted countries face the sudden loss of export earnings.Global stock markets have tumbled as panicked investors dump shares, and political condemnation has been near-universal. China has already retaliated with 34% tariffs, threatening an escalating trade war. Right now, it looks and feels like disastrous overreach by a uniquely erratic administration at the behest of a president with a terrifyingly limited grasp of how the modern economy works.Trump has talked about imposing tariffs on the world since he first rose to prominence in the 1980s, when his target was Japan. In a political career notable for its jack-knifes in policy and direction, tariffs – “the most beautiful word in the dictionary” – have been a constant. But this is about far more than his long-cherished whims. However inconsistent or even confused Trump may sometimes appear to be, those around him have a clear-eyed view of what they want to achieve.His Treasury secretary, hedgefund billionaire Scott Bessent, has spoken of a “global economic reordering” that he intends to shape to the benefit of the US’s elite. Trump’s new chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, Stephen Miran, wrote a lengthy paper, A User’s Guide to Restructuring the Global Trading System, shortly before his appointment. The latter is particularly ambitious – detailing how the US should use not only tariffs but also the threat of withdrawing its security support to compel its friends and allies to accept cuts in payments due from the Federal Reserve on their US Treasury bills. This would be a potentially massive loss to them, akin, in reality, to a US debt default. But it is tariffs that are the cutting edge of the plan – leveraging the US’s power as the world’s largest consumer and greatest debtor to compel other countries into a negotiation on terms.After decades winning in an international trading game it wrote and refereed the rules for, the US is now facing serious competition – primarily from China, but with Europe as an expensive irritant. The response of this administration is to kick over the table, and demand everyone starts again. What it ultimately wants is a cheaper dollar to revive US manufacturing and Chinese competition held off, all the while keeping the dollar as the world’s reserve currency. And the rest of the world will pay the price.There are precedents. In October 1979, Paul Volcker, newly appointed as chair of the Federal Reserve, drove up interest rates to a remarkable 13% in a bid to tackle inflation, later raising them to 17%. Soon the US was in recession. Millions lost their jobs over the next two years, notably in manufacturing, where soaring interest rates had driven up the value of the dollar, making US exports less affordable on the world market. After a light easing of interest rate hell by the Fed, Volcker applied a second dose of the medicine, driving interest rates up to 19% and forcing the economy back into a double-dip recession. Unemployment peaked at around 10% in late 1982.View image in fullscreenBut by mid-1983, inflation had come down to 2.5%. For the rest of the 1980s, the US economy boomed. The “Volcker shock” appeared to have worked. Volcker is today a folk hero among central bankers: Ben Bernanke, chair of the Federal Reserve during the 2008 crisis, praised Volcker’s “independence” and willingness to brazen out the political storm.More decisive than lower inflation, however, was the reshaping of the US economy Volcker’s interest-rate shock accelerated: with manufacturing in freefall, investment flooded into finance and property, firing up what became the great credit bubble of the 1990s and 2000s. The world economy was reordered around a US that acted as a giant sink for its output – swallowing exports from the rest of the world on seemingly limitless borrowing. China’s extraordinary boom was the flipside of US debt and deindustrialisation. The Volcker shock, more than any other single action, created the globalised world system that Trump is now bent on destroying.Few would have bet on Volcker’s world-shaping capacity at the time. The stock market response to the shock was immediate and unanimous. US shares plunged by a record 8% in the two days after his announcement. The S&P 500 lost 27% of its value before August 1982 – two years of grinding decline. Manufacturers and unions hated it, understandably: they were on the wrong side of an epochal reconfiguration of US capitalism. But they were not the only losers: rising interest rates in the US meant less developed countries had to spend more on servicing debts, just as recession squeezed their major export markets. The result was the so-called “third world” debt crisis, as heavily indebted countries across the global south plunged into spirals of economic decline and soaring indebtedness.Over the weekend, Bessent and commerce secretary Howard Lutnick were doing the media rounds, insisting that there would be no climbdown on the tariffs. Trump is not for turning on what is clearly for him a personal crusade. Already, countries such as Vietnam are promising to cut all their tariffs on US goods – a clear and brutal demonstration of the US’s continuing economic power. The administration has claimed 50 other countries have also asked to open negotiations. By the end of the week, expect Trump to be triumphantly announcing more such concessions from economies in the global south. His real target – China – will be a far tougher nut to crack, if it breaks at all.Perhaps the rolling market chaos will become too much. Perhaps the administration will blink first. There is no guarantee this extraordinary gamble will work, not even for those in the clique around Trump. But it would be a mistake to assume it cannot work – and however the pieces now land, they will not return to their old places.

