Tag: economy
MAGA Extremists Aim To Crash US Economy And Then 'Rebuild Society'

MAGA Extremists Aim To Crash US Economy And Then 'Rebuild Society'

"War Room" host Steve Bannon has often described himself as a "Leninist" — not because he actually embraces communist ideology, but because he applies one of Vladimir Lenin's principles to the MAGA movement.

Lenin famously argued that before a revolutionary movement can make serious progress, it first needs to tear down existing political structures. And Bannon believes the U.S. must be purged of Democrats and non-MAGA Republicans before a total MAGA revolution can come about.

In an October 29 post on X, formerly Twitter, Politix.fm's Brian Beutler argued that some MAGA Republicans are seriously talking about tanking the U.S. economy on purpose in order to give the country a full-fledged MAGA makeover.

Beutler highlights a tweet posted by far-right Trump supporter @FischerKing64, who acknowledged that some of the things Trump is proposing — including "mass deportations" and "firing" government employees in big numbers — could, in fact, create an economic crisis.

@FischerKing64 tweeted, "Markets will tumble. But when the storm passes and everyone realizes we are on a sounder footing, there will be a rapid recovery to a healthier, sustainable economy."

Beutler, in response, warned that @FischerKing64 is making an argument for crashing the economy on purpose.

Beutler posted, "An important story here for the campaign press corps. Trump's top backer, whom Trump has promised to hand this very remit, acknowledges the plan is to crash the economy and markets so they can rebuild society in MAGA's image. I don't think most Trump voters were in on that plan!"

Beutler, in a separate tweet, noted that @FischerKing64 was using "false premises" to push a "bad plan."

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

Tom Homan

'They're Building Our Houses': Contractors Warn Against Trump's Mass Deportation

One key plank of former President Donald Trump's second-term agenda is mass deportations of undocumented immigrants. That policy proposal is now getting heavy criticism from construction industry leaders.

According to NBC News, homebuilders in particular are coming out against the ex-president's call to deport millions of immigrants. this includes builders in Republican-dominated states like Florida and Texas. Construction business leaders are worried that an already shallow labor pool could dry up even further if Trump followed through on his signature campaign initiative.

"They don’t think it’s going to happen,” Stan Marek, CEO of the Texas-based Marek Family of Companies, said of his colleagues in the construction industry. “You’d lose so many people that you couldn’t put a crew together to frame a house.”

“We need them. They’re building our houses — have been for 30 years,” Marek added. “Losing the workers would devastate our companies, our industry and our economy.”

Tampa, Florida homebuilder Brent Taylor, who runs a five-person construction business, said building is already a "very, very difficult industry," and is only "getting worse." He told NBC that Trump's proposed deportations would have a particularly adverse impact on both his company and his clients.

Taylor said that he often subcontracts labor, and that those who provide him with workers typically don't check workers' immigration status before sending them out to construction sites. He added that Trump's deportations would mean that he hypothetically "can only do 10 jobs a year instead of 20." He then noted: “Either I make half as much money or I up my prices. And who ultimately pays for that? The homeowner.”

The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that there are roughly 370,000 open construction jobs, and that figure would likely climb even higher if migrants are rounded up and deported en masse. And according to the National Immigration Forum, roughly 30 percent of construction workers in the United States are immigrants. That share of non-native born Americans working in construction climbs up to 40 percent in larger states like California and Texas.

Trump has said he would deport as many as 20 million immigrants if he were elected to a second term. That figure is noticeably higher than the number of undocumented immigrants currently in the U.S., which is currently estimated to be around 11 million. The former president has suggested he would revoke the Temporary Protected Status granted to migrants from unstable nations reeling from political violence and war like Afghanistan, Haiti, Honduras, Somalia, Syria, Ukraine, and Yemen, among others.

The logistics of rounding up, detaining and deporting that many people would be a massive endeavor. During the National Conservatism conference in July, Tom Homan — the former director of the Trump administration's Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) — hinted that ICE would kick its operations into high gear if Trump wins the November election.

"Trump comes back in January, I’ll be on his heels coming back, and I will run the biggest deportation force this country has ever seen,” Homan said. “They ain’t seen s— yet. Wait until 2025.”

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

New Report Exposes Calamitous Impact Of Trump Tariff Scheme

New Report Exposes Calamitous Impact Of Trump Tariff Scheme

A new report from The Budget Lab at Yale University, first previewed in a column published by Bloomberg News, describes the calamitous macroeconomic effects of implementing various tariff proposals endorsed by Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, which likely include a net loss of economic growth, a decrease in American household incomes, and a renewed burst of inflation.

