Keeping an open mind in assessing Trump's approach, my take principally on Tariffs and the destruction of the welfare sector:
From my understanding, and memory, there have been two attempts, both successful, to cut American government spending. Once was in the late 1920s, and the other under Clinton. On both occasions, cuts in federal spending were successful and government spending was cut. On both occasions, a few years after came a downturn or recession. The reason for this may be that with government restrictions on national spending private borrowing increased rapidly and caused problems for most of the next decade until the Second World War, which caused an increase in government spending.
Now while this alone may have enabled the wealth growth of the 1950s, the war had damaged or disabled all of America's competitors. America had a free hand to expand.
That is the history, now to the present.
There seems a lack of know, in my view, of how economies function and the idea that cutting welfare will encourage growth is mistaken as by doing so other problems will arise and with the very poor without sufficient money spending overall will decline and there will in addition be far less money around. Trump's government is a business one, including as it does, Musk. But businesses operate within states and are not, obviously, states. Their economics is different. Welfare enables spending even by the very poor, which will positively impact the state's internal economy. Without it, many, indeed millions, will or could function outside of the economy.
Tariffs are a different issue as there is no evidence they will work. Trump seems to believe that the USA is that of his childhood when it could command other economies due to the war and USA technological advances in the following decades. What Trump sees as America having been ripped off by the entire world is simply natural change. The impact of tariffs and counter tariffs could end up seriously damaging Western economies to the benefit of China.
Excellent observations Stanley Wilkin ! Trump’s view reflects a desire to restore a perceived golden age, but as you mentioned, it’s essential to understand that economic conditions evolve, and a return to past policies may not be feasible or effective. Any effective economic policy must consider both short-term gains and long-term sustainability. Investment in education, infrastructure, and technology are generally seen as ways to foster a robust economy that can adapt to changing circumstances. Policies that encourage innovation and skills development may prove more beneficial than those that rely on protectionist measures or cuts to welfare. The interconnected nature of global economies means that domestic policies must be carefully considered to avoid unintended consequences. You Stanley Wilkin have raised very important points about the complexities of economic systems and the interplay between welfare, business practices, and trade policies.
Neither Trump nor Musk understand the role played by services in modern economies. Both are very much entrepreneurs after the quick buck.
Tariffs can open a country to undermining by external groups, offering similar goods without tariffs, thereby destroying America's trade for the future!
Tariffs are meant to replace income tax eventually, which will benefit the billionaires. There is unlikely to be sufficient for welfare. This is a billionaire's move.
But because of changes in the production of wealth and its distribution a new economy is necessary.
Your notion Stanley Wilkin that changes in the production of wealth and its distribution necessitate a new economy reflects a growing consensus among economists, policymakers, and social theorists.
The rapid advancement of technology, especially in automation, artificial intelligence, and digital services, has transformed traditional industries. This shift requires new economic models that can harness these technologies for broader societal benefits. While globalization has expanded markets and opportunities, it has also led to economic dislocation in certain regions. A new economic framework might need to balance global trade with local economic resilience and community empowerment. Advances in financial technology (FinTech) present opportunities for new economic models that promote better access to capital, particularly for underserved communities, small businesses, and startups.
Adapting to these changes in how wealth is produced and distributed is crucial for creating an economy that is equitable, sustainable, and resilient.
Stephen,
My thoughts and more.
One problem, amongst many, is that tariffs will benefit the wealthier nations and not allow room for the smaller ones, thereby (and this is what people like Musk do not understand) affecting the development of wealth overall.
Yes Stanley Wilkin . While tariffs may serve certain short-term interests in wealthy nations, their long-term effects on global wealth distribution and economic development can be detrimental, particularly for smaller and developing countries. An understanding of these dynamics is crucial for policymakers and influential figures in the business world.
My contention is, and always has been, that Trump and Musk are enamoured of Putin's Russia and are attempting to replicate it in America, for example closing the Education sector. While this is not necessarily a Putin move, his society is oligarchal and one where the poor are further impoverished in order better to be controlled and as we have seen throw their lives away in pointless wars for Putin. Look how many wars Trump has hinted at: Canada, Mexico, Greenland, an aspect of the United States that began dying at the beginning of the 20th century.
It is not a novel view to suggest that Trump and Musk are setting up an oligarchal society (look how the billionaires recently stood behind Musk and Trump, a unison of money (new money) and privilege based on the false idea that making money indicates or betstows exceptional qualities on the entrepreneur. Worth noting that most entrepreneurs, although they claim they are self-made, never are, they just quickly forget those who helped them when they succeed. Trump inherited millions but absurdly makes the same claims.
Although each believes they are intellectually exceptional, listening to Musk and Trump, ignoring their self-publicising eccentricities (especially Musk), they appear to lack in these respects suggesting other aptitudes are at work. I have worked with businessmen, and I established several of my own but (what that says about me) none worked well, but then I was not backed up by wealthy relatives. It is actually hard to succeed with start-ups without a lot of financial backing. Modest wealth can be acquired but usually through the ownership of small businesses developed over time.
Adding to above: the dynamics of business rather than simply 'doing well' involves internal volition that has little to do with the businessmen involved. At certain points, money really does seem to attract money. The Ancient Athenians, the first to create money rather than coinage, were very aware of how money acquires a life of its own.
Trump believes having a great deal of money means a high IQ (whatever that entails) and that view occasions his admiration of Musk, who has more money then he does,therefore theoretically is more intelligent. Nothing in their recent activities indicates any of this. What comes over instead is two people with practical knowledge but no theoretical knowledge who cannot understand or deal with the activities they have unleashed. Imposing one political form on another invariably brings problems.
Your observations Stanley Wilkin raise interesting points about the relationship between wealth, intelligence, and political ideology. The belief that financial success equates to intelligence is a common perception, but it can be misleading. Many individuals with considerable wealth, like Donald Trump and Elon Musk, may possess practical skills and entrepreneurial acumen; however, this does not necessarily translate to a deep understanding of complex theoretical concepts or the broader implications of their actions.
Moreover, the issues arising from their endeavors often stem from a lack of nuanced understanding of the systems they engage with. For instance, imposing one political framework onto another—whether through business practices, technological advancements, or governance—without fully considering the historical and cultural context can lead to significant challenges.
This can be particularly evident in the way both Trump and Musk approach innovation and policy. Their focus on immediate results and disruption can overlook the importance of collaboration, empathy, and the consideration of diverse perspectives, which are vital for long-term success and stability.
Navigating complex societal issues necessitates not just practical knowledge, but also a theoretical understanding of human behavior, social systems, and the interconnectedness of various factors.
