SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
center for economic and policy research
Call What's Coming the 'Donald J. Trump Recession,' Says Economist
"While a recession may not be fully baked into the cards at this point, the risk is evident and it's almost entirely coming from Donald Trump's policies."
Mar 10, 2025
As U.S. financial markets continued their downward spiral on Monday amid rapidly mounting concerns about the impacts of President Donald Trump's erratic and destructive tariff policies, one economist argued that the president has almost single-handedly engineered economic conditions that could result in a recession in the near future.
"Past recessions have been the result of policy errors or disasters," Dean Baker, senior economist at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, wrote Monday. "The most typical policy error is when the Federal Reserve Board raises interest rates too much to counter inflation. That was clearly the story in the 1974-75 recession as well as the 1980-82 double-dip recession."
"Then we have recessions caused by collapsing financial bubbles, the 2001 recession following the collapse of the stock bubble and the 2008-09 recession following the collapse of the housing bubble. And of course, we had the 2020 recession because of the Covid pandemic," he added. "But now Donald Trump is threatening us with a recession, not because of something that is any way unavoidable, but rather because as president he has the power to bring on a recession."
Baker pointed specifically to Trump's decision to impose sweeping tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico, and China, which the economist estimates will cost Americans roughly $2,000 per household as companies push the costs of the tariffs onto consumers in the form of higher prices.
Trump is going to give us a recession, because he can cepr.net/publications...
[image or embed]
— Dean Baker (@deanbaker13.bsky.social) March 10, 2025 at 12:04 PM
Retaliatory measures are also likely to inflict pain on Americans: On Monday, Ontario announced it would charge 25% more for the electricity it provides to Minnesota, New York, and Michigan in response to Trump's tariffs on Canadian imports, a move that's expected to hike electricity bills significantly for ratepayers in those states.
China, meanwhile, hit back at Trump Monday with an additional 15% tariff on U.S. farm products, including chicken, pork, soybeans, and beef.
Trump's tariff policies, and the widespread confusion surrounding their implementation, have sparked a sell-off on Wall Street and broader fears about the state of the U.S. economy as the labor market shows signs of stalling and consumer confidence plunges.
"While a recession may not be fully baked into the cards at this point, the risk is evident and it's almost entirely coming from Donald Trump's policies," Baker argued, noting that while the recession threat is "first and foremost" driven by tariffs, they "are just one possible route."
"The other is Elon Musk's DOGE team attack on the government. If there was ever any doubt, it is now clear that this outfit has nothing to do with increasing government efficiency," Baker wrote. "The direct impact of Musk's job cuts on both the budget and the economy is likely to be small. The bigger impact is the uncertainty they have created in large sectors of the economy."
"In short, Donald Trump has good reasons for telling us that his MAGA policies might give us a recession," he added. "It's hard to know how bad this recession would be, but it will definitely be the 'Donald J. Trump recession.'"
"Will the Trump slump turn into a recession? How will Trump lie and cheat his way out of it? Stay tuned."
Baker's assessment came a day after Trump declined to rule out the possibility of an economic recession in the U.S. this year and downplayed the effects of his tariffs, claiming without a shred of evidence that they will make the country "so rich you're not going to know where to spend all that money."
Trump previously insisted that the U.S. stock sell-off was attributable not to his chaotic tariff announcements, but to "globalists that see how rich our country is going to be and they don't like it."
Former U.S. Labor Secretary Robert Reich wrote Monday that just seven weeks after Trump's inauguration, "the bottom is falling out" of the U.S. economy.
"Stocks are plunging. Treasury yields are falling. Consumer confidence is dropping. Inflation is picking up," Reich wrote. "The cost of living—the single biggest problem identified by consumers over the last several years—is going up, not down. Trump's tariffs on steel and aluminum, and his threatened 25% tariffs on Canada and Mexico, are playing havoc with supply chains inside and outside America."
"Even before this Trump slump, only the richest 10% of Americans had enough purchasing power to keep the economy going with their spending. The bottom 90%—including most Trump voters—were barely getting by. The next eighteen months could be rough on millions of people," he continued. "Will the Trump slump turn into a recession? How will Trump lie and cheat his way out of it? Stay tuned."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Medicare Defenders Slam 'Obscene' Looming Cuts to Telehealth Coverage
"We have trillions to spend on tax breaks for the rich and corporations," said one economic policy expert, "but we can't afford to cover telehealth visits for seniors?"
Feb 21, 2025
The announcement Thursday that Medicare will no longer cover many telehealth services starting April 1 prompted elder and telemedicine advocates to urge the Trump administration to continue the provision of vital remote care for millions of Americans.
According to the Medicare website, "you can get telehealth services at any location in the U.S., including your home" until March 31. Beginning April 1, "you must be in an office or medical facility located in a rural area... for most telehealth services. If you aren't in a rural healthcare setting, you can still get certain Medicare telehealth services on or after April 1."
