Evelyn Reynolds

Facing the threat of tariffs from President Trump after he took office, Mexico bent over backward to comply with his demands.Almost immediately, the government moved to secure its northern border, severely stanching migration to the United States. Then it hunted cartel leaders in a dangerous fentanyl stronghold. And just last week, in a once-in-a-generation move, it delivered into U.S. custody 29 of the country’s most powerful drug lords.But even after all of that, Mr. Trump imposed the tariffs anyway, shaking global markets. The move left officials in both countries baffled about what the White House was trying to accomplish and frantically asking the same question: What was Mr. Trump’s endgame?Even some people close to the president seem to disagree on the answer.Some outside advisers predict that the tariffs, which are currently at 25 percent on most imports from Mexico and Canada, will result in a steady stream of revenue for the United States.Others maintain that they are Mr. Trump’s attempt to shake up the global order and flex his muscles on the world stage.Many believe that the president, who has seen trade deficits as a crisis for decades, is simply trying to follow through on a threat that he has dangled over Mexico for months. By pressing forward, they say, Mr. Trump is seeking to ensure that he is seen as tough among world leaders as he pushes his foreign policy agenda in other global hot spots, including Gaza and Ukraine.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

A growth scare in the economy has accompanied worries over a resurgence in inflation, threatening to potentially rekindle stagflation.
The phenomenon, not seen since the dark days of hyperinflation and sagging growth in the 1970s and early ’80s, has primarily manifested itself lately in “soft” data.
The converging factors are causing waves on Wall Street, where stocks have been been in sell-off mode this month, erasing the gains since Trump’s election in November.

Traders work on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) in the Financial District in New York City on March 4, 2025. 
Timothy A. Clary | Afp | Getty Images

A growth scare in the economy has accompanied worries over a resurgence in inflation, in turn potentially rekindling an ugly condition that the U.S. has not seen in 50 years.
Fears over “stagflation” have come as President Donald Trump seems determined to slap tariffs on virtually anything that comes into the country at the same time that multiple indicators are pointing to a pullback in activity.

That dual threat of higher prices and slower growth is causing angst among consumers, business leaders and policymakers, not to mention investors who have been dumping stocks and scooping up bonds lately.
“Directionally, it is stagflation,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics. “It’s higher inflation and weaker economic growth that is the result of policy — tariff policy and immigration policy.”
The phenomenon, not seen since the dark days of hyperinflation and sagging growth in the 1970s and early ’80s, has primarily manifested itself lately in “soft” data such as sentiment surveys and supply manager indexes.
At least among consumers, long-run inflation expectations are at their highest level in almost 30 years while general sentiment is seeing multi-year lows. Consumer spending fell in January by its most in nearly four years, even though income rose sharply, according to a Commerce Department report Friday.
On Monday, the Institute for Supply Manufacturing’s survey of purchase managers showed that factory activity barely expanded in February while new orders fell by the most in nearly five years and prices jumped by the highest monthly margin in more than a year.

Following the ISM report, the Atlanta Federal Reserve’s GDPNow gauge of rolling economic data downgraded its projection for first quarter economic growth to an annualized decrease of 2.8%. If that holds up, it would be the first negative growth number since the first quarter of 2022 and the worst plunge since the Covid shutdown in early 2020.
“Inflation expectations are up. People are nervous and uncertain about growth,” Zandi said. “Directionally, we’re moving toward stagflation, but we’re not going to get anywhere close to the stagflation we had in the ’70s and the ’80s because the Fed won’t allow it.”
Indeed, markets are pricing in a greater chance the Fed will start cutting interest rates in June and could lop three-quarters of a percentage point off its key borrowing rate this year as a way to head off any economic slowdown.
But Zandi thinks the Fed reaction might do just the opposite — raise rates to shut down inflation, in the vein of former Chair Paul Volcker, who aggressively hiked in the early ’80s and dragged the economy into recession. “If it looks like true stagflation with slow growth, they will sacrifice the economy,” he said.

