Tag: trump inflation
Will Surrendering To Iran Relieve Trump's Gas Pains? Alas, Probably Not!

Will Surrendering To Iran Relieve Trump's Gas Pains? Alas, Probably Not!

Donald Trump’s rhetoric on Iran oscillates wildly from day to day, sometimes from hour to hour. But Trump has run out of military options that don’t involve huge war crimes, so we seem to be heading for a reopening of the Strait of Hormuz on Iran’s terms. And that includes the imposition of de facto tolls, whatever they are called.

There is no mystery about Trump’s surrender: He’s desperate to end the war because he is paying a steep political price for high gasoline prices, and the midterms are only four and a half months away.

But can Trump rehabilitate his standing with American voters by throwing in the towel? Probably not, for both economic and political reasons. I would argue that there are four points of slippage between Trump’s political goals and what is likely to happen.

The state of the Strait: Even if the war is truly over, it will take time to return world oil supplies to normal levels. First, there has been substantial damage to the Persian Gulf’s infrastructure, which will take months, if not years, to repair. Second, many oil tankers are now in the wrong place and it will take weeks or months to move them. Third, some shipping channels are at risk from stray mines. Lastly, the world met the Hormuz crisis in part by running down oil inventories, which will now need to be rebuilt.

It’s true that a surge in Iranian oil exports has begun thanks to the lifting of the U.S. blockade. This will add to global oil supplies but will also strengthen the regime. But despite this surge of Iranian shipments, prices of oil futures — promises to buy or sell oil on specified dates — indicate that the oil markets expect oil prices to decline at only a slow rate for the rest of this year:

west texas intermediate oil price

Rockets and feathers: There is a well-documented pattern to how the price of gasoline responds to changes in the price of crude oil. When there is a global shock that causes the price of crude oil to soar, gasoline prices rise like a rocket. But when the crisis is over and crude prices plunge, the price of gas declines only gradually ­— it drifts down like feathers.

Will that happen this time? Gasoline and, to a lesser extent, diesel, have fallen considerably in price from their peak:

oil price

They are, however, still well above their prewar levels, and by more than you would expect given the commonly used rule of thumb:

$10 on price of crude = $0.25 on price of gasoline

Crude oil prices are $10-$15 a barrel higher than they were prewar, which would point to gasoline prices $0.25-$0.37 higher per gallon. Yet gasoline is currently almost $1 a gallon higher than it was before the war.

So if the “rockets and feathers” pattern continues to apply, gasoline prices will be elevated for months to come, thwarting Trumpist hopes of quick political relief from capitulating to Iran.

Prices beyond gasoline: As you can see in the chart above, the war on Iran sent the price of diesel fuel soaring by significantly more than the price of gasoline. Unlike gasoline, which is mainly purchased by consumers, diesel is mainly used by businesses, for trucking and industrial uses. So the surge in diesel prices led to a surge in business costs rather than a direct burden on consumers.

True, businesses do eventually pass higher costs on to consumers. The key word, however, is “eventually.” This means that there is probably substantial Iran war-induced inflation still in the pipeline.

Nor were soaring prices of diesel the only cost the war imposed on businesses. The Persian Gulf is normally a key supplier of many chemicals, whose prices soared when the Strait of Hormuz was closed. For example, the price of urea, a key fertilizer with industrial uses as well, temporarily rose by 75 percent when the Strait was closed. Again, some of the effect of these cost shocks still hasn’t hit consumer prices.

Moreover, the economy is delivering inflationary shocks independent of the war. Notably, the AI/datacenter boom has driven a rapid rise in electricity prices and huge increases in the prices of memory chips, which are used in almost all consumer electronics, from smartphones to laptops to game consoles. The AI boom has also pushed up interest rates on mortgages and consumer loans. Oh, and Trump’s cuts to Obamacare subsidies are causing many Americans’ health insurance costs to soar.

So while consumers are getting some relief at the gas pump, they’re facing persistent sticker shock on many other goods. It’s safe to predict that consumers won’t be in a celebratory mood on D-I [defeat by Iran] Day. Instead, they are likely to feel that any claims of victory are Pyrrhic at best.

The cost of broken promises: We have just endured the second big gasoline price shock of the past five years. The previous shock, during the Biden years, briefly sent average prices of gasoline above $5 a gallon. Like the recent price spike, the 2022 run-up in gas prices was largely caused by a war — the war between Russia and Ukraine. That wasn’t a war that the U.S. president launched on a whim. Regardless, the price of gasoline fell rapidly after June 2022:

Inflation also fell rapidly, especially if you exclude the price of shelter, which as measured tends, for technical reasons, to lag far behind market prices:

So what did cheaper gas and rapid disinflation without a recession do for perceptions about President Biden’s handling of the economy? Almost nothing. The Roper Center published an analysis of trends in Biden’s economic approval rating, and found hardly any improvement when gas prices and overall inflation plunged:

You may argue that this was unfair because Biden was punished for a global inflation shock that wasn’t his fault. Furthermore, his overall economic management was in fact very good. In fact, that’s what I have argued, and a majority of Americans now say that the economy was better under Biden than under Trump. However, that argument is beside the point for analyzing the effect of the Trump surrender. The point, instead, is that once a leader has lost the public’s economic trust, that trust doesn’t come back just because gasoline prices have receded.

