Presidential Election of 2024

More stories

  • 175 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    Trump Brags About His Math Skills and Economic Plans. Experts Say Both Are Shaky.

    by

    In a combative interview, the former president hinted at even higher tariffs as an economic magic bullet.Former President Donald J. Trump has been offering up new tax cuts to nearly every group of voters that he meets in recent weeks, shaking the nerves of budget watchers and fiscal hawks who fear his expensive economic promises will explode the nation’s already bulging national debt.But on Tuesday, Mr. Trump made clear that he was unfazed by such concerns and offered a one-word solution: growth. Despite the doubts of economists from across the political spectrum, Mr. Trump said that he would just juice the economy by the force of his will and scoffed at suggestions that his pledges to abolish taxes on overtime, tips and Social Security benefits could cost as much as $15 trillion.“I was always very good at mathematics,” Mr. Trump told John Micklethwait, the editor in chief of Bloomberg News, in an interview at the Economic Club of Chicago.Faced with repeated questioning about how he could possibly grow the economy enough to pay for those tax cuts, Mr. Trump dismissed criticism of his ideas as misguided. He professed his love of tariffs and insisted that surging output would cover the cost of his plans.“We’re all about growth,” Mr. Trump said, adding that his mix of tax cuts and tariffs would force companies to invest in manufacturing in the United States.The national debt is approaching $36 trillion. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget projected last week that Mr. Trump’s economic agenda could cost as much as $15 trillion over a decade. Economists from the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a nonpartisan think tank, estimated last month that if Mr. Trump’s plans were enacted, the gross domestic product could be 9.7 percent lower than current forecasts, shrinking output and dampening consumer demand.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

  • 125 Shares119 Views

    in Economy

    Meet Michelle Bowman, the Fed Official Cited by JD Vance

    by

    Michelle Bowman, a Trump-appointed Fed official recently cited by JD Vance, has been gaining prominence.When Senator JD Vance wanted to back up the assertion he made during the vice-presidential debate that new immigrants are exacerbating America’s housing affordability crisis, he cited a Federal Reserve study. Except it wasn’t a study. It was a speech by Michelle Bowman, a Fed governor appointed by former President Donald J. Trump.Ms. Bowman’s name is likely little known outside Washington. But that may be about to change, as Ms. Bowman positions herself as a prominent conservative voice at the central bank ahead of a possible Trump presidency.Ms. Bowman, 53, was first nominated to the Fed’s seven-person Board of Governors by Mr. Trump in 2018. A former state bank commissioner of Kansas, she had previously worked in community banking and as an adviser in the Department of Homeland Security during the George W. Bush administration. She filled the governor spot on the Fed Board that is earmarked for community bankers.Unlike many Fed officials, she is not a doctoral economist with a string of coastal schools behind her name. Ms. Bowman holds a degree in advertising and journalism from the University of Kansas and a law degree from Washburn University. Given her limited macroeconomic experience, she has never been a closely watched player when it comes to the Fed’s interest rate decisions. Her speeches have long focused on nitty-gritty banking issues.But Ms. Bowman’s criticism of the Fed’s approach to bank rules over the last two years — as well as her recent and rare move to push back on the central bank’s half-point interest rate cut — has raised her public profile.In September, Ms. Bowman voted against the central bank’s decision to lower interest rates sharply. That stood out, because Fed governors hardly ever dissent on economic policy: Hers was the first “no” vote by a governor since 2005.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

  • 138 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    How Kamala Harris’s Economic Plan Has Been Shaped by Business Leaders

    by

    The vice president has repeatedly incorporated suggestions from business executives into her economic agenda.When two of Vice President Kamala Harris’s closest advisers arrived in New York last month, they were seeking advice. The Democratic nominee was preparing to give her most far-reaching economic speech, and Tony West, Ms. Harris’s brother-in-law, and Brian Nelson, a longtime confidant, wanted to know how the city’s powerful financiers thought she should approach it.Over two days, the pair held meetings across Wall Street, including at the offices of Lazard, an investment bank, and the elite law firm Paul, Weiss. Among the ideas the attendees pitched was to provide more lucrative tax breaks for companies that allowed their workers to become part owners, according to two people at the meetings. The campaign had already been discussing such an idea with an executive at KKR, the private equity firm.A few days later, Ms. Harris endorsed the idea during her speech in Pittsburgh. “We will reform our tax laws to make it easier for businesses to let workers share in their company’s success,” she said.The line, while just a piece of a much broader speech, was emblematic of Ms. Harris’s approach to economic policy since she took the helm of the Democratic Party in July. As part of a bid to cut into former President Donald J. Trump’s polling lead on the economy, her campaign has carefully courted business leaders, organizing a steady stream of meetings and calls in which corporate executives and donors offer their thoughts on tax policy, financial regulation and other issues.The private feedback has, in sometimes subtle ways, shaped Ms. Harris’s economic agenda over the course of her accelerated campaign. At several points, she has sprinkled language into broader speeches that business executives say reflects their views. And, in at least one instance, Ms. Harris made a specific policy commitment — to pare back a tax increase on capital gains — after extended talks with her corporate allies.This article is based on interviews with more than two dozen campaign officials, policy experts, donors, lobbyists and business leaders.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

