PJFP.com

Pursuit of Joy, Fulfillment, and Purpose

Tag: income inequality

  • Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent Unpacks Trump’s Global Tariff Strategy: A Blueprint for Middle-Class Revival and Economic Rebalancing

    TLDW:

    Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent explained Trump’s new global tariff plan as a strategy to revive U.S. manufacturing, reduce dependence on foreign supply chains, and strengthen the middle class. The tariffs aim to raise $300–600B annually, funding tax cuts and reducing the deficit without raising taxes. Bessent framed the move as both economic and national security policy, arguing that decades of globalization have failed working Americans. The ultimate goal: bring factories back to the U.S., shrink trade deficits, and create sustainable wage growth.


    In a landmark interview, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent offered an in-depth explanation of former President Donald Trump’s sweeping new global tariff regime, framing it as a bold, strategic reorientation of the American economy meant to restore prosperity to the working and middle class. Speaking with Tucker Carlson, Bessent positioned the tariffs not just as economic policy but as a necessary geopolitical and domestic reset.

    “For 40 years, President Trump has said this was coming,” Bessent emphasized. “This is about Main Street—it’s Main Street’s turn.”

    The tariff package, announced at a press conference the day before, aims to tax a broad range of imports from China, Europe, Mexico, and beyond. The approach revives what Bessent calls the “Hamiltonian model,” referencing founding father Alexander Hamilton’s use of tariffs to build early American industry. Trump’s version adds a modern twist: using tariffs as negotiating leverage, alongside economic and national security goals.

    Bessent argued that globalization, accelerated by what economists now call the “China Shock,” hollowed out America’s industrial base, widened inequality, and left much of the country, particularly the middle, in economic despair. “The coasts have done great,” he said. “But the middle of the country has seen life expectancy decline. They don’t think their kids will do better than they did. President Trump is trying to fix that.”

    Economic and National Security Intertwined

    Bessent painted the tariff plan as a two-pronged effort: to make America economically self-sufficient and to enhance national security. COVID-19, he noted, exposed the fragility of foreign-dependent supply chains. “We don’t make our own medicine. We don’t make semiconductors. We don’t even make ships,” he said. “That has to change.”

    The administration’s goal is to re-industrialize America by incentivizing manufacturers to relocate to the U.S. “The best way around a tariff wall,” Bessent said, “is to build your factory here.”

    Over time, the plan anticipates a shift: as more production returns home, tariff revenues would decline, but tax receipts from growing domestic industries would rise. Bessent believes this can simultaneously reduce the deficit, lower middle-class taxes, and strengthen America’s industrial base.

    Revenue Estimates and Tax Relief

    The expected revenue from tariffs? Between $300 billion and $600 billion annually. That, Bessent says, is “very meaningful” and could help fund tax cuts on tips, Social Security income, overtime pay, and U.S.-made auto loan interest.

    “We’ve already taken in about $35 billion a year from the original Trump tariffs,” Bessent noted. “That’s $350 billion over ten years, without Congress lifting a finger.”

    Despite a skeptical Congressional Budget Office (CBO), which Bessent compared to “Enron accounting,” he expressed confidence the policy would drive growth and fiscal balance. “If we put in sound fundamentals—cheap energy, deregulation, stable taxes—everything else follows.”

    Pushback and Foreign Retaliation

    Predictably, there has been international backlash. Bessent acknowledged the lobbying storm ahead from countries like Vietnam and Germany, but said the focus is on U.S. companies, not foreign complaints. “If you want to sell to Americans, make it in America,” he reiterated.

    As for China, Bessent sees limited retaliation options. “They’re in a deflationary depression. Their economy is the most unbalanced in modern history.” He believes the Chinese model—excessive reliance on exports and suppressed domestic consumption—has been structurally disrupted by Trump’s tariffs.

    Social Inequality and Economic Reality

    Bessent made a compelling moral and economic case. He highlighted the disparity between elite complaints (“my jet was an hour late”) and the lived reality of ordinary Americans, many of whom are now frequenting food banks while others vacation in Europe. “That’s not a great America,” he said.

    He blasted what he called the Democrat strategy of “compensate the loser,” asserting instead that the system itself is broken—not the people within it. “They’re not losers. They’re winners in a bad system.”

    DOGE, Debt, and the Federal Reserve

    On trimming government fat, Bessent praised the work of the Office of Government Efficiency (DOGE), headed by Elon Musk. He believes DOGE can reduce federal spending, which he says has ballooned with inefficiency and redundancy.

    “If Florida can function with half the budget of New York and better services, why can’t the federal government?” he asked.

    He also criticized the Federal Reserve for straying into climate and DEI activism while missing real threats like the SVB collapse. “The regulators failed,” he said flatly.

    Final Message

    Bessent acknowledged the risks but called Trump’s economic transformation both necessary and overdue. “I can’t guarantee you there won’t be a recession,” he said. “But I do know the old system wasn’t working. This one might—and I believe it will.”

    With potential geopolitical shocks, regulatory hurdles, and resistance from entrenched interests, the next four years could redefine America’s economic identity. If Bessent is right, we may be watching the beginning of an era where domestic industry, middle-class strength, and fiscal prudence become central to U.S. policy again.