These services include monthly kidney dialysis treatments; diagnosis, evaluation, or treatment of acute stroke symptoms; and mental and behavioral health services, including addiction treatment.
"What is the rationale for this, other than making life more difficult for many seniors?"
The announcement came as the White House signaled Republican U.S. President Donald Trump's openness to slashing Medicare's budget under the guise of the Department of Government Efficiency's (DOGE) mission of reducing "waste, fraud, and abuse."
"Unreal," economic policy expert Michael Linden
said on social media. "We have trillions to spend on tax breaks for the rich and corporations, but we can't afford to cover telehealth visits for seniors?"
One Trump supporter asked on social media: "Why is Medicare eliminating telemedicine? I'm a senior and find it very convenient. If it's fraud, figure out a way to prevent fraud. Have calls made over a government app! I want to know why!"
Congressman Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) asked, "What is the rationale for this, other than making life more difficult for many seniors?"
Campaign for New York Health executive director Melanie D'Arrigo accused Trump of "killing telehealth for seniors, because many seniors will skip seeing a doctor if they have to go in person."
"Patients skipping appointments saves money, but also leads to more preventable deaths," D'Arrigo added. "Guess which he cares about more?"
Dean Baker, senior economist at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, quipped: "Not sure who this is a handout to. I know Trump wants to burn as much fossil fuel as possible, so that is one motivation. Maybe people were getting fewer unnecessary tests with telemedicine, so the medical testing industry could also have been a factor. Any other explanations?"
Georges Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Association—an advocacy group for U.S. public health professionals—toldRoute Fifty's Kaitlyn Levinson Thursday that "the federal contribution is absolutely essential for [telemedicine] to be a seamless system."
However, Benjamin said that "it is unclear what the Trump administration's financial policies will be in terms of supporting telemedicine and incentivizing telemedicine."
Benjamin added that he hopes the Trump administration will "provide supplemental funding and support for states that want to beef up their telemedicine capacity."
The American Telemedicine Association (ATA), another advocacy group, last month praised Trump for temporarily expanding Medicare telehealth coverage during the Covid-19 pandemic.
"Trump can cement his legacy as the president to modernize the American healthcare system by permanently enabling omnichannel care delivery that leverages both in-person and virtual care," ATA senior vice president for public policy Kyle Zebley said in a statement.
"In doing so," Zebley added, "he will expand access to needed care for millions of patients, boost a beleaguered provider population, and create greater efficiencies and operational successes for struggling healthcare organizations."
American Medical Association president Dr. Bruce A. Scott said last month that "congressional action is required to prevent the severe limitations on telehealth that existed before the Covid-19 pandemic from being restored."
"We must make these flexibilities permanent and secure telehealth's future as an essential element of our patient toolbox, and ensure that all Americans—including rural, underserved, and historically marginalized populations—can receive full access to the care they need," Scott added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Absolutely Insane': Trump Teases Killing FEMA While Touring Disaster Zones
"If we abolish federal funding for disaster assistance, municipalities and states wouldn't be able to cover these types of catastrophic emergencies and people would be left to fend on their own," one expert warned.
Jan 24, 2025
With trips to North Carolina and California on Friday, Republican U.S. President Donald Trump renewed his threat to the federal disaster assistance agency, drawing swift rebukes from climate campaigners, experts, and members of Congress.
Trump was sworn in on Monday and took aim at the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) during a Wednesday interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity. He echoed those comments on Friday after landing at Asheville Regional Airport in North Carolina, to visit a region devastated by Hurricane Helene in September.
During his first trip since Inauguration Day, Trump declared that he will "be signing an executive order to begin the process of fundamentally reforming and overhauling FEMA or maybe getting rid of FEMA."
"I think, frankly, FEMA's not good," he said. "I think when you have a problem like this, I think you want to go, and whether it's a Democrat or Republican governor, you want to use your state to fix it and not waste time calling FEMA."
"FEMA's turned out to be a disaster," the president added. "I think we're gonna recommend that FEMA go away and we pay directly, we pay a percentage to the state, but the state should fix this."
While attempting to kill FEMA could be legally complicated due to a federal law passed after Hurricane Katrina, Trump's comments sparked concern and criticism. According toCNN:
Officials with FEMA scrambled to understand his comments in North Carolina Friday, with personnel nationwide calling and texting one another, trying to figure out what his statements meant for the agency's future and work on the ground, according to a source familiar.
Trump's desire to eliminate or curtail FEMA could have chilling effects on emergency response even at state levels, former FEMA Chief Deanne Criswell told CNN.
"We need to take him at his word, and I think state emergency management directors should be concerned about what this means for spring tornado season" and the coming hurricane season, said Criswell, who served under former President Joe Biden. "Do they have the resources to protect their residents?"