This analysis highlighting Trump’s potentially ruinous policy agenda comes after months of other mainstream news outlets letting Trump off the hook for proposals that would harm the economy and jump-start inflation.

During an October 15 appearance at the Economic Club of Chicago, which featured an interview moderated by Bloomberg Editor-in-Chief John Micklethwait, Trump repeatedly insisted that if elected, he would implement across-the-board tariffs on imported goods to somehow restore American manufacturing jobs and strengthen the American economy.

Trump repeatedly ignored attempts by Micklethwait to highlight the adverse effects of implementing these policies, baselessly claiming his tariffs would “have a massive effect, a positive effect” on the overall economy and rejecting concerns that his import tax scheme would disrupt supply chains, present obstacles for small businesses, and raise consumer prices.

In an October 16 op-ed published by Bloomberg, economist Ernie Tedeschi previewed a new report produced by his research team at The Budget Lab, which describes in detail the harmful disruptions Trump’s tariff policies would unleash on the American economy.

According to Tedeschi, the research found that Trump’s tariff scheme would raise tax revenues by trillions of dollars, to be paid by American companies and consumers, but the increase in tax revenue would likely be reduced when foreign countries impose retaliatory tariffs against the United States and reduce overall trade flows. The researchers then found that Trump’s tariffs would shrink the size of the American economy by up to 1.4%, or $325 billion annually, which would also shave up to $1 trillion from the tax base and offset some of the taxes raised by the tariffs themselves.

Crucially, Trump's tariff policies would simultaneously result in a burst of additional inflation of up to 5.1% annually (roughly double the current inflation rate) coupled with a net reduction in real household incomes. The average American family would see its purchasing power reduced by “between $1,900 and $7,600,” with the worst effects likely felt by lower-income families.

All told, this new research demonstrates that Trump’s tariff proposals could be a disaster for the United States, and in particular the tariffs could unwind all of the progress made in combating inflation over the past two years of the Biden-Harris administration.

Media Matters has already demonstrated on numerous occasions that many mainstream news outlets have been asleep at the wheel in describing the stakes of Trump’s inflationary policy proposals. With Trump potentially just weeks away from retaking the White House, the American public deserves to know what is truly at stake.

This new report from The Washington Post, which includes the Budget Lab study, is a good start that should be emulated by other mainstream news organizations.

And of course Bloomberg deserves praise for publishing Tedeschi and his team's work to begin with. From his op-ed:

Pundits sometimes claim that US presidential campaigns are devoid of big, consequential policy ideas. That’s clearly not true this time around. Arguably the most profound policy change being proposed in this campaign is former President Donald Trump’s big idea to broadly raise tariffs on imported goods, possibly to levels the US has not seen in many decades.
...
In a series of campaign remarks, Trump has laid out the contours of ideas to raise tariffs back to historical levels. He has suggested broad tariffs on all imports from trading partners that could range from 10% to 20%, and has raised the possibility of a tariff on all Chinese imports of 60%. In remarks in September, Trump floated the idea of a 200% tariff on Mexican imports. The Budget Lab simulated 12 illustrative scenarios that were various combinations of these different rates, and which assumed retaliation and no retaliation from the targeted countries.

Tariffs are, first and foremost, a tax, and Trump’s proposals would indeed raise meaningful revenue that could be used to shrink the federal budget deficit, which totaled $1.8 trillion in fiscal year 2024 ended Sept. 30. Under the most common interpretation of Trump’s proposal — a 10% tariff on all goods imports and a 60% tariff on Chinese goods imports — the US raises $2.6 trillion over 10 years if other countries do not retaliate. Dial the non-China tariffs up to 20% and revenues rise by $4.4 trillion.

But there are several asterisks when it comes to tariffs as a revenue raiser. First, other countries almost certainly would retaliate against the US, and do so almost immediately, as, for example, China did within days when Trump imposed Section 301 tariffs against them in 2018. At The Budget Lab, I found that retaliation leads to the US raising less of its own tariff revenue: 12% to 26% less under each proposal if other countries retaliated. That means the 10% broad/60% China proposal would only raise $2.2 trillion if there was retaliation, and the 20%/60% proposal $3.4 trillion.