Read more CNBC tariffs coverage

Sell-off in stocks
The converging factors are causing waves on Wall Street, where stocks have been been in sell-off mode this month, erasing the gains that were made after Trump won election in November.
Though the Dow Jones Industrial Average fell again Tuesday and is off about 4.5% through the early days of March, the selling hasn’t felt especially rushed and the CBOE Volatility Index, a gauge of market fear, was only around 23 Tuesday afternoon, not much above its long-term average. Markets were well off their session lows in afternoon trading.
“This certainly isn’t the time to hit the panic button,” said Mark Hackett, chief market strategist at Nationwide. “At this point, I’m still in the camp that this is a healthy resetting of expectations.”
However, it’s not just stocks that are showing signs of fear.
Treasury yields have been tumbling in recent days after surging since September. The benchmark 10-year note yield has fallen to about 4.2%, off about half a percentage point from its January peak and below the 3-month note, a reliable recession indicator going back to World War II called an inverted yield curve. Yields move opposite to price, so falling yields indicate greater investor appetite for fixed income securities.

Stock chart icon

10-year Treasury yield in 2025.

Hackett said he fears a “vicious circle” of activity created by the swooning sentiment indicators that could turn into a full-blown crisis. Economists and business executives see the tariffs hitting prices for food, vehicles, electricity and an assortment of other items.
Stagflation “certainly is something to pay attention to now, more than it’s been in a while,” he said. “We have to watch. This is such a collapse in sentiment and such a change in the way people are viewing things and the level of emotion is so elevated right now that it will start impacting behavior.”
White House sees ‘the greatest America’
For their part, White House officials are maintaining that short-term pain will be dwarfed by the long-term benefits tariffs will bring. Trump has touted the duties as way to create a stronger manufacturing base in the U.S., which is primarily a service-based economy.
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick acknowledged in a CNBC interview Tuesday that there “may well be short-term price movements. But in the long term, it’s going to be completely different.” Market-based inflation expectations are in line with that sentiment. One metric, which measures the spread between nominal 5-year Treasury yields against inflation, is at its lowest level in nearly two years.
“This is going to be the greatest America. We’ll have a balanced budget. Interest rates will come smashing down, and I mean 100 basis points, 150 basis points lower,” Lutnick added. “This president is going to deliver all of those things and drive manufacturing here.”
Likewise, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told Fox News that “there’s going to be a transition period” and said the administration’s focus is on Main Street more than Wall Street.
“Wall Street’s done great. Wall Street can continue to do fine, but we have a focus on small business and the consumer,” he said. ” We are going to rebalance the economy, we are going to bring manufacturing jobs home.”
Important clues on where the economy is headed should come from Friday’s nonfarm payrolls report. If the jobs count is good, it could reinforce the notion that the hard data has remained solid even as sentiment has shifted.
But if the report shows that the labor market is softening while wages are holding higher, that could add to the stagflation chatter.
“We have to be observant. There’s the potential that the stagflation term just by itself, by talking about it, can manifest some of it,” said Hackett, the Nationwide strategist. “I’m not in the we-are-in-a-period-of-stagnation camp, but that is the disaster scenario.” More

Comments from a member of President Trump’s cabinet over the weekend have renewed concerns that the new administration could seek to interfere with federal statistics — especially if they start to show that the economy is slipping into a recession.In an interview on Fox News on Sunday, Howard Lutnick, the commerce secretary, suggested that he planned to change the way the government reports data on gross domestic product in order to remove the impact of government spending.“You know that governments historically have messed with G.D.P.,” he said. “They count government spending as part of G.D.P. So I’m going to separate those two and make it transparent.”It wasn’t immediately clear what Mr. Lutnick meant. The basic definition of gross domestic product is widely accepted internationally and has been unchanged for decades. It tallies consumer spending, private-sector investment, net exports, and government investment and spending to arrive at a broad measure of all goods and services produced in a country.The Bureau of Economic Analysis, which is part of Mr. Lutnick’s department, already produces a detailed breakdown of G.D.P. into its component parts. Many economists focus on a measure — known as “final sales to private domestic purchasers” — that excludes government spending and is often seen as a better indicator of underlying demand in the economy. That measure has generally shown stronger growth in recent quarters than overall G.D.P. figures.In recent weeks, however, there have been mounting signs elsewhere that the economy could be losing momentum. Consumer spending fell unexpectedly in January, applications for unemployment insurance have been creeping upward, and measures of housing construction and home sales have turned down. A forecasting model from the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta predicts that G.D.P. could contract sharply in the first quarter of the year, although most private forecasters still expect modest growth.Steady Growth, From Private and Government SpendingGovernment spending has contributed to G.D.P. growth in recent quarters, as private-sector growth has remained solid.

