🔗 Share this article

Throughout the previous presidential campaign, Donald Trump wooed the electorate with promises to lower costs immediately upon taking office. However, once he assumed office, he seemed to pay precious little focus to affordability issues. This shifted following inflation-weary voters expressed dissatisfaction at the polls. Shortly thereafter, the Trump administration launched a hastily assembled campaign to address affordability. Regrettably, the drive has proven a hot mess—filled with illogical claims, inconsistencies, magical thinking, scapegoating, and Trumpian dishonesty.

Out-of-Touch Claims and Grocery Store Truth

Merely 48 hours post-election, Trump began his cost-reduction push with a disastrous statement: “Food prices are way down. All items is way down… So I don’t want to hear about affordability.” This comment from the wealthy leader—who frequently associates with other ultra-rich individuals—demonstrated utter contempt for everyday citizens facing difficulties when visiting the grocery store. Essentially, he ignored their concerns as unimportant, suggesting they had it wrong about price levels.

This statement about declining prices proved highly misleading and dishonest. How could all costs be decreasing when the taxes he imposed were pushing up costs? Official statistics show banana prices rose 6.9% in the last twelve months, beef prices climbed 14.7%, and coffee prices surged 18.9%—partly due to punitive tariffs applied to Brazilian products. In the first three quarters, costs increased in the majority of food categories monitored by the government’s price index, including meats, poultry, and fish (up 4.5%), non-alcoholic beverages (increasing nearly 3%), and produce (rising slightly).

Inconsistencies and Inaccuracies in Economic Statements

In spite of these numbers, the president persists in repeating his misleading narrative about affordability. Since election day, he has claimed there is “virtually no inflation,” insisted “prices are way down,” and argued “it is far less expensive under Trump than it was under sleepy Joe Biden.” Such remarks ignore the fact that general costs have unarguably risen since Biden left office. Currently, price growth is running at a 3 percent per year, that’s half again as much than the central bank’s 2% goal. Adding to the inaccuracies, Trump boasted that gas prices had fallen to around two dollars, despite official data show they average $3.19.

Faced with reality and declining opinion polls, some Trump aides evidently warned that his “prices are down” rhetoric made him sound dangerously out of touch from typical Americans. Many citizens are angry about prices continuing to climb following promises of reductions. As a result, advisers proposed one quick fix: reduce some of Trump’s beloved tariffs. This sensible idea contradicted the president’s unrealistic claim that new tariffs would not increase costs for US consumers.

Suggested Fixes and Their Potential Impact

With certain taxes reduced on coffee, beef, tomatoes, and bananas, Trump will likely claim that he has lowered costs once these products start declining in price. This would be like an arsonist taking credit for extinguishing a blaze that he ignited. On another occasion, when addressing McDonald’s executives, he stated that “we are in the golden age of America” and told the audience that “prices are coming down and all of that stuff.” Such statements are easy for a billionaire to make, but seem insincere to countless households who are struggling—particularly when millions face losing food stamps or rising insurance costs.

Per a recent poll from October, 74% of Americans think economic conditions are fair or poor, while only 26% consider them positive. Another poll found that 61% of Americans feel the administration’s actions have “made the economy worse” in the country.

Financial Reality and Proposed Measures

Scott Bessent, Trump’s top economic official, recently contradicted assertions of a golden age. He stated that instead of thriving, certain sectors of the US economy “have contracted.” The manufacturing sector—a priority for the administration—appears to have contracted for eight months in a row and lost approximately tens of thousands of positions this year. Citing this weakness, the secretary called on the central bank to reduce borrowing costs—a move that could ease financial pressure.

Reacting to widespread concern about affordability, Trump suggested a direct payment of “a dividend of at least $2,000 a person” excluding “high income people.” To numerous households in need, this sounds like manna from heaven, but it is unlikely that Congress—concerned about large shortfalls—will enact the proposal. This idea could increase federal spending, push up borrowing costs, and possibly fuel inflation by injecting cash into the economy.

A further proposed solution for cost issues centered on creating half-century home loans, with the notion that they could reduce monthly mortgage payments. However, the truth is that such lengthy loans have minimal impact to lower monthly payments—often reducing them by a small amount per month. The downside is that these mortgages could more than double the overall cost homeowners pay and hinder building home value.

Blaming the Past Government and Economic Prospects

In their affordability campaign, the administration have again blamed the previous president for financial challenges, including increasing costs. Officials claimed they “inherited a disaster from Joe Biden” and were “cleaning up the prior administration’s price hikes.” This is unfounded and untruthful claims. Actually, the former president left a strong economy, with low price growth, solid expansion, and minimal joblessness. However, Trump’s policies—particularly his tariffs—have created an difficult situation, pushing up prices and reducing economic output.

According to Mark Zandi, lead analyst at Moody’s Analytics, numerous regions are already in recession, with their conditions worsened by Trump’s tariffs. Zandi fears that if key regions such as major economies tumble into recession, the nation could face a broad economic slump. During recessions, consumers typically have reduced funds to spend, and inflation usually declines. Sadly, given the highly-touted cost initiative probably ineffective to hold down prices, his primary method for improving living standards might prove to be pushing the nation into recession—something that struggling Americans cannot handle.