🔗 Share this article

During last year's race for the White House, Donald Trump courted the electorate with promises to reduce prices starting on day one. But, after his inauguration, there was precious little focus to affordability issues. All that changed after inflation-weary citizens expressed dissatisfaction at the ballot box. Shortly thereafter, the Trump administration launched a hastily assembled campaign to tackle affordability. Unfortunately, the drive is a hot mess—characterized by illogical claims, contradictions, magical thinking, blame-shifting, and Trumpian dishonesty.

Detached Assertions and Supermarket Truth

Merely 48 hours post-election, Trump kicked off his affordability drive with a disastrous statement: “Our groceries are way down. Everything is way down… So I don’t want to hear about affordability.” This comment from billionaire Trump—who frequently associates with other ultra-rich individuals—revealed utter contempt for everyday citizens who struggle every time they go supermarkets. Essentially, he dismissed their concerns as unimportant, implying they were mistaken about actual costs.

This statement that everything was “way down” was highly misleading and dishonest. In what way could all costs be decreasing when the taxes he imposed were increasing costs? Official statistics indicate banana prices increased 6.9% over the past year, the price of beef climbed 14.7%, and the cost of coffee surged 18.9%—partly due to punitive tariffs on Brazil’s coffee and beef. Between January and September, costs increased in five of the six main grocery groups tracked by the government’s price index, including meats, poultry, and fish (up 4.5%), drinks (increasing nearly 3%), and fruits and vegetables (up 1.3%).

Inconsistencies and Inaccuracies in Economic Statements

Despite the evidence, Trump persists in repeating his misleading narrative about affordability. After the vote, he has claimed there is “almost no price increases,” declared “prices are way down,” and argued “it is far less expensive under Trump than it was under sleepy Joe Biden.” These statements ignore the fact that general costs have clearly increased since Biden left office. Currently, price growth is at a 3 percent per year, which is 50% higher than the central bank’s target of 2 percent. In another falsehood, Trump claimed that fuel costs had fallen to around two dollars, despite official data show they average over three dollars.

Faced with actual conditions and declining opinion polls, some Trump aides evidently warned that his “costs are falling” rhetoric portrayed him as disconnected from typical Americans. A lot of voters are frustrated about prices continuing to climb following promises of reductions. In response, advisers proposed one quick fix: roll back certain import taxes. The logical move clashed with the president’s unrealistic claim that new tariffs would not increase costs for American shoppers.

Suggested Fixes and Their Possible Impact

As some tariffs reduced on coffee, beef, tomatoes, and bananas, Trump will probably announce that he has cut prices once those foods start declining in price. That would be similar to a firestarter taking credit for putting out a blaze that he ignited. On another occasion, when addressing McDonald’s executives, Trump stated that “this is the peak period of America” and told the audience that “costs are decreasing and all of that stuff.” These comments come naturally for a billionaire to make, but seem insincere to countless households who are struggling—especially when millions face losing food stamps or skyrocketing health premiums.

According to a recent poll from October, three-quarters of respondents believe economic conditions are mediocre or bad, while only 26% consider them positive. Another poll found that a majority of citizens feel the administration’s actions have “worsened economic conditions” in the country.

Economic Truth and Suggested Measures

Scott Bessent, the president’s chief financial officer, lately disputed assertions of a prosperous era. He noted that far from booming, certain sectors of the US economy “have contracted.” The manufacturing sector—a priority for the administration—seems to have shrunk for eight months in a row and lost around tens of thousands of positions this year. Pointing to these challenges, the secretary called on the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates—a move that could help affordability.

Reacting to widespread concern about affordability, the president suggested a direct payment of “a payout of at least $2,000 a person” excluding “high income people.” For many struggling Americans, this sounds like manna from heaven, but it is unlikely that lawmakers—already alarmed about large shortfalls—will approve the proposal. The scheme could raise government expenditure, push up borrowing costs, and potentially drive prices higher by putting more money into consumers’ pockets.

A further proposed solution for cost issues involved creating 50-year mortgages, with the notion that this would lower housing costs. But, the truth is that such lengthy loans have minimal impact to lower monthly payments—frequently reducing them by a small amount per month. The drawback is that these mortgages could significantly increase the overall cost borrowers pay and hinder building home value.

Blaming the Past Government and Financial Outlook

As part of their affordability campaign, the administration have again pointed fingers at Biden for economic problems, such as increasing costs. Spokespeople claimed they “inherited a disaster from Joe Biden” and were “cleaning up Biden’s inflation.” These are unfounded and inaccurate claims. Actually, the former president left a robust economic situation, with low price growth, economic growth strong, and unemployment low. However, the current administration’s actions—especially import taxes—have resulted in an difficult situation, pushing up prices and slowing GDP growth.

Per Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, 22 states are experiencing economic decline, with their conditions worsened by the administration’s trade policies. He worries that if key regions like California and New York enter a downturn, the US could slide into a widespread recession. In downturns, consumers generally possess less money to spend, and price increases often falls. Sadly, given the highly-touted cost initiative probably ineffective to control costs, his most effective “tool” for improving living standards might end up pushing the nation into recession—a scenario that hard-pressed households cannot handle.