While wealth can provide a platform for influence, it does not inherently confer wisdom or understanding, and the impact of decisions made without such insight can be profound and far-reaching, also e.g. with respect to the long-term strategy of Mr.Putin.
Stephen
An absolute response but the approach is different based on experiencing, the immediacy of money making as against understanding the processes. Trump and Musk individualize experience and attach it to ego perceptions. Consequently, there is limited perception and action is everything.
It's not my understanding of intelligence- even people like Caesar and Napoleon were deep thinkers. Neither of the above realise the consequences of their acts.
Trump is now calling out Japan in his usual manner, insults, claims, threats. Guess what, Japan has been ripping off America too. With no knowledge of history the world's leading dumbo, claims that America has long been defending Japan without payment, and now Trump will place tariffs on Japan. He's managing to insult and provoke all allies.
Now, Japan has poured money into the USA and has set up numerous industries there, but the biggest dumbo in the world does not know that (he does not seem to read: probably too much effort and not worth bothering with when he can simply lie and shout). Japan can put tariffs back on America, if it chooses with dramatic effect, or withdraw its finance from America, either way for America its lose/lose.
The worst part? Trump is distablising the world economy and to the advantage of China. He only attacks his western allies. NATO, as it is, is also likely to collapse. In the pay of Putin or just stupid, surrounded by 4th raters who just agree with him, he is certainly destroying America's economy. His rule will affect the USA for several generations, his economic readdressing through gangster methods of threat and blackmail.
Innovation it is not. There is nothing new or original, except a weird strategic choice to go to trade war against the whole world, and antagonize allies. I hope it's just for show, if anything. It's US choice, and it's their right, and they will judge the consequences.
Bradut,
Yes, it isn't an innovation except for his bullying approach. How US comes back from this is another matter.
His recent threats again to Ukraine seem peculiarly self serving and makes you wonder if the money Trump wants from Ukraine will end up in his own bank account? Vote in a known crook and you get Trump.
New tariffs likely to cause economic downturns. it would take three years to take advantage but with immense difficulty. creating new factories is probably not possible even in 4 years
Given today's red tape required in most western world, building a greenfield investment may take years for legal documents only.
Instead of a tariff, I would rather reduce that red tape and streamline that process. That would be an immediate benefit a a massive reduction in capital cost for investments. That would mean massively reducing the risks, bringing the production phase closer in time, and way more sustainable benefits. However, such a measure require huge administrative and legal expertise, and it's a complex process.
Bradut,
Your method leaves control with Trump and that is exactly what he wants. Doing so would cause stagnation even eventually for America. The economic situation stays a game one played by Trump.
I just watched a video by the famous Greek economist. His previous one had him waxing lyrical about Trump's marvellous change of the economy to bit coins. It was nonsense and projection but in the recent one he attributes Trump's economics to cleverness discussing Nixon's 1971 economic miracle changing the economic structure to be based entirely on America. Now Nixon was clever but Trump just pretends to be, both are criminals or were. Problem is, Trump probably doesn't know what Nixon did and was not anyway exactly what the Greek economist believes. Trump is not educated and does not read.
The Greek economist fails to note Trump's authoritarian behaviour and its effects on the world economy alone.
No, Trump needs to be stood up to and told that America is not as exclusive as it once was and call his bluff. Trump should, within reason, be ignored and the world will find it does not need the US as much as it needs the world.
An authoritarian vision of international trade- disaster follows.
Trump’s trade doctrine is part of a broader strategy defined by confrontation, centralised executive power and a neo-imperial view of the global economy...
US v. them: Trump’s tariffs and his economic vision of dominance
Confrontation with the rest of the world, enemies and allies alike, is at the heart of Donald Trump’s politics. His tariffs must be understood in this way...
"US President Donald Trump’s April 2 announcement of sweeping new tariffs against numerous countries isn’t just driven by (already questionable) economic reasoning. It reflects the deeply adversarial worldview embraced by the current occupant of the White House.
Since returning to the presidency, Trump has unleashed a new wave of tariffs unprecedented in scope. Traditional allies and strategic rivals are now under the same banner, marking a radical shift in Washington’s trade policy that hardens positions taken in Trump’s first term, amplifying them with an unbridled display of power..."
https://theconversation.com/us-v-them-trumps-tariffs-and-his-economic-vision-of-dominance-254096
Winding people up, Ljubomir Jacić? While there is much to your position he actually appears to believe what he says. Why do others find it difficult to believe he's simply very stupid?
He really appears to have no understanding of economics and what is actually mutual transaction he sees, if the results are unbalanced as they often appear to be because most of the transactions ae not stated, the other countries are stealing.
If someone is, as the English say, thick, they would believe that.
If Mr.Trump continues like this, he will be the Gorbachev of the USA. Stanley Wilkin Yes=He really appears to have no understanding of economics.
Stephen
Trump's claims for high intelligence, on the evidence offered, seems absurd and another instance of Trumpian rhetoric. The same could apply to Musk although he has built his ego on high intelligence, and accepting his limitations would be difficult for him. Trump would simply go on and boast about something else.
But other issues arise from this. I have seen claims by others that Trump's IQ is 150, but by attestation. That is his own claim. I came across an article on a night club bouncer who says he has an IQ of 198. An extraordinary one. The problem is there is no test offered. He says, and that is it. He has achieved nothing except a YouTube video on his ideas which consist of him looking dreamy and solemn and warbling on in a genius like fashion (actually nonsense). Trump too offers no test evidence.
Behaviour and actual achievement is everything and a bouncer who claims to be an IQ genius is just a grifter. That includes Trump who has only himself to confirm achievements, in business and out. Trump's use of his office to make another fortune in crypto confirms his grifter nature.
The stock market fetish
"The most recent turmoil in the stock market caused by Donald Trump’s ill-considered policy to impose tariffs on the entire world, has brought up one legitimate question: what is the correct attitude towards stock market declines and crashes? This is a question being asked regardless of the chain of decisions and events that had brought the stock market recently down.
I can quite readily understand that the reaction of the capitalist class and the right-wing elite would be to be appalled by such declines. This is quite obvious from the think-tanks and the mainstream press. These are cataclysmic events—for them. Their opinions are guided by only two principles: to reduce own tax rates and to become richer through appreciation of capital they own. So it makes total sense that they should outraged by the declines in the stock market..."
https://branko2f7.substack.com/p/the-stock-market-fetish
Ljubomir,
An interesting view. Strangely, as you must be aware, it is the billionaires who are being most affected.