    “This is about Main Street. It’s their turn,” Bessent repeated. “And we’re just getting started.”

  • The Relic of Prosperity: Why GDP No Longer Measures Our World

    The Relic of Prosperity: Why GDP No Longer Measures Our World

    For nearly a century, Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has stood as the unrivalled titan of economic measurement, a numerical shorthand for a nation’s strength and success. Born in the 1930s amid the chaos of the Great Depression, it was the brainchild of economist Simon Kuznets, who crafted it to help a struggling United States quantify its economic output. At the time, it was revolutionary—a clear, unified way to tally the value of goods and services produced within a country’s borders. Factories roared, assembly lines hummed, and GDP offered a vital pulse of industrial might. Today, however, this once-innovative metric feels like an artifact unearthed from a bygone era. The world has transformed—into a tapestry of digital networks, service-driven economies, and urgent ecological limits—yet GDP remains stubbornly rooted in its industrial origins. Its flaws are no longer mere quirks; they are profound disconnects that demand we reconsider what prosperity means in the 21st century.

    A Tool Forged in a Different Age

    GDP’s story begins in 1934, when Kuznets presented it to the U.S. Congress as a way to grasp the scale of the Depression’s devastation. It was a pragmatic response to a specific need: measuring production in an economy dominated by tangible outputs—steel, coal, automobiles, and textiles. The metric’s genius lay in its simplicity: add up everything bought and sold in the marketplace, and you had a gauge of economic health. Kuznets himself was clear-eyed about its limits, warning that it was never meant to capture the full scope of human welfare. “The welfare of a nation,” he wrote, “can scarcely be inferred from a measurement of national income.” Yet his caution was sidelined as GDP took on a life of its own. By the mid-20th century, it had become the global yardstick of progress, fueling post-World War II recovery efforts and shaping the rivalry of the Cold War. Nations flaunted their GDP figures like medals, and for a time, it worked—because the world it measured was still one of smokestacks and assembly lines.

    That world no longer exists. The industrial age has given way to a reality where intangible forces—knowledge, data, services, and sustainability—drive human advancement. GDP, however, remains a prisoner of its past, a metric designed for a landscape of physical production that has largely faded. Its historical roots explain its rise, but they also expose why it feels so out of touch today.

    The Modern Economy’s Invisible Wealth

    Step into 2025, and the global economy is a vastly different beast. In advanced nations, services—think healthcare, software development, education, and tourism—account for over 70% of economic activity, dwarfing manufacturing’s share. Unlike a car or a ton of wheat, the value of a therapy session or a streaming subscription is slippery, often undervalued by GDP’s rigid focus on market transactions. Then there’s the digital revolution, which has upended traditional notions of wealth entirely. Giants like Google, Meta, and Wikipedia power modern life—billions navigate their platforms daily—yet their free-to-use models barely register in GDP. A teenager coding an app in their bedroom or a volunteer editing an open-source encyclopedia contributes immense societal value, but GDP sees nothing. This is a metric forged for an age of steel, not silicon.

    Even within traditional sectors, GDP’s lens is myopic. Consider automation: as robots replace workers, productivity might climb, boosting GDP, but the human cost—job losses, community upheaval—goes unrecorded. Or take the gig economy, where millions cobble together livelihoods from freelance work. Their hustle fuels innovation, yet its precariousness escapes GDP’s notice. The metric’s obsession with output ignores the texture of how wealth is created and who benefits from it, leaving us with a hollow picture of progress.

    The Costs GDP Refuses to Count

    Beyond its struggles with modern economies, GDP’s gravest sin is what it omits. It’s a machine that counts ceaselessly but sees selectively. Income inequality is a stark example: GDP can trumpet record growth while wages stagnate for most, funneling riches to an elite few. In the U.S., the top 1% now hold more wealth than the entire middle class, yet GDP offers no hint of this chasm. Similarly, environmental destruction slips through its cracks. Logging a forest or pumping oil spikes GDP, but the loss of ecosystems, clean air, or biodiversity? Invisible. Absurdly, disasters can inflate GDP—think of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon spill, where cleanup costs added billions to the tally—while proactive stewardship, like rewilding land, earns no credit. This perverse logic turns a blind eye to the planet’s breaking points, a flaw that feels unforgivable in an era of climate reckoning.

    Then there’s the silent backbone of society: unpaid labor. The parent raising a child, the neighbor tending a community garden, the caregiver nursing an elder—these acts sustain us all, yet GDP dismisses them as economically irrelevant. Studies estimate that if unpaid household work were monetized, it could add trillions to global economies. In failing to see this, GDP not only undervalues half the population—disproportionately women—but also the very foundation of human resilience. It’s a relic that measures motion without meaning, tallying transactions while ignoring life itself.

    Searching for a Truer Compass

    The cracks in GDP have sparked a quest for alternatives, each vying to redefine what we value. The Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) takes a stab at balance, starting with GDP but subtracting costs like pollution and crime while adding benefits like volunteerism and equitable wealth distribution. It’s a messy, imperfect fix, but it at least tries to see the bigger picture. The Human Development Index (HDI), used by the United Nations, pivots to well-being, blending income with life expectancy and education to track how economies serve people, not just markets. Bhutan’s Gross National Happiness (GNH) goes further, weaving in cultural vitality, mental health, and ecological harmony—an ambitious, if subjective, rethink of progress. None of these have dethroned GDP’s global reign; their complexity and lack of universality make them tough to scale. But their existence signals a hunger for something truer, a metric that doesn’t just count the past but guides us toward a sustainable future.

    The Stubborn Giant and the Road Ahead

    Why does GDP endure despite its obsolescence? Its staying power lies in its clarity and consistency. Central banks tweak interest rates based on it, governments craft budgets around it, and international bodies like the IMF rank nations by it. A country’s GDP still carries swagger—China’s rise or America’s dominance owes much to those headline numbers. Abandoning it outright risks chaos; no replacement has the infrastructure or consensus to take its place. Yet this inertia is a double-edged sword. Chasing GDP growth can trap us in a cycle of short-term wins—bulldozing forests, burning fossil fuels—while the long-term costs pile up unseen. In a world grappling with climate collapse, AI disruption, and social fractures, leaning on a 1930s relic feels like navigating a spaceship with a sextant.

    The path forward isn’t to topple GDP but to demote it—to treat it as one tool among many, not the sole arbiter of success. Pair it with GPI’s nuance, HDI’s humanity, or even experimental dashboards that track carbon footprints and mental health. Simon Kuznets saw this coming: he knew his creation was a partial measure, never the full story. Nearly a century later, we’re still catching up to that insight. GDP’s legacy as a groundbreaking metric is secure, but its reign as the lone king of prosperity must end. The world has outgrown it—not just in years, but in complexity, ambition, and need. It’s time to honor its service and let it share the stage with measures that see what it cannot: the messy, vital heartbeat of life in 2025 and beyond.

  • 12 Major Threats to the US Economy: Is a 20-Year Downturn on the Horizon?

    12 Major Threats to the US Economy: Is a 20-Year Downturn on the Horizon?

    According to AI here is the bear case for the United States over the next 20 years.

    The bear case for the US economy over the next 20 years is based on a range of potential issues and challenges that could lead to an underperforming economy. While it is impossible to predict the future with certainty, here are some key factors that may contribute to a weaker economic outlook:

    1. Demographic Challenges: The aging population could place significant strain on the economy. As the baby boomer generation retires, there will be fewer workers available to support the growing number of retirees, leading to increased healthcare and pension costs, lower labor force participation, and slower economic growth.
    2. Rising Income Inequality: The widening gap between the rich and the poor could lead to reduced social mobility, weaker consumer demand, and decreased investment in education and skills. This may result in an economy that is less innovative, less competitive, and slower growing.
    3. High National Debt: The US national debt is at historically high levels and is projected to continue rising. High debt levels could lead to increased interest rates, reduced private investment, and a larger share of government spending devoted to servicing the debt, all of which may contribute to slower economic growth.
    4. Technological Displacement: Automation and artificial intelligence (AI) could lead to widespread job displacement, particularly in manufacturing and service sectors. This could lead to higher unemployment rates, lower consumer spending, and increased social unrest.
    5. Climate Change: The increasing frequency and severity of natural disasters due to climate change could cause massive disruptions to economic activity, leading to reduced growth, increased insurance costs, and the need for substantial public and private investment in disaster recovery and resilience.
    6. Trade and Globalization: Ongoing trade disputes and a potential retreat from globalization could lead to reduced international trade, decreased foreign investment, and slower economic growth. Additionally, supply chain disruptions and rising protectionism could increase inflation and reduce overall efficiency.
    7. Infrastructure Decay: The US has an aging infrastructure that requires significant investment to maintain and improve. Failure to adequately invest in infrastructure could lead to reduced productivity, lower growth rates, and increased costs for businesses and households.
    8. Healthcare Costs: The US has some of the highest healthcare costs in the world, and these costs are projected to continue rising. High healthcare costs could strain government budgets, reduce disposable income, and limit economic growth.
    9. Geopolitical Risks: Rising tensions between major powers, regional conflicts, and increased political instability could lead to disruptions in global trade, increased military spending, and reduced foreign investment, all of which could negatively impact the US economy.
    10. Education and Skills Gap: A lack of investment in education and skills training could lead to a workforce that is ill-prepared for the jobs of the future. This could reduce productivity, limit innovation, and result in lower economic growth.
    11. Monetary Policy Constraints: With interest rates near historic lows, the Federal Reserve may have limited tools to combat future recessions, potentially leading to deeper and more prolonged downturns.
    12. Potential Asset Bubbles: Overvalued asset markets, such as real estate or equity markets, could be at risk of a significant correction, potentially leading to a broad-based economic slowdown.

    While the US economy has shown remarkable resilience in the past, it faces a number of long-term challenges that could lead to a weaker economic outlook over the next 20 years. Policymakers will need to address these issues proactively to ensure continued growth and prosperity for future generations.