In a recent discussion on The Five, panelists unpacked Donald Trump’s comments during his speech at the Economic Club of New York, where he laid out his economic plans for the United States should he return to the presidency. Jessica Tarlov, a regular voice of reason on the show, was particularly critical of Trump’s ideas, especially his stance on tariffs and his solution to the country’s childcare issues. Tarlov’s dissection of the speech opened a broader conversation on the coherence, or lack thereof, of Trump’s economic vision and whether it stands to help or hurt the U.S. economy. Her sharp critique provides an opportunity to delve deeper into Trump’s statements, as presented in his Economic Club speech, and assess the potential economic consequences.
The Core of Trump’s Economic Plan
Trump’s speech at the Economic Club of New York was quintessentially “Trumpian.” He took the stage with his characteristic confidence, highlighting his past successes while framing his vision for the future. The major pillars of his plan included reducing energy costs by bolstering oil production, instituting tariffs on imported goods, and providing tax relief. The underlying tone was a return to the protectionist policies that defined his first term—tariffs on foreign goods, a heavy focus on domestic energy production, and promises of economic relief through tax cuts.
However, Trump’s explanations, particularly when it came to certain crucial issues like childcare, were puzzling. As Tarlov noted, the former president’s ideas seemed both simplistic and detached from the complexities of modern economic dynamics.
Jessica: I would dare any of you to listen to Trump’s answer on child care and tell me what the hell he was talking about. It was one of the more incoherent things I’ve ever heard.. pic.twitter.com/Ps8XJBssiN
— Acyn (@Acyn) September 5, 2024
Trump on Childcare: A Missed Opportunity
Stay up-to-date with the latest news!
Subscribe and start recieving our daily emails.
In his speech, Trump briefly touched on childcare, stating that his administration would make it more affordable. Yet, beyond this vague promise, the details were murky at best. Trump’s comments about tariffs and economic growth being sufficient to cover the costs of childcare were, as Tarlov pointed out, incoherent. She challenged the practicality of relying on tariffs to solve such a nuanced and critical issue.
In the video discussion, Tarlov emphasized the absurdity of Trump’s stance. “I would dare any of you to listen to his answer on childcare and tell me what the hell he was talking about,” she stated. Trump’s solution—or lack thereof—focused on tariffs as a cure-all for domestic problems. In reality, tariffs are indirect taxes on consumers, meaning that while they might protect American industries, they also increase costs for everyday citizens, particularly low- and middle-income families.
The disconnection between Trump’s promises and the tangible impacts of tariffs raises questions about his economic understanding of everyday American struggles. Childcare remains a pressing issue in the U.S., and relying solely on tariffs or tax cuts without a comprehensive plan overlooks the significant structural changes required to provide families with affordable and accessible childcare solutions.
NBC caught this quote:
“Somewhere in that incoherent word salad was a claim that the proposed tariffs could both balance the budget and pay for free child care across the country, which is of course mathematically absurd,” said Brian Riedl, an economic policy expert with the conservative Manhattan Institute and a former policy adviser to prominent Republicans. “Trump sounded like the student who hadn’t studied for the test and was making up numbers.”
Tariffs: A Double-Edged Sword
One of the most notable takeaways from Trump’s Economic Club speech was his strong advocacy for tariffs. Trump argued that tariffs would penalize countries that unfairly subsidize their exports, benefiting the U.S. by encouraging domestic production and creating jobs. Greg Gutfeld, another panelist on The Five, jumped in to defend Trump’s stance. He claimed that tariffs are designed to punish nations that harm the U.S. economy by dumping subsidized goods into the market.
On the surface, this might sound like a reasonable strategy to promote American manufacturing and jobs. However, as Tarlov quickly pointed out, the economic reality is far more complicated. Tariffs, by design, raise the prices of imported goods. While this might protect certain industries in the short term, the longer-term effect is that consumers bear the cost through higher prices on everyday products.
In Trump’s first term, we saw this play out. His trade war with China led to increased costs on everything from electronics to agricultural products, impacting consumers and businesses alike. While some industries did benefit, like steel and aluminum, many more sectors suffered as prices rose and global supply chains became more expensive and complicated.
Moreover, Trump’s reliance on tariffs as a catch-all solution ignores the broader implications of trade dynamics. Tariffs can lead to retaliation from trading partners, creating a cycle of economic punishment that harms both nations. If Trump intends to rely heavily on tariffs again, it raises concerns about whether such policies could inadvertently damage the U.S. economy in the long run, especially as inflationary pressures remain high.
CNN explains why HERE:
It’s part of the reason Goldman Sachs in an analyst note this week said Trump’s economic policies – particularly on trade – would cause America’s economy to shrink. By contrast, Vice President Kamala Harris’ economic policy proposals would grow the economy, Goldman Sachs predicted.
Goldman and other experts fear Trump’s tough proposed trade tactics could worsen the affordability crisis in America.
“It’s one of those magical economic proposals that can actually cause inflation and put you into a recession – at the same time,” David Kelly, chief global strategist at JPMorgan Asset Management, told CNN in a phone interview.
Energy Policy: Back to “Drill, Baby, Drill”
Trump’s energy policy, as discussed in his speech, focused on increasing domestic oil production, doubling down on the “drill, baby, drill” mantra. He criticized the Biden administration’s policies, arguing that energy independence is crucial for the nation’s economic stability.
However, as Tarlov pointed out during The Five discussion, the U.S. is already a global leader in oil production. According to data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), the U.S. has been producing more oil in recent years than ever before. While Trump’s focus on energy independence is a legitimate concern, framing it as a new or revolutionary idea undercuts the progress that has already been made.
Trump’s energy policy might appeal to his base, particularly in states heavily reliant on fossil fuel production. However, it fails to acknowledge the growing importance of renewable energy in creating a sustainable, long-term energy strategy for the country.
A Rhetoric Out of Sync with Reality
The criticisms raised by Tarlov on The Five underscore a broader issue with Trump’s economic plan: it sounds good in rhetoric but lacks substance when it comes to practical solutions. His overreliance on tariffs, vague childcare solutions, and a dated energy policy create more questions than answers. The economic realities of tariffs, for instance, could hurt the very people he promises to protect—everyday consumers.
Trump’s speech at the Economic Club of New York was an attempt to paint a rosy picture of what another term under his leadership would look like. However, as Tarlov and the panel demonstrated, the devil is in the details—or in this case, the lack thereof. Without clear, practical plans, Trump’s economic vision remains a series of bold promises with potentially harmful outcomes.
Featured image via screengrab