Is, I wonder, the Trump presidency that makes us aware of the lack of intelligence of business people, and why perhaps they do not need to be? Is it that personality plays a larger part than understanding and reflection?
I will add, the claimed distinction between academics, not active types, and business people is nonsense.
Have You read this article about Elon MUSK and USAID? Dear Stanley Wilkin it is, somehow related to your question.
Elon Musk, Meet Christine Sheckler
Maybe She Could Educate the Guy with the Chainsaw — Or Maybe Not
"What put the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), with an annual budget hovering at just about 1% of federal spending, at the top of Elon Musk’s budget-cutting target list? Was it just a political calculation that foreign aid is a safe target because it’s unpopular with so many Americans and cutting those funds will only hurt foreigners, not U.S. voters? Or was Musk motivated by some other grudge we haven’t even heard about?..."
https://tomdispatch.com/elon-musk-meet-christine-sheckler/
Ljubomir
An old friend of Musk says he went for people in competition with his companies.
While business leaders may have valuable skills in negotiation, strategy, and risk management, the dynamics of political leadership require a broader set of competencies, including empathy, ethical reasoning, and the capacity for reflective thinking. The Trump presidency illustrated that while charisma and personality can often overshadow traditional measures of intelligence, effective leadership in politics may require a deeper understanding of complex societal issues and the implications of policy decisions.
Stanley Wilkin
In a position such as mine standing up to the Trump Administration its just as pointless as standing up against the rain and the wind. All I can do is make projections regarding the future, different scenarios, and try to design a way to navigate the storm. I am NOT American, so I have absolutely no say about US policy. Seen from my perspective, Trump policies are a risk factor, and increase the probability of some highly pessimistic scenarios. What i can tell you is that the wall of unpredictable future has come way closer for me, and, i suppose, most people, including entrepreneurs and investors.
Bradut,
I agree with you about an unpredictable future.
The tariffs could or probably will cause poverty amongst the less well/off Americans, in fact those who voted for Trump, and probably elsewhere. Trump and Putin knew each other when Trump when he was about 36 went to Russia for future business prospects, and made the acquaintance of many politicians there and businessmen. His authoritarian intentions probably began then.
There is little doubt for me that Trump, who talks constantly about the American Gilded Age, when USA was run by billionaires, was to repeat this period. He comes from a generational group of millionaires who were also urban gangsters taking an unethical approach to business. I believe he has already recouped millions from his present term.
Stephen
There is one area of the tariffs which is not discussed.
They effectively tie the involved countries to the US economy, with the US deciding prices and effectively the market place and competition.
While that seems good for the US economy nevertheless new market places are likely to arise as a consequence, perhaps China and EU. Sharma's cowardly response could play against the UK as Trump's attempts to control the marketplace rather than compete will play against the US.
The Coming Economic Nightmare
Trump’s tariffs could cause stagflation for the first time in decades. It may go on for a long, long time...
"The term that came into use to describe the era was stagflation: stagnation plus inflation. Until recently, it seemed a relic of the disco era, but the economic chaos of Donald Trump’s second presidency has resurfaced the old word. Stock markets are warning of a recession. Bond markets are anticipating inflation. Perhaps one market is wrong, or the other, or both. More likely, they portend the return of a half-forgotten nightmare..."
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2025/06/trump-economy-tariffs-stagflation/682572/
Ljubomir
I will first point out that Trump's wealth is growing as he is now selling cryptic coins from the White House, with promises of his help if people purchase them. So he and his family will be fine unless Congress takes it away from him as effectively he is bribing people.
While you are right that this will be a continued disaster there is one long term event that seems overlooked. Give me your views on this!
If the tariffs hold, in a reduced form, Trump can control pricing. He is not astute enough to see this but it would or could be a long term effect. This will prevent further competition, reducing American and western competitiveness. Certainly then America and those that continue to be caught within its economic grip will stagnate....while China will have its own fiefdom and another could develop in EU, Canada, and the old British WHITE empire. Britain I would not include in this. The country's connection to US may being short term rewards but long term poverty. Starma needs some, as the Americans say, b...lls.
Your analysis touches on several important aspects of international economics and the potential long-term effects of protectionist policies, such as tariffs. This dynamic can indeed create a scenario where countries like China strengthen their economic positions, leveraging the existing tariffs to create a more insular market for their products. As you pointed out, this could lead to the formation of economic blocs that might challenge American and Western dominance, particularly if other regions, like the EU and Canada, align themselves more strategically against U.S. interests. The globalization of trade has interconnected economies in ways that make protectionist policies increasingly difficult to implement without significant trade-offs.
Stephen
None of this favours USA, and in comparison Canada could pull away. The Americans shot themselves in the foot by voting in Trump (merely demonstrating how stupid they are) and he seems not to understand the processes he has unleashed.
The only states ever able to control wealth were the Roman Empire as all gold and silver coins were minted in Rome, and Persia. But these incidentally were both monarchical who both conquered and controlled the opposition. Trump could only have succeeded (he couldn't actually as that is another matter) when the USA was several leaps away from others in the 1950s. And this was only because the European economies had been shattered by WW2 and Japan was almost destroyed and China not yet starting on the long road back. Trump's ideas were based on a world that long ago ceased to exist, the USA of cowboys and superman, chewing gum and arrogant American tourists.
MAGA was a throwback of a weakening state and the marshalling and militarising of a strange form of the Christian religion, ushering in the stupidest government officials from Trump down, a past and a state unable to face its decline. Republican politicians seem straight out 'creating morons by numbers' children's book.
Trump, tariffs and uncertainty
If one had to sum up the new US tariff policy in a word, “unpredictable” would suffice, as the so-called “Liberation Day” of 2 April 2025 represented the largest tariff increase in modern history...
"Just one week later, the US president then made two further announcements. First, a 90-day freeze on tariff hikes, apparently in search of bilateral agreements with the countries to which he had applied tariffs above 10%. Second, that China would be excluded from this exception, with tariffs on its products being raised to 145%.
This freeze means that until July EU goods being sold to the US will have a 10% tariff instead of the 20% that was announced on 2 April. However, the 10% applied by the new US administration is still much higher than the average tariff of 1.34% that was in force before 5 April.
But what will the tariff be after these 90 days? What about in December? What about in 2 years’ time? What goods will be exempted? How far will the trade war between China and the US go? The answer to all of these questions is: nobody knows. This uncertainty is evident in of the IMF’s spring forecast...
Unbelievable though it may sound, this appears to be how the tariffs are being decided and enacted. According to one account, the US Treasury and Commerce Secretaries were only able to persuade Trump to freeze recent tariff hikes because Peter Navarro – the president’s economic advisor and tariff ideologue – was in another room at the time.