Responding to Trump's remarks on social media, the think tank Carolina Forward said that "if you were upset at how FEMA responds to natural disasters, just wait until they don't exist at all. (Trump obviously won't do this—he can't, after all—but he'll very likely make a lot of noise about it and then not actually do anything, as usual)."
Congresswoman Deborah Ross (D-N.C.) also weighed in on X, saying that "FEMA has been a crucial partner in our fight to recover from Hurricane Helene. I appreciate President Trump's concern about Western N.C., but eliminating FEMA would be a disaster for our state."
Matt Sedlar, climate analyst at the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR), noted in a Friday statement that "before he took office, some wondered whether Trump would actually deny federal disaster aid to states he considered politically unfriendly. The unpleasant truth is that in theory he could—and right now he appears willing to test that idea in reality."
"Trump is already setting the stage for a significant reduction in federal disaster aid and mitigation funding," warned Sedlar, who also published an article on CEPR's website that highlights how Trump's attacks on the agency relate to the Heritage Foundation-led Project 2025. "He has made repeated demands that would tie California's aid to specific policy changes he would like to see, and has even begun discussing the possibility of overhauling FEMA—if not eliminating it entirely."
"States cannot absorb the costs of these disasters, and they don't have the money to prevent them either," he stressed. "The federal government agencies that aim to make the U.S. climate resilient are already chronically underfunded as it is. If Trump truly wanted to make America great again, he would prioritize funding for aid and mitigation. Instead, he is making incoherent political demands and setting Americans up for four years of uncertainty and suffering."
Shana Udvardy, senior climate resilience policy analyst at the Union of Concerned Scientists, released a similar statement on Friday.
"The president is suggesting eliminating FEMA. My question is: Should we also ban hospitals? Both are a means to recovery," Udvardy said. "This latest comment stretches the boundaries of reality. If we abolish federal funding for disaster assistance, municipalities and states wouldn't be able to cover these types of catastrophic emergencies and people would be left to fend on their own."
After visiting North Carolina on Friday, Trump took off for the Los Angeles area, which has been ravaged by recent wildfires. As of press time, the Hughes Fire was only 56% contained, according to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection.
Sharing a video of Trump's Friday remarks on social media, Congresswoman Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Calif.) said that "as someone who's actually been on the ground in LA, people are grateful for FEMA and want more help—not less."
Margie Alt, director of the Climate Action Campaign, said in a Friday statement that "the people of Los Angeles are suffering. They need and deserve help. Wildfires fueled by high winds and climate change-fueled drought have destroyed 12,000 homes and killed 27 people in the area so far."
"Rather than playing the traditional presidential role of 'comforter in chief,' Donald Trump's visit to the area is performative, using the tragedy to advance his personal agenda: changing state water management policy to help his Los Angeles private golf club," Alt suggested. "Trump's threat to withhold disaster aid to benefit his golf club seems, unfortunately, to be par for the course when it comes to his presidency. But the people of Los Angeles deserve better, and quickly."
"Wildfires like these will only get worse and more frequent if we don't address the climate crisis that is intensifying these disasters and other extreme weather including flooding, extreme heat, drought, and more that we are experiencing across the U.S. and the world," she added. "It is unconscionable to threaten to withdraw federal support to Americans suffering the effects of this crisis because of where they live or whom they may have voted for. The climate crisis won't spare anyone."
Alt argued that "the only acceptable course of action for Trump and the Republican majority in Congress is to stop playing politics with people's lives. They must ensure that FEMA has the resources it needs, and need to stop cutting programs designed to help mitigate climate pollution and pushing for more of the fossil fuels responsible for making this crisis worse."
U.S. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), ranking member of the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said in a Friday statement that "if Donald Trump cared even one bit about the communities being ravaged by climate change, he wouldn't hold disaster aid hostage to his political whims, dismiss the climate crisis as a hoax, or pander to his Big Oil donors."
"Instead, he'd tackle the carbon pollution driving these catastrophes and support U.S. clean energy dominance to lower energy costs for families," he added. "But from day one, Trump's priority has been rewarding his corrupt fossil fuel donors and sabotaging America's clean energy future. Now, he's exploiting the suffering caused by extreme weather to peddle his political agenda—proving once again he's all in for polluters and all out for the American people."
This isn't the first time Trump—who was previously president from 2017-21—has come under fire related to disaster response. As
The Associated Pressreported Friday:
The last time Trump was president, he visited numerous disaster zones, including the aftermath of hurricanes and tornadoes. He sometimes sparked criticism, like when he tossed paper towels to survivors of Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico.
Trump tapped Cameron Hamilton, a former Navy SEAL with limited experience managing natural disasters, as FEMA's acting director.
Reporting on Hamilton's position,
The New York Timesnoted Wednesday that "since Hurricane Katrina, when the federal response was severely criticized, FEMA has been led by disaster management professionals who have run state or local emergency management agencies, or were regional administrators at FEMA."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular