Tag: scott bessent
Wall Street Blaming Bessent And Warsh For Trump's Economic Chaos

Wall Street Blaming Bessent And Warsh For Trump's Economic Chaos

President Donald Trump's ongoing war on the Federal Reserve has been so persistent, it has started negatively impacting the economy. Now the economic editor of a conservative website is warning that Trump's economic policies are so erratic, two officials who otherwise were regarded as reliable are being met with unease on Wall Street.

"Within days of Mr. Bessent’s confirmation, at least, it was obvious this was a misjudgment," The Bulwark's economics editor Catherine Rampell wrote for The New York Times on Thursday. "One of his earliest actions as secretary was giving DOGE access to the sensitive Treasury payments system, which disburses some $6 trillion in payments annually. This was supposedly to investigate “fraud,” but it also was an attempt to help the Trump administration unilaterally freeze payments required by Congress. (A federal judge restricted DOGE’s access before this happened.)"

She added, "Soon after, Mr. Bessent also allowed the I.R.S. to share confidential tax data with immigration enforcement — undermining decades of work to convince immigrants that if they paid their taxes honestly, the payments wouldn’t be weaponized against them. (Federal judges have blocked that, too.)"

Rampell continued, "Now, after criticizing his predecessor for allegedly trying to juice the economy ahead of an election, Mr. Bessent appears to have attempted exactly that. Last week, he announced that the U.S. Treasury would ramp up repurchases of its long-term government bonds, a move intended to reduce their interest rates (which could in turn reduce the cost of mortgages and other financial products). Midterms are looming, and looser money tends to make for happier voters. Mr. Bessent’s plan backfired. Instead, after a brief dip, bond rates rose."

In short, the market realized that Bessent's plan would do nothing to address rising inflation, the dangerous national debt and the ongoing economic problems posed by AI.

"If anything, Mr. Bessent’s buyback play (announced along with comments insisting we can grow out way out of debt) only deepened those suspicions. It made Treasury leadership look feckless," Rampell wrote. She had similar reporting on how the markets are responding to Trump's Federal Reserve pick, Kevin Warsh.

"Mr. Warsh, like Mr. Bessent, has had a wobbly start to his tenure," Rampell wrote. "His most recent news conference was something of a disaster; Mr. Warsh either would not or could not articulate what the Fed’s plan was for tackling inflation, or why that plan did not appear to include interest rate increases. (Mr. Trump is demanding rates be lowered.) At one point Mr. Warsh seemed to suggest the Fed might switch its main yardstick for measuring inflation, raising concerns about backdoor attempts to soften the central bank’s commitment to reducing inflation."

She continued, "To make matters worse, Mr. Trump himself weighed in. He insisted that Mr. Warsh really truly wanted to reduce interest rates, but couldn’t because 'he’s got a board, and it’s a political board.' Days later Mr. Trump renewed his efforts to fire one of the members of that Fed board, which the Supreme Court had prevented him from doing. Markets were not happy about any of this."Rampell is not alone in her assessment of Warsh. Speaking with AlterNet earlier this week, an economic adviser to Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama broke down the problems with Warsh.

"My own guess is that he'll wait until right before or right after the election to raise rates, because he doesn't set policy alone — interest rate policy is made by a committee at the Federal Reserve comprising the seven members of the Board plus five of the regional bank presidents, and there's increasing pressure among them to raise rates," Dr. Robert J. Shapiro explained. "They're letting him put it off a little while longer, but there's no good news on inflation. Just this week, Trump announced 50 percent tariffs on our largest trading partner, Canada, which will further increase inflation. The markets don't have much confidence in Warsh anymore, so they're pricing in a higher-than-normal likelihood that he'll cut rates — even though I don't think he will — and in anticipation of the inflation that would result, they're raising long-term rates."

Reprinted with permission from AlterNet

Bessent and Lutnick with Trump in Oval Office

Bessent And Lutnick's Fantasy Stock Earnings Won't Finance Your Retirement

We all know how Trump likes to make up crazy numbers, which his lackeys then repeat. He has $18 trillion in foreign investment coming into the country. He won the 2020 election by millions of votes. He is lowering drug prices by 1500%.

We can usually just laugh these off as the ramblings of an old man suffering from dementia. But there is one crazy Trump number that it is important people know should not be taken seriously. This is the claim on stock returns that lackeys like Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick tout when telling people how much money their new-born kid can get from their Trump accounts.

In their telling, the $1000 that the government is putting into the Trump accounts, starting this year, will grow to more than $590,000 when the kid reaches retirement age. If their families are able to put the full $5,000 allowed into the account, they will have more than $2.5 million when they reach retirement, and that assumes no further contributions. (They can put up to $5,000 a year into the account.)

