Tag: tech billionaires
If Trump Cancels Midterms, The Tech Billionaires Wouldn't Even Blink

If Trump Cancels Midterms, The Tech Billionaires Wouldn't Even Blink

The lack of market reaction to the news that Trump ordered his Justice Department to investigate criminal charges against Fed Chair Jerome Powell surprises many people. After all, everyone knows that the claims about cost overruns being the basis for the investigation is nonsense. Trump wants to threaten Powell with criminal charges because he ignored Trump’s demand that he lower interest rates.

This ordinarily would be seen as a very big deal. Ever since Nixon, presidents have been reluctant to be seen as pressuring the Fed. In fact, their concern on this issue often seemed absurd to my view. President Biden didn’t want his Council of Economic Advisors to even comment on interest rate policy, as though giving a view based on the economic data would be undue pressure.

There is a big difference between presenting an economic argument and threatening to imprison a Fed chair who disagrees. And we now see which side Trump comes down on.

But apparently, the markets are just fine with this new threat. The major stock indexes all rose on Monday, although bond prices fell slightly, pushing long-term rates higher. The dollar also fell modestly.

The non-reaction of the stock markets might seem surprising. After all, the independent Fed is considered a sacred feature of U.S. prosperity. There is no shortage of economists who will insist that a Fed that is subordinate to the whims of a president is a quick route to double-digit or even triple-digit inflation. (I’m more agnostic on this one, but the markets generally don’t listen to me.)

Anyhow, Trump is now not just looking to fire an insubordinate Fed chair, he’s looking to throw him in prison. And the markets just yawned.

This reaction should cause us to start asking how the markets might react if Trump just cancels or outright steals the 2026 elections in order to keep his lackeys in control of Congress. Under any other modern president, the fear of a cancelled or stolen election would be silly. While they might have used dubious tactics leading up to an election, we could be comfortable that the votes would be counted, and the outcome would be binding. (Florida in 2000 is a major exception.) No one ever suggested that an election would be cancelled.

But Trump has made it clear that he considers both cancellation and ordering that some votes not be counted as serious options in his recent New York Times interview. No one can be safe in assuming that we will have a normal democratic election this year.

Given this reality, we might want to speculate on how the markets would react in the event that Trump does decide to end American democracy. We now know that most of the big money boys couldn’t care less about democracy. Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, and Tim Cook have been happy to cozy up to Trump in Mar-a-Lago, even as he violates one democratic norm after another. Elon Musk has made it clear that he has contempt for democracy, insofar as it means allowing non-white people to vote.

This gang would obviously have no moral issues with a cancelled or stolen election. But what about the economics?

Trump has already made it clear that he will favor businesses whose leaders praise him and punish those who criticize him. His most recent effort in this direction was saying that he intended to ban Exxon-Mobil from access to Venezuelan oil because its CEO said what every oil analyst has said since Trump became president of that country: it will be difficult for companies to profitably invest there.

The economies of countries where the leader can reward or punish companies on a whim tend to not do very well. The courts have provided a limited check on Trump’s whims as has even this pathetic Congress. However, if Trump is deciding who serves in Congress, the checks will be gone. We will have full rule by our demented 79-year-old president.

Perhaps markets will be fine with that. With enough rear-end licking some companies may still do fine, but it would seem on the straight economics most people with money would probably prefer to invest in a serious country. Let’s hope we don’t have to find out.

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.

Billionaires Rant About Falling Birth Rate (But They Won't Fund Child Care)

Billionaires Rant About Falling Birth Rate (But They Won't Fund Child Care)

When Elon Musk and his first wife talked about how many children they would have, Justine reportedly said she wanted one or two. "But if I could afford nannies, I'd like to have four."

Musk reportedly replied: "That's the difference between you and me. I just assume that there will be nannies."

And that's also the difference between the tech billionaires up in arms about flat birthrates and the many Americans who feel they can't afford children.

JD Vance, father of three, famously launched into the political opposition, complaining that the country was being run by "a bunch of childless cat ladies." He had a net worth estimated north of $10 million. His wife Usha is a high-powered corporate lawyer.

The Vances' use of nannies has been a tightly controlled secret. Usha didn't leave her demanding job until mid-2024, when JD became Donald Trump's running mate. She stated she wanted "to focus on caring for our family."

Do the math. By the middle of 2024, their oldest child was about 7, and the youngest was at least 2. We don't imagine that JD changed a lot of diapers or that Usha routinely brought her babies into the offices of Munger, Tolles & Olson.

Musk is too weird to hold him to the same hypocritical standards as Vance. Let it be noted, however, that he has married and divorced two other women since Justine. He now has an estimated 14 children. They surely have no shortage of nannies, but fatherly attention may not be in great supply. It would be no surprise that his adorable son X, on display in his father's Oval Office visits, served mainly as an accessory. (We look forward to X's memoirs.)

Suffice it to say, the sight of the super-rich waving fingers of disapproval at the one-child or childless middle-class families is unappealing. Still, it's worth pondering why so many younger men and women don't want children.

The discussion is a long one, but it could include a growing materialism and stress. Many young people don't wish to forgo vacations and free time to pursue family life. It could be that many were the product of a stressful divorce or no marriage to begin with. They may have suffered related trauma they don't want to deliver on anyone else.

It could even be prohibitions on abortion, which has made problematic pregnancies potentially life-threatening. (Blaming abortion itself doesn't work. The abortion rate in the U.S. is well down from the level of 50 years ago.)

A lack of affordable child care may be a factor, though countries with that and other bountiful government benefits are seeing a notable drop in births. The right-wing, allegedly family-friendly Project 2025 failed to advocate for child care programs. It even called for ending Head Start.

Young people are said to be suffering widespread depression for a number of reasons. The result, some studies say, is little hope for a future that children represent.

However, there is also debate about whether the falling birth rate is a serious crisis, especially in a country with a housing supply unable to keep up with demand. The U.S. now has about 350 million people, 60 million more than it had in 2000. The population has almost doubled over the last 50 years.

Meanwhile, the rich princes of tech or finance can "phone in" fatherhood from their beach houses or country chateaux, knowing that wherever their kids may be, professional child care will be abundant. It doesn't even matter whether the mother — a wife-, ex-wife or never-wife — is available to cover play dates.

There will be nannies. Those well down the economic scale from the Silicon billionaires know there won't be.

Froma Harrop is an award winning journalist who covers politics, economics and culture. She has worked on the Reuters business desk, edited economics reports for The New York Times News Service and served on the Providence Journal editorial board.

Reprinted with permission from Creators.

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World