      James Meadway is the host of the podcast Macrodose More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Corporate America won’t stop Trump’s tariffs. Here’s why | Alex Bronzini-Vender

      by

      Few historical analogies exist for Donald Trump’s newly announced tariffs. The investment bank Evercore estimates that the so-called “liberation day” announcement has raised the weighted average US tariff to 29% – its highest rate since 1900. To call it a generational action would be an understatement; my grandmother was born in 1939.These tariffs, if they remain in place, will raise prices, eliminate jobs and shrink retirements. No one will pay for them more dearly than American workers. Yet a shock to capitalism inevitably raises the question of whether, and how, capitalists will respond. Faced with Trump’s tariffs, what will the US’s business class do?Some commentators have hoped that, once the effects of Trump’s economic misrule become apparent, executives will finally turn on the Maga movement. But the answer, as during Trump’s previous tariff scares, is likely to disappoint. The Chamber of Commerce, National Association of Manufacturers, and International Dairy Foods Association have each issued strongly worded statements against Trump’s trade action. Others are likely forthcoming. But those words are unlikely to become meaningful action, for it is simply not in the business lobby’s nature to fight the Republican party.Unlike much of the developed world, the US lacks a single, representative organization for big business. Barring extraordinary initiative by political actors, or moments of deep and protracted crisis, unified and cross-sectoral corporate lobbies rarely appear in American history. The National Association of Manufacturers and the Chamber of Commerce began as initiatives of presidents William McKinley and William Howard Taft, respectively; the Business Roundtable, founded through a merger of two union-busting business groups in 1972, stands as a rare business lobby organized by business itself.If these organizations have a difficult time coming together, they have an even harder time sticking together. The roundtable and the chamber experienced their greatest momentum during the economic turbulence of the 1970s: at last, their managers were able to unite the otherwise fractious American business community under the banner of fighting organized labor and its New-Dealer allies within the Democratic party. But by the middle of Ronald Reagan’s presidency, those enemies had been vanquished – and the chamber and roundtable hemorrhaged membership in turn.Business organizations never regained the command of American capitalism they had won in the late 70s and early 80s. The Chamber of Commerce has maintained stature only by becoming, essentially, an all-purposes lobbying firm. Its primary function is to receive contributions from industries attempting to obscure their hand in pushing politically unpopular causes: tobacco seeking to shield itself from liability, the auto industry seeking to relax safety standards, the health insurance sector seeking to stall healthcare reform, etc.Though the chamber and roundtable briefly stepped into more activist roles during the disruptions of the Tea Party, their success was, at best, mixed. At once, they found themselves dueling against the oil, gas and utilities sectors, each of whom fervently backed rightwing insurgents. By 2014, they had largely eliminated the Tea Party’s beachhead in Congress. Even so, they failed to repel the advance of Trump during the 2016 primaries; nor did they manage to sap the influence of the Freedom Caucus, today a king-making group among House Republicans.Though business organizations managed to significantly shape Trump’s 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, they notably failed to shape his administration’s 2018 trade war. Rather than mount a united front against Trump’s tariff regime, nearly 4,000 firms attempted to individually lobby the office of Robert Lighthizer for individual exemptions for their imports of interest. This, the political scientist Jack Zhang explains, had the ironic effect of overwhelming the United States trade representative’s office, and crowding out most lobbyists: few ultimately received exemptions, while the rest continued paying the cost of high tariffs.That period’s patterns are telling: American business, given the weakness of its coordinating institutions, is essentially incapable of coordinating significant challenges to the Republican party’s governance. A previous generation of corporate leadership might have met a shock of Wednesday’s magnitude with a coordinated response felt at all levels of American society – whether through lobbying efforts in Washington or advertisements in local newspapers. But American business is too disunited to mount similar campaigns today. “The pursuit of individual self-interests,” as Zhang noted in 2020, “left none to defend the public goods associated with a free and open market between the US and China.”That phenomenon is a persistent feature of the Trump era. The chamber’s boycott of campaign contributions to the Republican party after the January 6 insurrection lasted little more than two months. And the agricultural lobby, once a powerful pro-immigration voice on Capitol Hill, has all but abandoned its public advocacy for immigrants: organizing on the issue, where it exists, is done through quiet lobbying behind closed doors. If history is any guide, then, there will be no meaningful corporate break with the Republican party.“We are living through the nightmare edition of ‘Great Men Make History’,” wrote the leftwing theorist Mike Davis shortly before his death in 2022. “Unlike the high Cold war when politburos, parliaments, presidential cabinets and general staffs to some extent countervailed megalomania at the top, there are few safety switches between today’s maximum leaders and Armageddon.”Our moment, as Davis observed, is the apogee of a long-brewing structural crisis of American liberalism, where even the mechanisms that once aligned state policy with corporate interests have fundamentally broken down. Whether among executives, lobbyists or university trustees, an elite-led backlash to the Trump administration – on trade, immigration, the rule of law or anything else – is not forthcoming. Only an organized working class, then, can resist Trump.

      Alex Bronzini-Vender is a writer living in New York More