That’s a serious chunk of money, even if we cut it by four to adjust for projected inflation over this period. It’s also serious nonsense. The problem is that there is no plausible story whereby the stock market can provide the 10 percent nominal return the Bessent-Lutnick gang is pushing. In their story, price-to-earnings ratios would have to go through the roof.

By 2093, when our newborn kid plans to cash out the fortune in their Trump account, their 10 percent compounded returns would imply a price-to-earnings ratio (PE) of almost 1400. The problem is that if the Trump accounts are growing at the rate of 10 percent a year, the economy and corporate profits are only growing at a bit less than 4.0 percent annually. This causes the PE to go through the roof.

This is not an old problem. Some of us have been trying to point this one out to arithmetic fans ever since the Social Security privatization debates of the 1990s. While the stock market has historically provided returns that were higher than the economy’s rate of growth, this was possible because the PE in the stock market has averaged around 14 to 1. It is currently close to 40 to 1.

The simplest way to calculate the real rate of return consistent with a stable PE is to simply take the reciprocal of the PE ratio. When the PE ratio is 14, the sustainable real rate of return is 7.1 percent percent. Adding in inflation that has averaged close to 3.0 percent, gets the 10.0 percent that we can see going back 100 years.

But with the current PE close to 40, this sort of rate of return is not possible unless the PE gets ever higher. The sustainable real rate of return would be just over 2.5 percent. Adding in projected inflation of 2.3 percent gets us to 4.8 percent, well below the Bessent-Lutnick promise.

The moral of this story is that, just as no one in their right mind would take health advice from RFK Jr., no one in their right mind should take financial advice from the Bessent-Lutnick gang. As the saying goes, do your own research.

Dean Baker is a senior economist at the Center for Economic and Policy Research and the author of the 2016 book Rigged: How Globalization and the Rules of the Modern Economy Were Structured to Make the Rich Richer. Please consider subscribing to his Substack.

Reprinted with permission from Dean Baker.

'No No No No!" Treasury Secretary Roasted For Denying Inflation Under Trump

'No No No No!" Treasury Secretary Roasted For Denying Inflation Under Trump

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on Sunday refused to admit inflation has gone up for Americans after NBC Meet The Press host Kristen Welker confronted him with the numbers.

"Inflation has gone up,” Welker said Sunday. “It's at three percent now up from two percent in April when the tariffs were imposed.”

“No, no no no,” Bessent replied. “So, inflation hasn't gone up. The one thing we're not gonna do is do what the Biden administration did and tell the American people they don't know how they feel. They are traumatized."

Bessent’s remark sparked outrage from observers who noted President Donald Trump’s administration is doing the same thing it accused its predecessor of doing — telling consumers not to believe their own pocketbooks.

As policy analyst Evaristus Odinikaeze posted on X, “the inflation went from 2 percent to 3 percent, literally and no amount of ‘no, no, no’ changes basic math.”

“Telling Americans inflation hasn’t risen right after tariffs pushed prices higher is the same gaslighting they accused others of,” Odinikaeze continued. “You don’t fight economic anxiety by denying lived reality. You solve it. But instead, Trump’s making it worse and lying about it.”

Bulwark Deputy Digital Director Evan Rosenfeld likewise argued, “Trump and Republicans have learned nothing from how badly Joe Biden and the Democrats bungled inflation.”

“Instead they’re repeating some of the same mistakes,” Rosenfeld wrote on X.

Bessent also drew condemnation after offering advice for Americans feeling the pain from Trump’s economic policies.

"You know the best way to bring your inflation rate down? Move from a blue state to a red state. Blue state inflation is half a percent higher,” Bessent told Welker.

“Scott Bessent cannot stop staying really stupid things,” journalist John Harwood said of Bessent’s suggestion.

TreasyReprinted witih permission from Alternet


When Scott Bessent Claims Trump Is Making Life Affordable, Who Believes Him?

When Scott Bessent Claims Trump Is Making Life Affordable, Who Believes Him?

When it comes to the economy, the thing American households care most about by far these days is affordability, aka the cost-of-living, aka what things cost.

Note that while, of course, inflation is related to this concern, it is by no means the same thing. Telling people who want lower prices that they’ve got slower inflation is a slight-of-hand that they interpret as gaslighting. They want lower prices; you’re (falsely, as shown below) claiming that you’re delivering slower-growing prices.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has been on a campaign to convince people that life is a lot more affordable under his boss, despite the fact that this is false and people know it’s false. The fact that his boss and party are refusing to reconsider their policy to make health-coverage premiums rise sharply for tens of millions of Americans just makes their affordability falsehoods that much more transparent.

First, here’s Sec’y Bessent on Face the Nation last Sunday:

MARGARET BRENNAN: [Americans] are seeing prices still high on furniture, energy, gardening, lawn care, apparel. Do you expect these things to cool off and when?
SEC. BESSENT: Well, it is cooling off because the core inflation number that you referenced was 0.2% which is down the- from the previous sequence over the previous months. And you listed the things that are up, but we’re seeing plenty of things that are down, whether it’s energy and rents.