  • 88 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    Jobs Report Gives Kamala Harris Another Boost

    by

    Vice President Kamala Harris probably could not have hoped for a better run of pre-election economic data than what the United States has enjoyed over the last month.In recent weeks, key inflation indicators have fallen close to the Federal Reserve’s 2 percent target rate, after years of running hot under Ms. Harris and President Biden. Federal Reserve officials cut interest rates by a half percentage point, immediately bringing mortgage rates to their lowest level in two years. The Commerce Department confirmed that the economy has grown at a robust 3 percent clip over the last year, after adjusting for rising prices. The Census Bureau reported that the typical household’s inflation-adjusted income jumped in 2023.Those numbers had encouraged Democrats, including policymakers in the White House and close to Ms. Harris’s campaign team. Recent polls have shown Ms. Harris closing the gap, or pulling even, with former President Donald J. Trump on the question of who can best handle the economy and inflation.But it was Friday’s employment report — 254,000 jobs gained, with wages growing faster than prices — that appeared to give Harris boosters a particularly large dose of confidence. The report came less than a day after striking dockworkers agreed to return to work through the end of the year, avoiding what could have been a major economic disruption with a month to go before the election.“The combination of this great job market and easing inflation is generating solid real wage and income gains,” said Jared Bernstein, the chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers. “While those continue to power this expansion forward, we’re also seeing record investment in key sectors, an entrepreneurial boom and gains in worker bargaining power to help ensure that workers get their fair share of all this growth.”Even Mr. Biden, who has attempted to strike a balance between cheering the economy’s performance and acknowledging the struggles created by years of fast-rising prices, sounded more upbeat than normal on Friday. He made a surprise appearance in the White House briefing room to celebrate the jobs report and the end of the port strike, which the president and his aides helped broker.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

  • 175 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    Trump and Harris Want to Revive Manufacturing, but How Much Could They Actually Do?

    by

    The policy focus on the industry has changed from job quantity to job quality. And while federal incentives matter, local factors are more important.In recent weeks, the presidential candidates have been tussling over a familiar campaign issue in postindustrial America: how to reinvigorate manufacturing.Former President Donald J. Trump has proposed stiff tariffs on nearly all imports as a way of forcing foreign companies to make their goods in the United States, an escalation of a strategy that did not work during his term. “We’re going to take their factories,” Mr. Trump declared recently.Building on the Biden administration’s approach, Vice President Kamala Harris has promised tax credits and more apprenticeships to strengthen factory towns and invest in advanced technologies, ensuring they “are not just invented in America but built here.”In truth, no president can single-handedly control the growth of specific industries. Larger economic forces like recessions and exchange rates tend to play a much more powerful role. But some policies can help or hinder their progress.Over the last four years, policy and macroeconomic factors have combined to begin reshaping the manufacturing industry. While job growth has been flat for the past two years — as interest rates have clamped down on expansion and a strong dollar has dulled exports — shifts in the composition and location of it are underway beneath the surface.But first, a more fundamental question: Why do politicians care so much about manufacturing, anyway?Which manufacturing sectors have been growing fastest?Domestic output of semiconductors and other electrical components has expanded by 30 percent since the beginning of 2020. Other products, not as much.

    Notes: The semiconductor category includes other components. Source: Federal ReserveBy The New York TimesWhere manufacturing jobs have shifted since the pandemicBetween January 2020 and March 2024, the West Coast and Northeast have lost factory employment while many states in the Southeast have gained.