The end result of this unpredictability is that the best course of action, for consumers and businesses alike, is inaction..."
https://theconversation.com/imf-world-economic-outlook-economic-uncertainty-is-now-higher-than-it-ever-was-during-covid-255055?
The amateurish and slipshod nature of Trump's government is a given. hopefully the effects of tariffs on USA will be such that we can begin to ignore the USA.
Oh by the way worth noting again that there were no tariffs on Russia but were on Ukraine. Time to admit that the two presidents work together?
America’s Economic Tailwinds Will Override Trump and His Tariffs
"Following the shock and awe of Donald Trump's return to the White House, it is now clear that his most destructive economic policies will be contained by market, institutional, and structural forces. Moreover, underlying trends should position the United States for exceptional growth over the medium and long term...
To be sure, US inflation will surge above 4% this year. Trade deals with most countries will limit the tariff rate to an undesirable but manageable 10-15% level, and a likely de-escalation with China will leave that rate at around 60%, on average, driving a gradual decoupling of the two economies. The ensuing shock to real (inflation-adjusted) disposable incomes will stall growth by the fourth quarter of this year, perhaps leading to a shallow US recession that will last for a couple of quarters.
But a Fed that remains credibly committed to anchoring inflation expectations will be able to cut rates once growth stalls, and a modest rise in the unemployment rate will weaken inflation. By the middle of 2026, US growth will be experiencing a strong recovery, but Trump will have been damaged politically, auguring a loss for his party in the midterm elections. Fears of the US descending into autocracy will be alleviated. American democracy will survive the Trump shock, and, after an initial period of pain, the US economy will thrive."
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/markets-fed-technology-will-offset-trump-tariffs-by-nouriel-roubini-2025-04
Ljubomir
I have had similar thoughts that these, for all the wrong reasons, will have a positive effect long term but the damage and changes are not just economic.
NSF stops awarding new grants and funding existing ones
"...In the long term, severe reductions in science funding could damage the economy. A report last month by economists at American University in Washington DC estimates that a 50% reduction in federal science funding would reduce the US gross domestic product by approximately 7.6%1. “This country’s status as the global leader in science and innovation is seemingly hanging by a thread at this point,” one NSF staff member says..."
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-01396-2
Ljubomir,
This alone demonstrates how dangerous Trump is to America's future and really how stupid he actually is. With his tragic interference with the universities , America will lose all status. How many new students from abroad will enroll at these universities losing an immense source of revenue as well as the loss of the best minds from the academic and scientific staff?
America's first (perhaps) illiterate government. Shouldn't there be precautions, some means of preventing people this stupid from assuming power.
Trump’s Misguided Plan to Weaken the Dollar
"The so-called Mar-a-Lago Accord, proposed by Council of Economic Advisers Chair Stephen Miran, aims to reduce the United States’ current-account deficit by weakening the dollar. But this plan is based on a deeply flawed understanding of the relationship between the dollar’s global status and US deindustrialization...
Miran’s plan, clever as it might be, is based on a flawed diagnosis. While the dollar’s role as the world’s leading reserve currency plays a part, it is just one of many factors contributing to America’s persistent trade deficits. And if the trade deficit has many causes, the idea that tariffs can be a cure-all is dubious at best."
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/trump-administration-mar-a-lago-plan-to-weaken-dollar-is-deeply-flawed-by-kenneth-rogoff-2025-05
America Is Erasing the Data the World Needs
"From evaluating economic trends to tracking climate change and measuring progress on health, US government data have long played a vital role in guiding policy, both at home and internationally. But the production and reliability of long-standing, widely used US government data sources are now under threat...
In recent months, thousands of web pages and datasets have been removed from United States government websites. An informal army of “data rescuers” has emerged to download, save, and republish vital information, including some 300,000 datasets on data.gov, before it is lost. But preserving existing data is only a temporary measure. The bigger question is how future data – particularly the health and climate data that are essential to guide policy – will be produced and published..."
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/how-to-respond-to-us-attacks-on-the-creation-and-reliability-of-data-by-shaida-badiee-et-al-2025-05
Health Experts Say: Don’t Abandon WHO, Reform It
Even critics of the global health organization say that the United States’ withdrawal won’t solve pressing problems...
"In the short term, WHO will presumably try to mitigate damage from the U.S.’s withdrawal, said Torreele, the Geneva-based global health researcher. In the longer term, she hopes the shock of the situation will have a silver lining, encouraging WHO to reform and focus on its core mission.
“If we are in this time of crisis and big geopolitical shifts, can we grab that opportunity to bring back health as a human right, as a collective, solidarity-based thing?” Torreele asked. “That would be fantastic.”..."
https://undark.org/2025/05/07/who-trump-reform/
Culture wars, political polarization and deepening inequality: the roots of Trumpism
"More than 100 days into his return to the White House, the conclusion is stark: Donald Trump is no longer the same president he was during his first term. His familiar nationalist and populist rhetoric is now openly paired with an authoritarian turn – one without precedent in US history. He has adopted a neo-imperial view of the economy, treating the global order as a zero-sum contest of winners and losers. In this worldview, cooperation gives way to domination: what matters is power and the accumulation of wealth...
The US re-elected not just a man, but a style, an era and a worldview built on dominance, disruption and disdain for rules. Still, history is unwritten: intoxicated by hubris and undermined by incompetence, Trumpism may yet crash into the wall of reality – with consequences far beyond America’s borders..."
https://theconversation.com/culture-wars-political-polarization-and-deepening-inequality-the-roots-of-trumpism-255778?
Ljubomir
I do not know enough to analyse this effectively but I think we need to see what happens when things start failing, still it seems to me the group, Trump and those around him, have formed a cocoon and separated themselves from events.
Ljubomir,
It is not possible to view developments outside of the criminal nature of Trump and those around him and his family. Imagine the Godfather taking over America, Trump spent much of his early years working with gangsters, and the gangsters running Russia.
In fact this concerns as much economic change, the rise and stealing of power by an oligarchy which in USA was interested at best in funding politics and finding out that they could run it and cut out the middle man. Yes, the Gilded Age again. But this long ruled in American politics with periods of ethical growth. Early 20th century American culture was obsessed with corruption, especially political corruption.
This wealthy group have discovered they can rule millions of others through new technology, i.e. Musk, although whether this can succeed for the long term is another matter. But this is not an ethical world view, which after all lasted at best for a few centuries encouraging the humanist view of human kind and the way societies function. Trump knows instinctively, and attacks on universities will continue given that they encourage thinking.