The gas price is down, as I’ll show in a moment, and that’s certainly a price people notice, but electricity prices are way up. CPI rents are up, not down, though the Zillow rent index is down $50 over both the past month and the past year. Rental inflation is, in fact, consistently down as shown in the figure below. It started falling in the spring of 2023, but again, that just means average rents are growing more slowly. Electricity prices are not just up, they’re accelerating (figure), in part due to data-center demand, meaning consumers in states like mine (VA) are getting hit with spillovers from insatiable data-center energy draws. No one’s loving that, either.

Gas is down—the figure shows the per gallon price from AAA—to about where it was in late 2024. You might think that boosted people’s economic vibes back then but it failed to do, much as it’s failing to do so now. Consumer sentiment is at or below recessionary levels.

Bessent went on to correctly point out that the mortgage rate is down, from about seven percent when Trump took office to just above six percent now, which is good news for home buyers and refi-ers. But while housing prices have flattened, they’re not coming down and they’re up by more than 50 percent since the pandemic (Case-Shiller index). When more than a third of Americans are “housing cost burdened,” meaning it takes at least 30 percent of their income to pay rent or mortgage, dismissing housing affordability is not your best play.

But, as is their wont, Bessent doubled down on X:

Inflation is down?? Yearly CPI inflation was ~2% in April and its ~3% now. We’ve got a pocketful of receipts on this one! As noted, some prices are down, but the rise in the average price level, i.e., inflation, is not in question. In every inflation report, you’ll always find some prices down and more prices up, but to claim “inflation is down” when it’s up over the past few months is not credible.

Moreover, tariffs are part of the reason inflation is up. I’ve shown this for goods prices in a recent post, but here’s the latest update from Cavallo et al, who have been tapping their unique dataset of five major retailers (the vertical line is when Trump’s tariffs were introduced):

Closer to home, and I mean your home and my home, where the day does not begin without an excessively large cup of coffee, Trump’s 50 percent tariff on Brazilian coffee is partially responsible for that price rising 19 percent over the past year (it’s not just tariffs; droughts have pushed up both coffee and beef costs). Some commentators responded to Bessent’s tweet above with pictures of what they were paying for groceries.

With all these mostly-up price movements going on in the background, the Trump administration and Congressional Rs voted to make health coverage a lot more expensive for over 20 million people by ending subsidies that were offsetting that cost.

Given those facts on the ground, Mr. Sec’y, here’s some free advice: Stop trying to convince people life is more affordable than they believe to be the case. You’ve got to know that average prices almost always go up, unless there’s a deep depression upon the land. So, BS’ing people that they can have their old prices back is, as noted, just feckless gaslighting.

Instead, you need to explain what you’re doing to make life more affordable, which has two broad policy thrusts: supporting real income growth and helping to offset the high costs of key sources of price pressures, including housing, groceries, health care, child care, utilities (e.g., electricity) costs. Neale Mahoney and I explain the policy framework and give some policy examples here; Chao and Konczal go deep here.

But before you can pursue policies to help with affordability, you’ve got to stop making the problem worse. That means unwinding tariffs and restoring health coverage subsidies.

On the income side, you’ve also got to start worrying about the unusually low-hire job market, which, unlike the booming stock market, is where the people most concerned about affordability get their income. For them, it’s paychecks, not portfolios.

So, when the Wall Street Journal reports the following…:

American employers are increasingly making the calculation that they can keep the size of their teams flat—or shrink them through layoffs—without harming their businesses. Part of that thinking is the belief that artificial intelligence will be used to pick up some of the slack and automate more processes. Companies are also hesitant to make any moves in an economy that many still describe as uncertain.

…you need to get the team thinking about ways to help restart the job-growth engine, which, for the record, isn’t tariffs, deportations, or Fed harassment. It is, in part, restored business and consumer confidence, less chaos and uncertainty, and standing up policies that nudge AI-use to upweight labor complementarity and down-weight labor substitution. I grant you, this is hard policy work, but it’s the only honest way forward.

I know—free advice, worth what you pay for it. But I learned much of the above the hard way. And for all the endless noise your boss generates, all the breaking of norms and laws, at the end of the day, affordability, as prosaic as may sound relative to reshaping everything from trade to immigration to the rule-of-law to the White House itself, is what people really need your help with.

Telling them that’s what you’re doing when in fact you’re doing the opposite won’t cut it.

Jared Bernstein is a former chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisers under President Joe Biden. He is a senior fellow at the Council on Budget and Policy Priorities. Please consider subscribing to his Substack.

Reprinted with permission from Econjared.

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Trending

World