During the previous presidential campaign, the former president courted voters with pledges to lower prices starting on day one. However, once he assumed office, there was precious little attention to affordability issues. All that changed following inflation-weary voters expressed dissatisfaction at the polls. Within days, his team launched a slapdash effort to address affordability. Unfortunately, this initiative is a hot mess—filled with illogical claims, inconsistencies, magical thinking, scapegoating, and misleading statements.
Just two days post-election, the president began his affordability drive with a disastrous remark: “Food prices are way down. Everything is way down… So I don’t want to hear about affordability.” This comment from billionaire Trump—often associates with other ultra-rich individuals—demonstrated a lack of empathy for millions of Americans who struggle when visiting the grocery store. Essentially, he dismissed their struggles as unimportant, suggesting they were mistaken about actual costs.
His assertion that everything was “way down” was highly misleading and inaccurate. How could all costs be decreasing when the taxes he imposed were increasing costs? Official statistics show the cost of bananas increased nearly 7% in the last twelve months, the price of beef went up 14.7%, and the cost of coffee jumped 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 tracked by the government’s price index, including meats, poultry, and fish (rising over 4%), drinks (increasing nearly 3%), and fruits and vegetables (up 1.3%).
Despite these numbers, Trump persists in repeating his misleading narrative about affordability. Since election day, he has stated there is “virtually no inflation,” declared “prices are way down,” and argued “living is cheaper under Trump than it was under sleepy Joe Biden.” Such remarks contradict the reality that prices overall have clearly increased since Biden left office. At present, price growth is at a 3 percent per year, that’s half again as much than the Federal Reserve’s target of 2 percent. In another falsehood, he boasted that gas prices had fallen to nearly $2 a gallon, even though official data show they average over three dollars.
Confronted by actual conditions and lower approval ratings, advisers evidently warned that his “prices are down” message portrayed him as dangerously out of touch from typical Americans. A lot of voters are angry about prices continuing to climb after assurances of reductions. As a result, advisers proposed a simple solution: roll back certain import taxes. This sensible idea contradicted Trump’s absurd assertion that new tariffs wouldn’t raise prices for US consumers.
As some tariffs being rolled back on coffee, beef, tomatoes, and bananas, Trump will likely announce that he has cut prices once those foods start declining in price. That would be like an arsonist taking credit for extinguishing a fire that he ignited. On another occasion, when addressing fast-food leaders, Trump stated that “this is the golden age of America” and told listeners that “costs are decreasing and all of that stuff.” Such statements are easy for a wealthy individual to make, but seem insincere to countless households who are struggling—particularly when millions risk losing food stamps or rising insurance costs.
According to a survey conducted last fall, 74% of Americans believe economic conditions are mediocre or bad, while just a quarter consider them good or excellent. Another poll found that a majority of citizens say the administration’s actions have “made the economy worse” in the country.
The treasury secretary, Trump’s top economic official, recently disputed claims of a golden age. He stated 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 lost approximately 33,000 jobs this year. Pointing to these challenges, Bessent called on the Federal Reserve to reduce borrowing costs—an action that could ease financial pressure.
Reacting to public dismay about affordability, Trump proposed a cash handout of “a payout 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 enact such a plan. This idea could increase federal spending, push up borrowing costs, and possibly drive prices higher by putting more money into consumers’ pockets.
A further proposed solution for affordability involved creating half-century home loans, with the notion that they could reduce monthly mortgage payments. But, reality is that such lengthy loans would do little to reduce installments—often cutting them by just $100 or $200 each month. The downside is that these loans could more than double the overall cost borrowers pay and hinder their accumulation of equity.
As part of their cost-cutting effort, Trump and his team have again pointed fingers at Biden for economic problems, such as rising prices. Spokespeople stated they “faced a mess from Joe Biden” and were “cleaning up Biden’s inflation.” This is absurd and inaccurate claims. Actually, the former president handed over a robust economic situation, with inflation way down, solid expansion, and minimal joblessness. However, the current administration’s actions—especially import taxes—have created an difficult situation, pushing up prices and slowing GDP growth.
According to an economist, lead analyst at a research firm, numerous regions are already in recession, with their conditions worsened by Trump’s tariffs. He fears that if large states such as major economies tumble into recession, the nation could slide into a broad economic slump. During recessions, consumers typically have reduced funds to spend, and inflation usually declines. Sadly, given the highly-touted affordability campaign likely to do little to control costs, his primary method for improving living standards might end up triggering an economic contraction—something that hard-pressed households really can’t afford.