Ignoring MAGA in this appalling period is not wise. I knew little about it before Trump's election seeing this as just another crazy American movement, which it is, with an equally strange take on Christianity, although this is in line with many powerful American Christian preachers who emphasis money, in the millions not like European churches who happily take small denominations.
I listened to one prominent MAGA yesterday talking about the Catholic Church, the new Pope has attacked MAGA and Trump, and saying in a powerful rasping voice (they all work on their voices making them instantly recognisable) that the Communist Party is still infiltrating the Catholic Church, taking it over. Now, his reasoning? The Pope's attacks on MAGA have referenced Christian virtues of helping the poor, do unto others, and thinking of others before yourself. and that Trump and MAGA insist on the opposite. He has also railed against a Christian Nationalism, which surely has more than a little to do with Putin's religion? The speaker believes these ideas are Communist. For the speaker, the new Pope is a communist agent as no doubt the previous one was.
Of course Trump posted a picture of him self as Pope, offending the church. Asked why he did it at a press conference, he gave a manufactured stern look (anyone notice how his expressions conform with the stern and pompous looks of other dictators in the past, and look at the sneaky, creepy expressions of his youth.) and simply replied 'Next question' looking elsewhere.
US is hobbling a healthcare breakthrough
"Drug makers are scrambling to navigate an “existential threat” to one of the most promising medical breakthroughs of the century: mRNA vaccines. In the United States, the cradle of much mRNA research, public trust has been damaged by anti-vaccine activism, led by Robert F. Kennedy Jr, who is now at the head of the country’s top health agency. In this newly hostile political climate, mRNA-vaccine advocates hope to remind US president Donald Trump of the technology’s immense success against COVID-19 during his first term. “I think what we’ll see in the next few years is that this tech is ceded to international competitors,” says RNA-therapeutics researcher Alex Wesselhoeft..."
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-01462-9
Justin Wolfers on You Tube (Trump Broke The Global Economy All By Himself (w/ Justin Wolfers) points out that the rich are now earning (Trump of course) far far more and a small elite are earning as much and soon more 5than 50% of other incomes.
To prosper, incomes must be shared through the population ensuring spending power. The rich spend on a narrow number of things. Thatcher tried the same by moving wealth to the Upper Middle Class and away from the poor claiming that the money would seep down to the poor. It didn't of course, the rich banked it.
Ljubomir,
Although I back drug development, to some extent, for diseases and anything of a similar nature I have headed justified attacks on psychiatric drugs claiming that the truth of their efficacy lies in the opinion of the doctor or medical profession, who do not after all take them but go by whatever the drug companies tell them.
Now I revolt against someone as inane as Kennedy (the family had to produce at least one duffer) in charge as there is a distinct difference between psychic and physical, with the latter demonstrating genuine evidence of improvement the other based on rhetorical stances of psychiatry.
The Economic Consequences of the Trump Administration’s Policies
"To call the current global economic environment “uncertain” grossly understates the confusion that has taken hold in recent months, and especially since US President Donald Trump introduced his “Liberation Day” tariffs in early April. He paused them almost immediately, after capital markets – especially US bond markets – were thrown into turmoil. But no one, except perhaps some administration insiders, knows whether Trump will reactivate the tariffs – suspended for 90 days as affected countries attempt to negotiate new bilateral trade agreements with the United States – sometime this summer, or replace them with a series of negotiated arrangements with trading partners. Nonetheless, we can predict some of the effects Trump’s policies will have on the US and global economies..."
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/short-and-long-term-effects-of-trump-economic-policies-by-michael-spence-2025-05
The US Dollar’s Fall from Grace
"Despite his stated commitment to maintaining the dollar’s global dominance, US President Donald Trump is actively undermining the value of – and confidence in – the greenback. This does not bode well for the “exorbitant privilege” that the dollar’s status as the main international reserve currency has long bestowed on the US, though it does create space for possible replacements..."
https://www.project-syndicate.org/onpoint/the-us-dollar-s-fall-from-grace
How private funders can jump-start science
"Grants from philanthropies cannot replace those from US federal agencies, but they can bolster science, argues Cynthia Friend, the head of The Kavli Foundation. She suggests two intertwined goals: “the first is to back early-stage, high-risk work with the potential to change the future of science and technology. The second is to work together, to maximize investment returns”. Misinformation researcher Lisa Fazio argues that private funders could step up by providing continued funding for cancelled grants. “These projects have already passed rigorous peer review, so funders can save time and resources by fast-tracking support,” she notes. In the meantime, those whose grants have been axed could consider conducting new analyses on existing data sets, leaning more on global collaborations and cutting costs with community-science projects..."
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-01544-8
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-01547-5
Trump and the Risk of a US Debt Default
William L. Silber warns that Donald Trump could join the list of reckless lame-duck presidents by putting the US into default on its bonds...
"As a recent Wall Street Journal editorial observed, if “tariffs fail to reorder the global trading system,” some fear that Trump will “impose a fee on Treasury debt, as chief White House economist Stephen Miran has proposed.” Because this would “cut the rate of return,” it would “amount to a partial US default.” Bankruptcy lawyers might argue over whether this taxing strategy counts as a default, but the logic is apparently as convincing to the WSJ’s editorial board as it is to me.
Trump might go even further. In my book The Power of Nothing to Lose: The Hail Mary Effect in Politics, War, and Business, I show that second-term presidents tend to become reckless, because they are no longer restrained by the ballot box. This is certainly the case with Trump, who has often embraced untested tools and policies. As I pointed out last year, there is no provision in the US bankruptcy code for the federal government to seek protection, in the way a business can, but Trump could order the Treasury secretary to abstain from paying interest and/or repaying the principal on the federal debt. Missing a payment would put the US in default.
A US default would indeed be catastrophic. And now, more than ever, it is a scenario that must be taken seriously."
https://mailchi.mp/project-syndicate/william-l-silber-on-the-risk-of-a-us-debt-default-for-ps-say-more?e=1af5004e12
The IMF Is Missing in Action
Today’s global economic imbalances result not from import tariffs or exchange-rate manipulation, but rather from inappropriate macroeconomic policies across deficit and surplus countries alike. If the International Monetary Fund was doing its job, it would be waving a red flag and recommending solutions.
"According to the International Monetary Fund’s Articles of Agreement, the Fund’s main purpose is to facilitate the balanced growth of international trade and thereby promote high levels of employment and real (inflation-adjusted) income. Yet with globalization facing its greatest threat in the postwar period, and with global external economic imbalances set to rise, the IMF seems to be missing in action. Instead of pursuing an active role in reducing external imbalances, it is focusing on issues that lie beyond its remit, such as climate change and gender equality..."