.dw-chart-subhed {
line-height: 1;
margin-bottom: 6px;
font-family: nyt-franklin;
color: #121212;
font-size: 15px;
font-weight: 700;
}

Quarterly change in inflation-adjusted gross domestic product
Notes: Change shown as seasonally adjusted annual rate. Private sector is total gross domestic product excluding government spending and investment. Government spending excludes transfer payments, including stimulus checks during the Covid-19 pandemic.”Source: Bureau of Economic AnalysisBy The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

<!–> –><!–> [–><!–> –><!–> [–><!–> –> <!–> –><!–> [–><!–> –><!–> [–><!–> –><!–> [–><!–> –><!–> [–><!–> –><!–> [–><!–> –><!–> [–><!–> –><!–> [–><!–> –><!–> [–><!–> –><!–> [–><!–> –> <!–> –><!–> [–><!–> –><!–> [–><!–> –> <!–> –><!–> [–><!–> –><!–> [–><!–> –><!–> [–><!–> –><!–> [–><!–> –> More

“Paradise” and “Silo” have opposing takes on the future of urban organization, echoing the debate over America’s housing shortage today.“Paradise” is a TV show on Hulu about a postapocalyptic society that lives underground in a suburb. “Silo” is a TV show on Apple TV+ about a postapocalyptic society that lives underground in an apartment tower.Both are propelled by mysteries. Both feature curious heroes. Both have shifty leaders who lie, blackmail and murder to keep their secrets hidden and their denizens in line.The shows have much in common, in other words.But somehow they find opposing answers to a question that seems increasingly relevant in a warming world: If the planet goes to hell and humanity heads to a bunker, what sort of neighborhood will we build inside it? A spacious holdout that tries to approximate a comfortable standard of living, or a cramped locker that saves more lives but leaves the survivors miserable?By imagining wildly different landscapes in response to the same end-of-the-world conceit, the shows use cinematic extremes to show how civilization and class divisions are constructed through the apportionment of space. People like to live around other people right up to the moment they feel their neighborhood has been overrun by others, at which point the hunger for togetherness becomes an impulse to exclude.A good amount of today’s housing politics fall within these parameters, whether it’s a proposal to build apartments in a suburb or a plan to cover farms with a new city. The fact that this debate now extends to fictional bunkers has me convinced that in the aftermath of global calamity, people will be at some dystopian City Council meeting arguing about zoning.Curious how they came up with their underground cities, I called writers of the two works — Dan Fogelman, the creator and showrunner of “Paradise,” and Hugh Howey, author of the novels on which “Silo” is based. I wanted to understand the inspiration for each world and what those worlds tell us about the societal trade-offs between accommodating a lot of people and trying to make those people happy.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

Sweeping tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico and China went into effect just after midnight on Tuesday, raising U.S. tariffs to levels not seen in decades and rattling foreign governments and businesses that depend on international trade.As of 12:01 a.m. Tuesday, the Trump administration added a 25 percent tariff on all imports from Canada and Mexico. The administration also added another 10 percent tariff on all imports from China. That comes on top of a 10 percent tariff on Chinese goods put into effect just one month ago and a variety of older levies, including those that remain from the China trade war in Mr. Trump’s first term.The tariffs will make good on President Trump’s campaign promise to rework America’s trade relations, and they are likely to encourage some manufacturers who want to sell to American customers to set up factories in the United States, instead of other countries.But by altering the terms of trade between the United States and its largest economic partners, the tariffs will also probably rattle supply chains, strain some of the country’s most important diplomatic relationships and add significant costs for American consumers and manufacturers.Canada, Mexico and China are the three largest trading partners of the United States, accounting for more than 40 percent of both U.S. imports and exports last year. The three countries supply the bulk of crude oil, beer, copper wire, toilet paper, hot-rolled iron, cucumbers and chocolate imported by the United States, as well as a dizzying array of other products. More

Euro zone inflation eased to 2.4% in February according to statistic agency Eurostat.
This was lower than January’s 2.5% reading, but higher than expected by economists polled by Reuters.
So-called core inflation, which strips out energy, food, alcohol and tobacco costs, came in at 2.6% in February, also lower than January’s print.

Two parents and their two children walk through a section of sweet cakes, biscuits and jam.
Nicolas Guyonnet | Afp | Getty Images

Euro zone inflation eased to 2.4% in February but came in slightly above analyst expectations, according to flash data from statistics agency Eurostat out on Monday.
Economists surveyed by Reuters had expected inflation to dip to 2.3% in February, down from the 2.5% reading of January.

