Throughout last year's race for the White House, Donald Trump wooed voters with pledges to lower costs immediately upon taking office. But, once he assumed office, there was precious little focus to the cost of living. This shifted following inflation-weary citizens delivered a rebuke at the ballot box. Shortly thereafter, the Trump administration launched a slapdash campaign to address affordability. Regrettably, this initiative has proven a hot mess—characterized by illogical claims, inconsistencies, magical thinking, blame-shifting, and Trumpian dishonesty.
Merely 48 hours after the election, the president began his cost-reduction push with a poorly received statement: “Food prices are way down. All items is way down… So I don’t want to hear about the cost of living.” These words from the wealthy leader—often associates with fellow billionaires—demonstrated a lack of empathy for everyday citizens who struggle every time they go the grocery store. In effect, he dismissed their concerns as trivial, suggesting they were mistaken about actual costs.
His assertion about declining prices proved highly misleading and dishonest. How could all costs be falling when his cherished tariffs were increasing costs? Recent data indicate banana prices increased nearly 7% in the last twelve months, the price of beef went up 14.7%, and coffee prices surged by nearly 19%—in part because of punitive tariffs applied to Brazilian products. Between January and September, costs increased in the majority of food categories monitored by the government’s price index, such as meats, poultry, and fish (rising over 4%), drinks (up 2.8%), and produce (rising slightly).
Despite the evidence, the president continues to push his big lie about lower costs. Since election day, he has stated there is “virtually no inflation,” insisted “costs have fallen significantly,” and asserted “it is far less expensive under Trump than it was under sleepy Joe Biden.” These statements ignore the reality that general costs have clearly increased since Biden left office. At present, 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 claimed that gas prices had dropped to nearly $2 a gallon, despite government figures show they are over three dollars.
Confronted by reality and lower approval ratings, advisers apparently warned that his “prices are down” rhetoric portrayed him as dangerously out of touch from ordinary people. A lot of voters are frustrated about rising costs following promises of reductions. In response, advisers proposed a simple solution: reduce some of Trump’s beloved tariffs. The logical move contradicted the president’s unrealistic claim that new tariffs wouldn’t raise prices for US consumers.
As some tariffs reduced on coffee, beef, tomatoes, and bananas, Trump will likely claim that he has cut prices once those foods start declining in price. That would be similar to a firestarter boasting for extinguishing a blaze that he had started. In another instance, when addressing fast-food leaders, Trump declared that “this is the peak period of America” and told the audience that “prices are coming down and all of that stuff.” These comments come naturally for a wealthy individual to make, but they ring hollow to countless households who are struggling—particularly when many face cuts to nutrition assistance or rising insurance costs.
According to a recent poll conducted last fall, 74% of Americans believe economic conditions are mediocre or bad, while only 26% rate them positive. A separate survey showed that 61% of Americans say Trump’s policies have “made the economy worse” in the country.
Scott Bessent, Trump’s chief financial officer, lately contradicted assertions of a prosperous era. He stated that far from booming, some parts of the US economy “are in recession.” Industrial production—which Trump vowed to save—appears to have contracted for multiple consecutive months and lost approximately tens of thousands of positions this year. Pointing to these challenges, the secretary called on the Federal Reserve to reduce borrowing costs—a move that could help affordability.
Reacting to widespread concern about affordability, Trump suggested a cash handout of “a dividend of at least $2,000 a person” excluding “high income people.” To numerous struggling Americans, it seems like a financial lifeline, but the prospects are dim that lawmakers—concerned about huge budget deficits—will approve the proposal. The scheme would likely increase federal spending, push up borrowing costs, and potentially drive prices higher by injecting cash into the economy.
A further supposed fix for affordability involved creating 50-year mortgages, with the notion that this would lower housing costs. But, reality is that such lengthy loans would do little to lower monthly payments—frequently reducing them by just $100 or $200 per month. The downside is that these mortgages could significantly increase the total interest homeowners pay and hinder their accumulation of equity.
As part of their affordability campaign, Trump and his team have again pointed fingers at Biden for financial challenges, including rising prices. Spokespeople claimed they “faced a mess from Joe Biden” and were “cleaning up Biden’s inflation.” These are unfounded and untruthful claims. Actually, the former president left a strong economy, with low price growth, solid expansion, and minimal joblessness. However, the current administration’s actions—particularly his tariffs—have resulted in an difficult situation, pushing up prices and slowing GDP growth.
Per Mark Zandi, lead analyst at Moody’s Analytics, 22 states are already in recession, with their conditions worsened by Trump’s tariffs. Zandi fears that if key regions like California and New York tumble into recession, the US could slide into a broad economic slump. During recessions, consumers generally possess reduced funds to spend, and inflation usually declines. Sadly, with Trump’s much-ballyhooed affordability campaign likely to do little to control costs, his most effective “tool” for achieving increased affordability might prove to be triggering an economic contraction—a scenario that struggling Americans really can’t afford.
A software engineer and tech writer passionate about open-source projects and AI advancements.