I would add that it may be especially hard for the Trumpists to make the case that things have turned around when they were never willing to admit that anything was wrong in the first place, insisting even as prices soared that we were living in a “golden age.”

So will Trump’s surrender to Iran rescue him and his party from a blue wave in November? It’s very unlikely. I suggest they find themselves some lifejackets.

Paul Krugman is a Nobel Prize-winning economist and former professor at MIT and Princeton who now teaches at the City University of New York's Graduate Center. From 2000 to 2024, he wrote a column for The New York Times. Please consider subscribing to his Substack.

Reprinted with permission from Paul Krugman.


Trump's Tariffs Are Still Inflating Prices -- And Will Stop Fed From Cutting Rates

Trump's Tariffs Are Still Inflating Prices -- And Will Stop Fed From Cutting Rates

Donald Trump assured us that exporters would pay his tariffs; that it would effectively be free money to the United States. At times he even suggested a tariff dividend, where he would send us all checks of $1k to $2k with all the money that was pouring in from his tariffs.

Virtually all economists said this was nonsense. Based on extensive research, they argued that people in this country would pay the overwhelming majority of the tariffs, even if there is some question as to how much might be borne by importers and retailers, as opposed to consumers.

We quickly learned that the Trump story was wrong. Before Trump’s election, inflation had been headed down to the Fed’s 2.0 percent target. After Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs went into effect, inflation began rising, hitting 3.0 percent even before the Iran War. With the big war-related run-up in energy prices, inflation is now over four percent.

With everything else going on in the economy and the world, we shouldn’t lose sight of the impact of the Trump tariffs. We got new data on that yesterday, when the Bureau of Labor Statistics released May data on import prices. The data showed non-fuel import prices rose 0.8 percent in the month of May and were up 3.7 percent over the last year.

Just to be clear, these are the prices that are paid to exporters. They do not include the tariffs that are paid by importers. The tariffs are added on to these prices. If exporters were eating the tariffs, as Trump promised, import prices would fall.

To take a simple case, if Trump imposed a ten percent tariff on shoes, in the exporters eating the tariff story, the price of imported shoes would fall ten percent. That would leave businesses and consumers here unharmed and exporters getting ten percent less for the price of their shoes.

This is clearly not happening. Trump’s tariffs may not be responsible for import prices rising (although his war might be), but they clearly are not falling. As every academic study has shown, and U.S. consumers know, we are paying Trump’s tariffs.

The sharp rise in import prices will be another factor pushing inflation higher. The increase in import prices may not be fully passed on to consumers, but certainly much of it will.

To take the simple arithmetic here, imports of goods are roughly percent of GDP. If import prices rise 3.7 percent, that would add a bit less than 0.4 percentage points to inflation, and that is before the impact of any Trump tariffs. The full story will be more complicated, but this should give us some idea of what we’re looking at.

These new data come out just as the Federal Reserve Board is having its first meeting under its new Trump-appointed chair, Kevin Warsh. Trump demanded that Jerome Powell, the prior chair, lower interest rates. When he refused, Trump threatened to fire him and then prosecute him.

Trump clearly wants lower interest rates and has said that he expects Warsh to give him what he wants. With the recent data all showing inflation on an upward path (we got bad news on both the Consumer Price Index and the Producer Price Index last week), it would be very hard to envision any of the other 11 members of the Fed’s Open Market Committee (FOMC) that determines interest rates voting for a rate cut.

This leaves Warsh with the option of either being the first Fed chair ever to be in the minority on an FOMC vote or incurring Trump’s wrath on Truth Social. Being an opportunistic sycophant can sometimes get people in trouble.

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.

Top Trump Adviser: Rising Gas Prices Show 'People Are Optimistic About The Future'

Top Trump Adviser: Rising Gas Prices Show 'People Are Optimistic About The Future'

President Donald Trump’s failure to negotiate an end to his war with Iran has led the administration to now absurdly claim the resulting rise in gas prices are a good sign for the economy.

Kevin Hassett, the Trump-appointed director of the National Economic Council, made the claim during an appearance on Fox News Sunday.

“People are spending more on gas, but they’re also spending more on everything else—not just groceries but restaurants and so on. And I think that’s a sign that you would see when people are optimistic about the future,” Hassett said.