Second, the conventional estimates above assume the economy stays fixed in size. In reality, past evidence along with The Budget Lab’s modeling suggest the economy would likely shrink in response to the tariffs, as whatever positive reshoring effects resulting from the tariffs would be more than overwhelmed by rising input costs, falling investment, and lower consumer spending and real incomes. Depending on the scenario, the level of real GDP would decline by 0.5% to 1.4% in the medium-term, which is the equivalent of shaving between $120 billion and $325 billion off the economy today. And a smaller economy means even less tax revenue raised. Using rules-of-thumb from the Congressional Budget Office, this range of GDP effects translates into $400 billion to $1 trillion less dynamic revenue than the conventional estimates. So, the fiscal upside would in fact be even smaller.

Third, prices would rise and real household incomes would decline in response to the tariffs. While a tenth of all consumer spending is on imports, a quarter of consumer goods spending is imported, so the tariffs would pinch households considerably. Consumers would face price increases of 1.2% to 5.1% depending on the specific proposal. That’s like suddenly getting between seven months and 2.5 years’ worth of normal inflation. For the average household, these price increases would lower the purchasing power of their annual income by between $1,900 and $7,600 in 2023 dollars. And since there is evidence that tariffs burden lower-income families more than upper-in ome families, the squeeze would be particularly severe for households that can least afford them.

Trump’s tariff proposal could be the biggest shift in US tax and trade policy in generations, and it could raise trillions of dollars in revenue. But as The Budget Lab’s findings show, the downside to the economy is potentially enormous. Pundits complained about not getting big policies; now they have an expensive one to talk about.

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters.

Frank Luntz

GOP Pollster Warns Trump Is Losing Ground To Harris On Economy

If former President Donald Trump hopes to win a second term in the White House this November, it will likely come down to voters' perception that he's better for the economy. But new polls show that he's rapidly losing ground to Vice President Kamala Harris on the issue.

According a recent article by the Washington Post's Abha Bhattarai, Trump previously enjoyed large advantages over President Joe Biden on who was more adept at managing the U.S. economy. When voters were asked which candidate they trusted on economic issues, Trump had as much as a 15-point edge over Biden in some polls. But now that Harris is at the top of the ticket, Trump is finding himself in a much different position.

Bhattarai noted that in the most recent Fox News poll, 51 percent of respondents said Trump was better for the economy, while 46 percent said the same of Harris. Other polls showed similar results: A Reuters/Ipsos survey, for example, showed that Trump had a seven-point edge over Harris on the economy. 91 percent of respondents in that poll said the economy was one of their top issues of concern in the 2024 election.

While the ex-president is still ahead of his Democratic opponent in that regard, the fact that Harris is polling significantly ahead of where Biden was is worrisome to one veteran Republican pollster. Frank Luntz told the Post that the latest polls on the economy are an ominous sign for the ex-president's hopes of reelection.

“Voters are beginning to give to give [Harris] the benefit of the doubt — and that’s really significant,” said Frank Luntz, a longtime GOP pollster. “Affordability is a top issue for voters, but Trump has failed to hold Harris to account or to tie her to Biden’s inflation failures.”

According to the Post, Harris' growing trust among voters on the economy differs from Biden in that while Biden was running on defending his managing of the economy, Harris has come off as more sympathetic to voters' concerns about high prices on consumer goods like groceries and gas. The paper also noted that consumer confidence – the metric of how Americans are feeling about their own economic health — is relatively high. Meanwhile, inflation has cooled off to 2021 levels and the Federal Reserve recently cut interest rates by half a percentage point, which is known in economic parlance as a "soft landing."

However, Harris' edge isn't limited to being a more effective communicator than Biden on the economy. Luntz opined that another advantage Harris has in the final stretch of the 2024 campaign cycle is that her opponent is failing to stay on message.

“Trump had an unprecedented opportunity to ask the American people, ‘Can you really afford four more years of Joe Biden?’” Luntz said. “And instead he’s focusing on people eating pets.”

Despite his favoring of Republican candidates and policies, Luntz has acknowledged recently that Harris' campaign is on a roll and rapidly turning voters off from the GOP ticket. In an August interview on CNBC, Luntz predicted that the vice president may very well not only keep the White House in Democratic hands this November, but that she could help her party gain and build on majorities in both the House and Senate.

"She’s bringing out people who are not interested in voting for either Trump or Biden, so the entire electoral pool has changed and if it continues in this direction you have to start to consider Democrats winning the Senate and Democrats winning the House," Luntz told Squawk Box last month.

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World