🔗 Share this article

Throughout last year's presidential campaign, the former president wooed the electorate with pledges to reduce costs starting on day one. But, after his inauguration, there was minimal attention to affordability issues. All that changed after inflation-weary citizens expressed dissatisfaction at the ballot box. Within days, his team initiated a hastily assembled campaign to address affordability. Regrettably, this initiative is a disorganized endeavor—characterized by illogical claims, inconsistencies, magical thinking, blame-shifting, and Trumpian dishonesty.

Detached Claims and Supermarket Truth

Just two days after the election, Trump kicked off his cost-reduction push with a poorly received statement: “Our groceries are way down. All items is way down… So I don’t want to hear about affordability.” This comment from billionaire Trump—often associates with fellow billionaires—revealed a lack of empathy for millions of Americans facing difficulties when visiting the grocery store. In effect, he ignored their struggles as unimportant, implying they had it wrong about actual costs.

His assertion that everything was “way down” was highly misleading and inaccurate. In what way could every price be falling when the taxes he imposed were pushing up costs? Official statistics show banana prices rose nearly 7% over the past year, beef prices climbed almost 15%, and the cost of coffee surged 18.9%—in part due to punitive tariffs applied to Brazilian products. Between January and September, prices rose in five of the six food categories tracked by the Consumer Price Index, such as animal proteins (up 4.5%), non-alcoholic beverages (increasing nearly 3%), and fruits and vegetables (up 1.3%).

Inconsistencies and Falsehoods in Economic Claims

In spite of these numbers, Trump persists in repeating his big lie about affordability. After the vote, he has stated there is “almost no price increases,” insisted “prices are way down,” and asserted “it is far less expensive under Trump than it was under his predecessor.” These statements contradict the reality that general costs have clearly increased since Biden left office. At present, price growth is running at a 3 percent per year, which is 50% higher than the Federal Reserve’s target of 2 percent. In another falsehood, Trump claimed that gas prices had fallen to nearly $2 a gallon, even though government figures indicate they are $3.19.

Confronted by reality and declining opinion polls, advisers evidently warned that his “costs are falling” message portrayed him as disconnected from ordinary people. A lot of voters are frustrated about prices continuing to climb after promises of decreases. In response, aides proposed one quick fix: reduce certain import taxes. This sensible idea contradicted the president’s unrealistic claim that additional taxes would not increase costs for US consumers.

Suggested Fixes and Their Potential Effects

As certain taxes being rolled back on coffee, beef, tomatoes, and bananas, the administration will likely announce that he has cut prices once those foods start declining in price. This would be similar to a firestarter taking credit for extinguishing a blaze that he ignited. In another instance, when addressing McDonald’s executives, Trump declared that “we are in the golden age of America” and assured listeners that “costs are decreasing and all of that stuff.” These comments come naturally for a wealthy individual to make, but they ring hollow to millions of Americans facing hardships—especially when millions risk losing food stamps or skyrocketing health premiums.

According to a recent poll from October, 74% of Americans believe economic conditions are fair or poor, while just a quarter consider them good or excellent. A separate survey found that 61% of Americans say Trump’s policies have “made the economy worse” in the country.

Financial Truth and Proposed Measures

Scott Bessent, Trump’s chief financial officer, lately disputed claims of a prosperous era. He stated that instead of thriving, some parts of the US economy “have contracted.” The manufacturing sector—which Trump vowed to save—appears to have contracted for eight months in a row and lost approximately tens of thousands of positions this year. Citing these challenges, Bessent urged the central bank to reduce borrowing costs—a move that could help affordability.

In response to public dismay about living costs, the president suggested a cash handout of “a dividend of at least $2,000 a person” not for “high income people.” To numerous households in need, this sounds like manna from heaven, but it is unlikely that lawmakers—already alarmed about large shortfalls—will approve such a plan. This idea would likely increase federal spending, push up borrowing costs, and possibly drive prices higher by putting more money into consumers’ pockets.

Another proposed solution for cost issues involved introducing 50-year mortgages, with the notion that this would lower housing costs. However, the truth is that 50-year mortgages have minimal impact to reduce installments—frequently reducing them by a small amount per month. The drawback is that these loans could significantly increase the overall cost homeowners pay and hinder building home value.

Faulting the Previous Administration and Financial Prospects

As part of their affordability campaign, Trump and his team have once more pointed fingers at the previous president for financial challenges, including rising prices. Officials claimed they “inherited a disaster from Joe Biden” and were “cleaning up the prior administration’s price hikes.” This is unfounded and untruthful allegations. Actually, the former president left a robust economic situation, with inflation way down, solid expansion, and minimal joblessness. However, Trump’s policies—especially his tariffs—have resulted in an difficult situation, pushing up prices and slowing GDP growth.

According to an economist, chief economist at a research firm, 22 states are experiencing economic decline, with their economies damaged by the administration’s trade policies. He worries that if key regions like major economies tumble into recession, the nation could face a broad economic slump. In downturns, people typically have less money to spend, and price increases often falls. Unfortunately, given the highly-touted affordability campaign likely to do little to control costs, his most effective “tool” for achieving increased affordability might end up pushing the nation into recession—something that hard-pressed households cannot handle.