In the weeks following Trump’s choice to attack Iran, which has caused the closure of the vital Strait of Hormuz shipping route, gas prices have reached an average of $4.32 per gallon, according to the American Automobile Association. That is significantly more than the $3.14 that a gallon cost at this time last year.

No serious economist would argue that rapidly increasing the cost of a necessity like fuel could be seen as a positive economic indicator, and the Trump administration is aware of this.

Increased fuel costs, along with Trump’s increased tariffs, have caused inflation to rise. According to the Commerce Department, inflation reached 3.8 percent year-over-year in April, the highest rate that has been measured since May 2023.

The recovering economy that Trump inherited from former President Joe Biden is being washed away by Trump’s actions.

On his Truth Social account, Trump fumed on Sunday night that he is receiving criticism for his diplomatic impotence. Trump and his team have continually promised that a “deal” with Iran is imminent, but for weeks, nothing substantial has materialized.

“[D]on’t the Dumocrats, and various seemingly unpatriotic Republicans, understand that it is MUCH tougher for me to properly do my job and negotiate, when political hacks keep negatively ‘chirping,’ at levels never seen before, over and over again, that I should move faster, or move slower, or go to war, or not go to war, or whatever,” Trump wrote.

He concluded: “Just sit back and relax, it will all work out well in the end – It always does!”

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos

Trump's China Visit Displayed His Weakness, Narcissism And Insecurity

Trump's China Visit Displayed His Weakness, Narcissism And Insecurity

More often than not, the geopolitical impact of high-level summitry takes times to reveal itself, so perhaps history will record this differently than I do here. But virtually all the reporting from the Trump-Xi summit in Beijing last week suggests the US came out looking like the weaker partner.

Anyone whose been paying attention could see this coming. Donald Trump has two modes in foreign policy: bully those who he believes he has sway over, and be the supplicant to those who have something he admires. Strategic assessment and pursuit of goals that would help the US and its citizens are beyond his reach.

Moreover, Trump went into the summit with a sharp disadvantage: it’s no secret to anyone, most notably his Chinese counterparties, that he has dragged the US into a costly war with no clear rationale. Even worse, we’re stuck in the conflict as a tiny opposition army continues to hold us to a stalemate. Such weakness is toxic in this context, emboldening Beijing in its designs on Taiwan, a situation made significantly worse by Trump’s suggesting that “a potential multibillion-dollar weapons sale to Taiwan" is a “negotiating chip” with China, "raising new doubts about the pace and scale of American military support for the island democracy.”

The problem is that Trump’s approach to foreign policy is extremely simplistic, and is all about, to cite his favorite phrase, “who holds the cards?” Like all insecure narcissists1, he’s a bully who aspires to intimidate other leaders over whom we have an advantage, as in we buy more from them than they do from us. But Xi recognized early on that even while we have a large goods trade deficit with China, we require access to their rare earths, of which they refine 90 percent of global capacity. In those cases, Trump’s foreign policy reduces to making sure the opposing leader is his “friend,” a word he used frequently, if unrequitedly, to describe Xi in this visit.

End of the day, it looks like the two main results of this summit are 1) China might buy more soybeans and Boeing aircraft from us, though this remains unconfirmed, and if past is precedent, the likelihood that such an “agreement” will hold is low, and 2) Xi has further confirmation that the US is weakened by a feckless yet unchecked president who has alienated his international allies, is more focused on his ballroom than expanding American influence, and is bogged down in what is surely the most unpopular war in recent history.

None of this is at all surprising or even that interesting. The more compelling question is what, if anything, does all the above mean for the average American, or for that matter, to the average Chinese citizen, who, for the record, is one of 1.4 billion? This essay by Yi-Ling Liu tries to get at that:

Moving between the two countries, I’ve been struck by how they have come to mirror and resemble each other. There is a shared sense of precarity that lies beneath the envy and distrust: The technological future is taking shape at vertiginous speed, yet its promise is not shared by all.

I’m sure that’s true, and while it’s worse now given the AI-driven angst and uncertainty, along with the exacerbated wealth concentration—in both countries—that I see as another symptom of this technology’s proliferation, such precarity is nothing new.

In fact, it’s inherent to economies both capitalistic and communistic. What matters then is what guardrails the political system puts in place to protect innocent bystanders from everything from job displacements to higher utility costs driven by data centers. It’s what pathways to opportunity we clear for those whose economic starting point blocks their access. It’s the affordability policies we put in place to help people meet their basic needs for healthcare, housing, childcare, and food.

Our federal government is making life more precarious, and, while I’m no expert, I don’t think China’s doing much better. To be clear, I’m not saying international diplomacy is a sideshow. But I am saying that most Americans can be forgiven for being a lot less interested in whether Xi is Trump’s “friend” than what’s left in their paycheck after they filled their gas tank.

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, from which this is reprinted with permission.


Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Trending

World