🔗 Share this article

Throughout the previous presidential campaign, Donald Trump wooed the electorate with promises to lower costs starting on day one. However, once he assumed office, there was minimal attention to the cost of living. This shifted after price-fatigued citizens delivered a rebuke at the ballot box. Within days, his team launched a hastily assembled campaign to tackle living costs. Regrettably, this initiative is a hot mess—characterized by absurdity, inconsistencies, magical thinking, blame-shifting, and misleading statements.

Detached Assertions and Supermarket Truth

Merely 48 hours after the election, the president kicked off his cost-reduction push with a poorly received remark: “Food prices are way down. All items 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—demonstrated utter contempt for millions of Americans facing difficulties when visiting the grocery store. In effect, he ignored their struggles as trivial, suggesting they were mistaken about price levels.

His assertion about declining prices was absurdly obtuse and inaccurate. In what way could every price be falling when his cherished tariffs were increasing costs? Recent data show banana prices rose nearly 7% in the last twelve months, beef prices went up almost 15%, and the cost of coffee jumped by nearly 19%—partly due to punitive tariffs on Brazil’s coffee and beef. Between January and September, prices rose in five of the six food categories tracked by the government’s price index, including meats, poultry, and fish (rising over 4%), non-alcoholic beverages (up 2.8%), and fruits and vegetables (up 1.3%).

Contradictions and Inaccuracies in Financial Statements

Despite these numbers, the president persists in repeating his misleading narrative about affordability. Since election day, he has stated there is “virtually no inflation,” insisted “costs have fallen significantly,” and asserted “living is cheaper under Trump than it was under sleepy Joe Biden.” These statements ignore the reality that general costs have clearly increased since Biden left office. Currently, inflation is running at a 3 percent per year, which is 50% higher than the central bank’s 2% goal. In another falsehood, he claimed that gas prices had fallen to around two dollars, even though official data indicate they average $3.19.

Faced with reality and lower approval ratings, advisers evidently warned that his “prices are down” rhetoric made him sound dangerously out of touch from typical Americans. Many citizens are frustrated about prices continuing to climb after assurances of reductions. In response, advisers suggested one quick fix: reduce some of Trump’s beloved tariffs. The logical move clashed with the president’s unrealistic claim that additional taxes would not increase costs for American shoppers.

Suggested Fixes and Their Possible Effects

As some tariffs reduced on coffee, beef, tomatoes, and bananas, the administration will likely claim that he has cut prices once these products start declining in price. This would be similar to a firestarter boasting for extinguishing a blaze that he ignited. On another occasion, while speaking McDonald’s executives, Trump stated that “we are in the golden age of America” and told listeners that “prices are coming down and all of that stuff.” These comments come naturally for a billionaire to make, but they ring hollow to countless households facing hardships—especially when many risk cuts to nutrition assistance or skyrocketing health premiums.

Per a survey conducted last fall, three-quarters of respondents think the state of the economy are fair or poor, while only 26% consider them positive. Another poll showed that a majority of citizens say Trump’s policies have “made the economy worse” in the country.

Financial Truth and Proposed Steps

Scott Bessent, the president’s top economic official, lately contradicted claims of a golden age. He noted that far from booming, some parts of the American economy “are in recession.” Industrial production—a priority for the administration—seems to have shrunk for eight months in a row and shed approximately tens of thousands of positions this year. Citing this weakness, the secretary called on the Federal Reserve to reduce borrowing costs—an action that could help affordability.

In response to widespread concern about affordability, Trump proposed a direct payment of “a dividend of at least $2,000 a person” not for “high income people.” For many struggling Americans, it seems like manna from heaven, but the prospects are dim that Congress—concerned about large shortfalls—will approve such a plan. This idea would likely increase federal spending, increase borrowing costs, and possibly drive prices higher by injecting cash into consumers’ pockets.

Another proposed solution for affordability involved creating 50-year mortgages, with the notion that they could reduce monthly mortgage payments. But, the truth is that such lengthy loans have minimal impact to reduce installments—often cutting them by just $100 or $200 each month. The downside is that these mortgages could more than double the overall cost homeowners pay and slow their accumulation of equity.

Blaming the Previous Administration and Economic Outlook

As part of their cost-cutting effort, the administration have once more blamed Biden for financial challenges, such as rising prices. Officials stated they “faced a mess from Joe Biden” and were “cleaning up Biden’s inflation.” This is unfounded and inaccurate allegations. In reality, Biden handed over a robust economic situation, with inflation way down, economic growth strong, and unemployment low. However, the current administration’s actions—particularly import taxes—have resulted in an difficult situation, pushing up prices and reducing economic output.

Per an economist, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, 22 states are already in recession, with their economies damaged by the administration’s trade policies. Zandi worries that if large states like California and New York enter a downturn, the nation could face a broad economic slump. During recessions, consumers generally possess less money to spend, and price increases usually declines. Sadly, with the highly-touted cost initiative likely to do little to control costs, his primary method for achieving increased affordability might end up triggering an economic contraction—something that struggling Americans really can’t afford.