Full text may be found here:
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/imf-passive-and-silent-despite-trumps-globally-destabilizing-tariffs-tax-cuts-by-desmond-lachman-2025-05
Stanley Wilkin , I do not understand your last reply. Please, clarify it. Thanks.
Ljubomir
Many seem simply afraid of Trump, those in positions where they should be defending values not hiding away.
Mercantilism Isn’t All Bad, but Trump’s Version Is the Worst
Donald Trump's chaotic, indiscriminate trade policies do little to expand critical, strategic investments in the United States, and are riddled with cronyism. His brand of mercantilism embodies all its worst defects, with none of the benefits that countries have unlocked by getting their trade policies right...
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/trump-mercantilism-worst-features-with-none-of-the-benefits-by-dani-rodrik-2025-05
Over the past two months, financial investors have hit upon a new trading strategy, based on a simple rule: TACO – Trump Always Chickens Out. America’s president threatens to slap massive import tariffs on friends and foes alike, or to remove the Federal Reserve chair, only to back down when the whip of the market imposes its uncompromising discipline. Then he switches back to tariffs, only to back down yet again...
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/only-americans-are-intimidated-by-trump-by-timothy-snyder-2025-06?
King Trump vs. the Bond Market
While US President Donald Trump promises that his “big, beautiful” tax and spending bill will supercharge growth and that tax cuts will pay for themselves, history offers little support for such claims. With no appetite for fiscal discipline, the question is not whether there will be a reckoning, but what form it will take.
In the Middle Ages, it was often the court jester who dared to speak uncomfortable truths to the king. In the ersatz court of US President and aspiring monarch Donald Trump, that role belongs to the bond market...
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/trump-big-beautiful-bill-will-harm-us-economy-and-dollar-by-kenneth-rogoff-2025-06?
Ljobomir,
If Trump is slowly descending into senility he will be the last to know how foolish he is. The evidence suggests he is although his memory loss concerns historical events as well as possibly personal ones. Not knowing about the Second World War (his discussion with the German leader) is maybe a memory loss too far. But what about the cognitive loss of his economic minister who thought bananas are grown in USA.
What about the moral loss that often accompanies extreme examples of ethical religions. MAGA, the make sure we are alright gathering, damn others, especially the poor. Has Vance gone quiet because as a Catholic the Pope is watching him?
The Post-Liberal Disorder
The effect of Trump’s wayward tariffs, refusal to confirm WTO appellate judges, and repeated invocation of “national security” to cloak mercantilism is likely to erode global trade norms that were built up over eight decades. The result will be a rapid dissipation of US soft power, and a world more conducive to authoritarianism.
Donald Trump’s re-election last year was bound to send shock waves through the global economy and what is widely known as the “liberal” or “rules-based” international order. And so it has, as Trump has made good on his promise to tear that order down...
https://www.project-syndicate.org/magazine/from-us-centered-rules-based-order-to-post-liberal-disorder-by-benn-steil-2025-06
Ljubomir
Trump has shown no understanding of soft power and it is that area he seems to attack. Such, of course, education, Harvard and others.
Let me stray slightly to mention how the other leaders treated him at the G7, well, like an idiot. His need for attention at all times disrupts meetings. Also, they are only likely to take his claims for himself as between farce and idiocy.
Modi and Macron shared a joke about whether both were on twitter with reference to Trumps use of such means of discussing important matters. Trump left early because he felt he was being treated without respect, in that he was perceptive.
US Debt Holders Should Brace for Impact
With neither Congress nor the White House demonstrating even a modicum of fiscal discipline, the US Federal Reserve will almost certainly be forced into monetizing enough federal debt to prevent a default in the near future. That means higher inflation, and thus higher interest rates, are all but assured...
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/us-treasury-yield-increases-likely-under-current-policies-by-willem-h-buiter-and-anne-c-sibert-2025-06
How Trump Happened
By most accounts, wages play some part in the working-class disillusionment that fueled the rise of Donald Trump as a singularly destructive political force. But to get the diagnosis right requires a proper understanding of what lay behind the past half-century of wage trends.
US President Donald Trump’s tariff wars have given financial markets – and anyone committed to the concept of globalization – the jitters. But the market turmoil also underscores a question that has been begging for an answer ever since Trump first won the presidency in November 2016: How and when did the forces that elected this man emerge?
https://www.project-syndicate.org/onpoint/roots-of-trump-destruction-of-organized-working-class-manufacturing-by-james-k-galbraith-2025-06
War and Tariffs Are a Double Shock to the World Economy
The twin shocks of the Israeli-US attack on Iran and Donald Trump’s tariff war come as global GDP growth continues to slow precipitously. Given that it doesn’t take much to tip an economy nearing its “stall speed” into outright recession, these crises and their combined effects are setting the stage for a worldwide downturn...
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/global-recession-likely-as-iran-war-tariffs-shock-slowing-world-economy-by-stephen-s-roach-2025-06
Emerging Economies’ Vulnerability to the US Bond Market
Despite the growing appeal of emerging-market assets, the combination of rising US Treasury yields, a weakening dollar, and escalating tariffs poses a significant threat to economies that rely on export-led growth. Local-currency debt issuance offers some protection, but the risk of financial instability remains.
Since US President Donald Trump announced his “reciprocal” tariffs on April 2, the sharp rise in Treasury yields, coupled with a weakening dollar, has prompted a broad re-evaluation of global assets. Some investors have turned to emerging-market assets to hedge against financial volatility, diversify their portfolios, and boost returns...
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/emerging-economies-vulnerable-to-rising-us-treasury-yields-by-dambisa-moyo-2025-06
The End of America’s Exorbitant Privilege
Since his return to office, US President Donald Trump has been systematically destroying markets’ faith in the dollar and the US economy. If he refuses to heed their warnings, as seems likely, the US should brace for a dollar and bond-market crisis in the run-up to next year’s midterm elections...
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/trump-undermining-faith-in-us-economy-and-dollar-by-desmond-lachman-2025-07?
Trump Threatens 50% Tariffs on Brazil over Bolsonaro Trial
U.S. President Donald Trump announced plans to impose a 50 percent tariff on Brazilian imports, and denounced the trial of his ally, former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, as a “witch hunt.”
https://www.occrp.org/en/news/trump-threatens-50-tariffs-on-brazil-over-bolsonaro-trial
Is Trump determined to destroy US allies or is this just an example of Trump catching the world's attention?