    Source: Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages, Labor DepartmentBy 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

  • 113 Shares159 Views

    in Economy

    World Braces for Bigger Trade Wars if Trump Wins

    by

    Business owners and foreign governments are preparing for high tariffs and trade disruptions, depending on the outcome of the election.When you’re in the whiskey business, you’re always making predictions about the future.From the time grain grown around the Midwest enters Sonat Birnecker Hart’s distillery on the North Side of Chicago, it will be four to 10 years before the whiskey is shipped to buyers. So running her business requires careful projections about demand.Those calculations have become harder of late. With the U.S. presidential election looming, many businesses around the world are facing uncertainty about the future of American trade policy and the tariffs that products will face in global markets.For the whiskey industry, the stakes are particularly high. In March, a 50 percent tariff on American whiskey exports to Europe will snap into effect unless the European Union and the United States can come to an agreement to stop the levies.The outcome may depend on who is in office. Both former President Donald J. Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris have embraced tariffs, but their plans differ significantly. Ms. Harris’s campaign has said she would use tariffs in a “targeted” fashion — possibly mirroring the approach of President Biden, who recently imposed tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles, silicon chips and solar panels. Like Mr. Biden, she has emphasized working closely with allies.Mr. Trump, in contrast, has said his approach to trade would be even more aggressive than the trade wars of his first term, when he imposed stiff tariffs on allies and rivals to obtain concessions and try to bolster American manufacturing. He has proposed a 60 percent tariff on products from China and a tariff of more than 10 percent on other goods from around the world.A 50 percent tariff on American whiskey exports to Europe will take effect in March unless the United States and European Union reach an agreement.Taylor Glascock for 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

  • 125 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Trump’s Plans Could Spur Inflation While Slowing Growth, Study Finds

    by

    A nonpartisan economic analysis warned that deporting migrants and increasing tariffs would damage the U.S. economy.Former President Donald J. Trump’s proposals to deport millions of migrants and impose new tariffs on imports from around the world would slash U.S. economic growth and employment and cause inflation to rebound sharply, according to a new analysis published on Thursday by the nonpartisan Peterson Institute for International Economics.That analysis also assumed that Mr. Trump would try to encroach on the independence of the Federal Reserve. He has not floated such a proposal but has suggested that presidents should have input into the central bank’s policies and in the past tried to publicly push the Fed to lower interest rates.The assessment of Mr. Trump’s policies was published days after the Republican presidential candidate pitched his plan to create a manufacturing “renaissance” in America by cutting corporate taxes and regulations and increasing tariffs by as much as 200 percent. Economists have been skeptical about the viability of many of Mr. Trump’s proposals, and some of them could be difficult to enact. But the new report argued that if taken together, the policies would inflict significant damage on the U.S. economy.“While Trump promises to ‘make the foreigners pay,’ our analysis shows his policies will end up making Americans pay the most,” Warwick J. McKibbin, Megan Hogan and Marcus Noland wrote in their report.The study from the Peterson Institute, which tends to favor free trade, examined the effects of three prominent parts of Mr. Trump’s agenda: deporting 8.3 million unauthorized migrants, levying 10 percent tariffs on all imports and 60 percent tariffs on imports from China, and eroding the Federal Reserve’s independence by allowing the president to influence interest rate policy.The study suggested that Mr. Trump wanted to weaken the Fed’s independence, citing a Wall Street Journal article that said his allies were drawing up a plan to blunt the central bank’s ability to freely set interest rates. It also noted that Mr. Trump has said he believes presidents should have a “say” on interest rate policy.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

  • 138 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    Harris Now Has an Economic Plan. Can It Best Trump’s Promises?

    by

    A central question in the final stretch of the election is if Vice President Kamala Harris’s proposals will cohere into an economic argument that can top former President Donald J. Trump’s.Vice President Kamala Harris has a plan for the economy: a glossy, 82-page booklet detailing proposals on housing, taxes and health care that her campaign handed out to supporters gathered at a campaign event in Pittsburgh this week.Former President Donald J. Trump has nothing so detailed. The issues section of his campaign website is spare. He has coughed up a string of four- or five-word slogans promising tax cuts, some of which even his advisers cannot fully explain. He has toyed with a tariff as high as 20 percent on every good imported into the United States, promised to deport millions of immigrants to reduce the demand for housing and boasted that he can halve energy prices in a year.Even with such an improvisational, loosely defined agenda, he is still leading Ms. Harris on the economy in polls, though his advantage is shrinking in some surveys. Many economists have warned that Mr. Trump’s promises, if turned into concrete policy, could slow growth, raise consumer prices and balloon the federal deficit.But many voters find Mr. Trump’s punchy promises easy to grasp. His basic message of lower taxes, less regulation and less trade with other countries helped carry him to the White House once before. A majority of Americans fondly remember the economy in the first three years of his administration, before the pandemic and years of elevated inflation.A central question in the final stretch of the presidential race is if Ms. Harris’s more detailed — but in many cases still not fully formed — stack of policy proposals will cohere into an economic argument that can top that.To a remarkable degree in a deeply polarized country, Ms. Harris and Mr. Trump have many of the same stated goals for the economy. Lower costs. Reduce regulations. Cut taxes for the middle class. Incentivize corporations to build their products in the United States.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