So-called core inflation, which strips out energy, food, alcohol and tobacco costs, hit 2.6% in February, just below the 2.7% print of the previous month.
The closely watched services inflation reading, which has proven sticky over recent months, also eased, coming in at 3.7% last month, compared to the January reading of 3.9%.
The Monday figures also pointed to a sharp slowdown in energy price hikes, which were up just 0.2% in February, versus 1.9% in the first month of the year.
“February’s decline in headline inflation was encouraging because it was partly due to lower services inflation,” Jack Allen-Reynolds, deputy chief euro zone economist at Capital Economics said in a note on Monday.
“We think February’s decline in services inflation is the start of a trend that will pull the core rate down substantially this year,” he added.

Headline inflation is meanwhile expected to remain around its current levels, Allen-Reynolds noted, as energy prices are expected to rise slightly and food inflation is forecast to stay above the 2% mark.
However, depending on how the current geopolitical situation develops, this could eventually impact inflation, Bert Colijn, chief Netherlands economist at ING, noted Monday.
“Geopolitical developments are making the inflation outlook highly uncertain at the moment. Think, for example, of uncertainty surrounding a trade war and energy prices,” he said.
Repeated threats from U.S. President Donald Trump to impose tariffs on goods imported from Europe have left investors and economists unsure about the outlook for inflation and economic growth. Tariffs are often seen as inflationary, and trade with the U.S. is a key pillar for several major European countries, especially the EU’s largest economy, Germany.
Euro zone inflation re-accelerated in the fourth quarter, but European Central Bank policymakers remain optimistic about its trajectory. Accounts from the central bank’s January meeting last week showed that policymakers believed inflation was on its way to meeting the 2% target, despite some lingering concerns.
The ECB meets again later this week and is widely expected to announce another interest cut, which would mark its sixth reduction since it started easing monetary policy back in June.
Markets will also pay close attention to the ECB statement accompanying the rate decision, searching for clues on policymakers’ assessment of inflation and monetary policy restrictions.
“For the European Central Bank, the big question is how low it will go,” ING’s Colijn said, adding that the Monday data will support the view that inflation is currently “fairly benign,” but that it will not provide a strong basis for how low rates should be.
“We expect another 0.25ppt cut later this week to be accompanied by a fiercer debate on when the ECB will reach its terminal rate,” he said.
The Monday data comes after several major economies within the euro zone reported inflation data last week. Provisional data showed that February inflation was unchanged at a higher-than-expected 2.8% in Germany, but eased sharply to 0.9% in France. The readings are harmonized across the euro zone to ensure comparability. More

China is still cautiously trying to figure out what Trump wants. The president has threatened big tariffs in response to the inaction.When President Trump threatened tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China in January, saying those countries needed to do more to stop the flow of drugs and migrants into the United States, Canadian and Mexican officials raced to Washington, bearing charts and videos detailing their efforts to toughen their borders.Canada created a “fentanyl czar” and committed fresh resources to combating organized crime, while Mexico dispatched troops to the border and delivered cartel operatives into U.S. custody. As a result, Mr. Trump paused tariffs on America’s North American neighbors for 30 days.China never made these kinds of overtures and, in Mr. Trump’s view, did not take any big moves to stop the flow of fentanyl into the United States. So on Feb. 4, Mr. Trump moved forward with imposing a 10 percent tariff on all Chinese imports. Last week, the president said that on March 4 he would add another 10 percent on top of all existing Chinese tariffs.Mr. Trump is moving quickly to radically transform the U.S.-China trade relationship. The Chinese are moving much more cautiously and deliberately as they try to assess Mr. Trump and determine what it is he actually wants from China. Some of Mr. Trump’s advisers, including Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, have held calls with their Chinese counterparts. But a call between Mr. Trump and Xi Jinping, China’s leader, has failed to materialize.The Chinese do not want to initiate a conversation because they do not want to be seen as pleading, and are wary of offering concessions before they understand the parameters of the debate, people familiar with the discussions said. Instead, Chinese officials, academics and others close to the government have been holding discreet conversations to try to determine Mr. Trump’s motives, while floating various aspects of a potential trade deal between the countries to assess the Americans’ reaction.“With my experience with the Chinese, they are suspicious in the initial rounds of a negotiation that there are hidden traps or other reasons to be cautious,” said Michael Pillsbury, a China expert who advises the Trump administration on dealing with the country.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More