When Ideology Trumps Economic Interests
There can be little doubt that many Republican lawmakers voted against their constituents’ economic interests in supporting US President Donald Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill.” That outcome holds an important lesson for students of political economy, who typically assume that interests are self-evident.
Among the disasters of US President Donald Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill,” one is particularly stinging for political economists. The bill radically phases out the clean-energy subsidies introduced during President Joe Biden’s administration three years ago. These subsidies were considered by many as immune to a change of presidents since they created new jobs and profit opportunities for firms in traditionally Republican-voting “red” states. As allergic as the Trump-controlled Republican Party is to green policies, conventional wisdom went, it would not dare take away these benefits. But then it did...
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/why-people-vote-against-their-economic-interests-by-dani-rodrik-2025-07
Phil,
That Trump's economic effects may be less dire, the reason is for all the shouting he actually did not follow through with many of those horrendous actions. Tariffs are performative so far rather than actual. They are, so far, about attention. None were ever practical.
Stanley Wilkin
Less dire? horrendous? performative?
Suggest you reserve judgement. We'll have plenty of time to judge the effects.
Economists are sufficiently error prone in predictions - witness Krugman v. Trump 1 and the article cited). Your only expertise in this area is your bias.
Phil,
I agree with you. But my understanding of economics suggests dire events for those at the bottom and better consequences for those in the higher income level. Medaid (?), attacks on education, and jobs offloaded. Many decades ago Thatcher in UK tried something similar, trying to move money to those with highest incomes, and promptly less for those on he lowest incomes, the job market became overwhelmed (changes in forms of employment (service industries)exacerbated the situation) and there were 3 million unemployed, that is more households with little money. There was less money available because it was in fewer hands, which increased economic problems.
For the first time since WW2 the blackmarket became an essential part of the economy. The more conservative economic policy of her successor, Major, started the slow return to economic health.
With such policies, money gravitating to the rich caused an illusion of prosperity, that is the markets appeared to thrive.
Why Markets May Soon Call America’s Tariff Bluff
"Financial markets have so far mitigated the impact of US President Donald Trump’s tariff threats by repeatedly forcing him to back down. But if investors become desensitized to Trump’s trade theatrics, they may embolden him to follow through.
Three months after President Donald Trump announced plans to impose sweeping new tariffs on most countries, the US economy appears surprisingly resilient. The stock market has rebounded from its initial slump, inflation remains under control, and fears of a recession have receded – or at least they had before Trump announced a new 30% tariff on imports from Mexico and the European Union, two of America’s biggest trading partners..."
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/investors-are-no-longer-buying-trump-tariff-threats-by-pinelopi-koujianou-goldberg-2025-07
Ljubomir,
It seems surely that Trump has not followed through with many tariff threats and so we cannot ascertain their actual effects. It has been as you say theatrical, strong man posturing!
Trump plans visit today to Federal Reserve as he continues attacks on its chair
President Donald Trump plans Thursday to visit the Washington headquarters of the Federal Reserve, a move that comes as he continues to attack the independent central bank’s chair, Jerome H. Powell, on his management of the economy. Trump has threatened to fire Powell but signaled this week he might allow him to remain in place as chairman until the end of his term in May. Trump administration officials previously announced plans to tour the site of ongoing costly building renovations at the Fed on Thursday. The White House provided no details about what Trump will do there. Separately, Trump plans to sign executive orders at the White House on Thursday afternoon. He is continuing to face fallout from his administration’s handling of the case of deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/07/24/trump-presidency-news/
Stanley - your understanding is casual and I suggest driven by your bias more than data.
Take your comment above "From my understanding, and memory, there have been two attempts, both successful, to cut American government spending."
Clearly Presidents/congresses attempted to cut spending either in detail, sun in sum.
https://checkyourfact.com/2018/04/24/fact-check-presidents-cancel-spending-1200-times/
If we start post ww2 with examples, Eisenhower who cut spending sufficiently to balance the budget, Carter (military spending), Reagan (https://www.historynewsnetwork.org/article/ronald-reagan-budget-cutter) as you mentioned Clinton with congress , Obama (https://www.thestreet.com/politics/here-are-the-budget-cuts-president-obama-has-offered-11798889).
Phil. I have no prejudices on this. simply research. But I have detected prejudice in Mitchell-s economics, whereby federal tax reduction involves -good policies and prosperity, but this was conditioned by tax relief on the wealthy. These tend to be short term policies even in the USA which engages in limited social thinking and the prosperity it can being through engaging all sections of society.
The problem there is less economic movement and thereby brief periods of wealth accumulation. I do believe that economics should reflect the times. Hardings may have been correct for the early 1920s.
Is Trump About to Fire the Fed Chair?
While a new Fed chair might immediately lower short-term rates, the longer-term rates that matter to households and businesses – rates for business loans and home mortgages, for example – are set by markets, not by the Fed. And markets will ensure that those rates rise.
US President Donald Trump reportedly polled a group of House Republicans last Tuesday about whether he should fire Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, even showing them a draft termination letter. Firing Powell would be a huge mistake on the merits – and it would increase interest rates at a time Trump wants to see them lowered...
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/trump-firing-powell-would-lead-to-higher-interest-rates-by-michael-r-strain-2025-07
Phil, your commitment to Putin and Trump does not give you rights to criticize others and your own daft approval of Trumps economics centred on his friends and himself, his taking institutions to court for millions, raises a number of questions. Trumps economics clearly reflects on himself, tax freedom for millionaires, etc, which cannot possibly have profound long term economic effects for America itself.
I personally cannot see any reflection in Trump and consider his economics must reflect that incapacity but I am willing to hear differently. His Tariffs were smokescreen and bluff, to create an image of toughness, and if they had been put in place would have been a disaster.
Where Trump's economic know how is concerned, it is not evident in his past business set ups whereby he enjoyed protection through his father and gangsters. In that he is like Putin.
Will this make European growth more difficult? And if so, how will that affect the growth of other economies?
Statement by President von der Leyen on the deal on tariffs and trade with the United States
"Today with this deal, we are creating more predictability for our businesses. In these turbulent times, this is necessary for our companies to be able to plan and invest. We are ensuring immediate tariff relief. This will have a clear impact on the bottom lines of our companies. And with this deal, we are securing access to our largest export market. At the same time, we will give better access for American products in our market. This will benefit European consumers and make our businesses more competitive. This deal provides a framework from which we will further reduce tariffs on more products, address non-tariff barriers, and cooperate on economic security. Because when the EU and US work together as partners, the benefits are tangible on both sides..."
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/de/statement_25_1915
US and European economies depend heavily on immigrants – decades of data reveal just how much
As anti-immigration rhetoric surges across Europe and the United States, it is vital that we look beyond the fearmongering and analyse what is really going on. While human mobility is often presented as a burden, the truth is quite the opposite. It is an essential driver of economic growth, demographic resilience and cultural cohesion.
Ignoring this fact is not just a miscalculation – it flies in the face of both empirical evidence and the democratic principles that modern societies claim to defend...
https://theconversation.com/us-and-european-economies-depend-heavily-on-immigrants-decades-of-data-reveal-just-how-much-261508?
Ljubomir,
While I do not agree with unrestricted migration as often those refugees arriving from other cultures have other agendas, and that should be recognised , but elsewhere I have written that it has been a fact throughout history and at least three major migrations have occurred in Europe, displacing much of the original populations.
I have also pointed out that the Trump push against migration, especially its fascist overtones, is especially strange as of course the present white Americans were from a migrant group and that was emphasised in Texas and California in the 19th century.
On the matter of economic benefits, yes that is a part of migration and has always been so. Migration involves the nature of the culture receiving new groups as well as well as the migrants, and as in California, has proved immensely beneficial. The Trump and MAGA position is certainly racist and based on, as usual, extreme ignorance.
Trump issues order imposing new global tariff rates effective Aug. 7
The executive order follows through on the president's recent trade agreements with some trading partners and his threats to slap punishing new duties on others...
This cartoon speaks itself.
https://www.politico.eu/cdn-cgi/image/width=1024,quality=80,onerror=redirect,format=auto/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/01/298329_1536_rgb.jpg
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/07/31/trump-executive-order-higher-tariff-rates-00487913
First published in The Hamilton Spectator, Canada, July 29, 2025 | By Graeme MacKay
A great deal of Trump's current Tariff activity seems for show mainly directed at his home audience. Other than that, the effects of his earlier changes, directed against the poor, are still to arrive and could cause a negative economic reaction in those states where his actions were mainly focused on.
To offset yj negative effects of earlier legislation affecting the poor, money may then be moved again towards the well off and rich to give the illusion of continued prosperity, again a monetarist, Thatcher, ploy.
La visión de la economía de Trump, centrada en aranceles y recortes al bienestar, es, desde mi perspectiva Stanley Wilkin , más un retroceso a la lógica del siglo XX que una innovación. La idea de que el recorte del bienestar fomenta el crecimiento es profundamente errónea y socialmente perjudicial.
Los programas de bienestar social actúan como estabilizadores automáticos y estímulos a la demanda interna, especialmente para las poblaciones de menores ingresos que tienen una alta propensión marginal a consumir.
Recortar el bienestar significa reducir el poder adquisitivo de millones de personas. Por ejemplo, en 2019, antes de la pandemia, el gasto en programas de asistencia social en EE. UU. (como cupones de alimentos o asistencia para vivienda) fue de cientos de miles de millones de dólares, impactando directamente la demanda de bienes y servicios (Fuente: Oficina de Presupuesto del Congreso, 2020). Al reducir estos apoyos, se contrae el gasto agregado, lo que puede llevar a una desaceleración económica y al empuje de millones de personas a la informalidad o fuera de la economía formal, aumentando la desigualdad. En 2023, la tasa de pobreza en EE. UU. fue del 11.5% (Fuente: U.S. Census Bureau, 2024), y los recortes al bienestar la exacerbarían.
En cuanto a los aranceles, la evidencia es contundente: no funcionan como Trump creía. Suponer que EE. UU. puede "mandar" en la economía global como en la posguerra es ignorar el ascenso de nuevas potencias. La guerra arancelaria con China, que impuso aranceles sobre bienes por más de 300 mil millones de dólares (Fuente: Oficina del Representante de Comercio de EE. UU., 2020), no solo no logró reducir el déficit comercial de forma significativa, sino que aumentó los costos para los consumidores estadounidenses y las empresas, y generó represalias. Un estudio de la Universidad de Chicago (2019) estimó que los aranceles de Trump costaron a los consumidores y empresas estadounidenses más de 50 mil millones de dólares anuales.
En lugar de proteger, las políticas arancelarias de Trump dañaron las cadenas de suministro globales y beneficiaron a competidores como China, que reforzó sus propias redes comerciales. La lógica empresarial, si bien vital, debe operar dentro de un marco estatal que asegure la equidad social y la estabilidad económica, priorizando el bienestar colectivo sobre el crecimiento financiero desregulado. Los recortes al bienestar y los aranceles de Trump no fueron innovación, sino una receta para la desigualdad y la inestabilidad global.
Andres
Your analysis is correct and i will go back to Margaret Thatcher in the UK who did exactly the same, it was and is a form of monetarism as money is being moved from the poor to a few in the very rich bracket, giving the impression of success and greater wealth production. The poor paid for the rich and the illusion of prosperity.
Money to the worst off was reduced and the money saved went into the pockets of the wealthy on the basis, nonsense of course, that this group provided the wealth and subsequently prosperity would flow down to everyone. public toilets were shut and the people working in them sacked, and this was in other facilities, causing huge numbers to be unemployed and as a consequence more anf more people joined the unemployed ranks. More unemployed emerged and it expanded as less money was going to the government. soon the government lacked the money to create resources and new economic growth. the creation of a small number of entrepreneurs did not help as many had a criminal outlook and were indifferent to others.
when the toilets were shut down, London began to smell of urine and tourism dropped. Like Trumps changes this was in relation to success, this was a reaction to the social policies of the 1960s, which were creating prosperity for the many not the few.
Trump runs the US like one of his own corrupt businesses, so can’t help believing it will be a disaster; why finance the election of a man that has filled for bankruptcy 4 times? Citizens United also opens up the US to foreign interference. Note updates to voting machines, read https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/2024-us-presidential-elections-did-kamala-harris-lose-because-polling-was-rigged-accused-voting-machine-company-speaks-out/amp_articleshow/121794911.cms
Trump will seek to corrupt the voting process come the next election and ensure, no matter the current polls, his election.
Trumps connection to corruption has always been clear and obvious, as was his father's and those around him. His business model and interactions were built up on the gangsters he associated with in New York. But remember his strategy is to out-wait others, ignore as much as he can. I knew, and know, his pedophilic tendencies but did not likewise believe that in the USA it would stop his political ambitions. TV news, etc, is anyway doing a marvellous job of shutting the US off from world criticism, the negativity that now comes their way, and it seems little is getting through. The Russians know little of Putin's criminal past nor of those who exploded into Donbas and Crimea (do you?).
- Badges
- Science topic