Higher cost of doing business from tariffs has frozen hiring. With a frozen job market, there’s less revenue coming in.
NYC is a leading indicator for the rest of the country.
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/13/nyregion/nyc-jobs.html
> Trump has made tariffs a central campaign pledge in order to protect US industry. He has proposed new 10-20% tariffs on most imported foreign goods, and much higher ones on those from China.
It is rather interesting to see the difference in standards of accountability for different presidents. Some are responsible for the economy even if its behavior is not sure to their actions. Others are not responsible for poor economic performance even when taking actions universally agreed to harm the economy.
Only all the people who voted for them and all the people who voted against them?
Before tariffs, in the post-pandemic recovery, we also didn't see hiring go back to pre-pandemic levels. There are other forces like AI adoption.
I don't have good intuition around the connection between tariffs and jobs. Yes, higher inflation may require cooling down the economy. But right now it looks like rates will be going down and anyways rates haven't really slowed down the economy that much. Inflation did come down. Inflation can have some benefits too for employers, it erodes the employee's salaries (and potentially other costs). If companies can raise prices and not pass that on to employees or to their suppliers (as they've seemingly done during this last inflation cycle) then it can be a win for them. A weaker dollar can also help US companies compete globally.
If companies are doing well and growing, and they seem to be, why aren't they hiring more? The largest US tech companies are sitting on piles of cash and making huge profits, for some time now. Is it just that they've become more productive and need less people? Maybe they don't have anywhere to put more people towards? Maybe they're hiring outside the US (this one is not a maybe- they are). Is the uncertainty related to progress in AI? to other macro factors?
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/04/22/trump-tariffs-replace-income...
You now have a situation where one week the cost of a commodity is X and the following week it could be 2X. The butterfly effect across industries also cannot be predicted.
Many industries also seem to be still recovering from the pandemic period with supply of spare parts still being de-prioritised over making parts available for new units. :/
Nobody mentioned yet the drop of the dollar making every single import 10% more expensive since the start of the year. That is on top of every tariff and is inflationary.
Government spending went up by a surprising amount while tariff revenue rolls in. I suspect one reason there is no detailed budget is to create the space to move things around without much notice. If a large swath of the tariffs would be ruled illegal (already happened twice, one step to final) the situation could become interesting.
Imagine trying to get a loan from a bank to make a USA manufacturing plant, pointing to the 150% Chinese tariff. A week later the tariff is 25%. Does your math still work? Probably not. Will that bank continue the loan? Nope. Will the bank even entertain a similar proposal from someone else right now? Nope.
If you want to grow USA manufacturing you need to subsidize it, or give private industry confidence it's not going to lose them money. If you can't do that, your relying on charity / non-profit / philanthropy... And I don't see many of those in manufacturing.
* Groups like Project 2025 spent years preparing an assault on our legal system
* This time Trump populated his administration with sycophants from day 1, instead of starting out with establishment figures
* The GOP has spent the last 8 years reconfiguring themselves into supplication
This time, Trump is fully unhinged and unfettered, and he knows the legal peril he faces if the White House isn’t GOP-held for the rest of his life.
People who actually understand politics and who realize that the extent to which politicians keep their campaign pledges is usually related to how their parties end up performing in the legislature, rather than just being dishonest.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_tan_suit_controve...
See also: Harris is an elite! (Trump is more elite), Trump knows business (he's a pretty bad business man), Harris did nothing in office! (She was VP), Trump is the underdog! (He's literally already been president)
I don’t believe most if not all of us have experienced such an immature and erratic administration. We are taxing trade partners, flip flopping on rules and nobody knows what to make of it.
I imagine to make American exports cheaper.
It will take years to make America an exporting nation. In the meantime many many businesses will go bankrupt. This administration doesn't care as they just see it as a cost of fulfilling their longer term plan to make America an exporting nation.
Trump was a terrible candidate and could've been beaten if a good candidate running against him.
Modi pissed Trump off by refusing to support a nomination for him to get the Nobel. And Trump hit India with tariffs. Unsurprising to anyone paying attention.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/30/us/politics/trump-modi-in...
No one is so stupid they can’t follow this, and predict the aggregate consequence well in advance.
It’s only by willfully suspending rationality, that people convinced themselves the obvious wouldn’t happen. And one of those is an insistence that the only valid form of prediction is at an absurd level of prediction granularity, rather than the inevitable storyline as a consequence of Trump’s intrinsic corruption and ability to corrupt everyone around him (or else they discarded and flung far away).
Trump is famously a racist, a rapist, a felon, and a vile insurrectionist. Nothing good could possibly have followed his election. Indeed, we’re really lucky so far. It’s going to get much worse.
tl;dr Elect an abuser, get abused.
How do you bid on a big project if you don't know what materials will cost next month, or 6 months, or a year from now? It's fucking impossible. And with inflation, labor cost is spiking. It's hard for people to get buy, so they're asking for more. It has investors and banks spooked to loan money for projects, because they could easily fail with so much volatility.
https://www.deseret.com/politics/2024/09/09/harris-policy-pl...
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-harris-campaign-promises-...
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/...
All of the above were posted prior to the 2024 election.
My point being: at some point the American electorate has to take responsibility for picking the worst available person. The Democrats did not compel them to vote for Trump.
Perhaps i didn't make my point clear. Indeed ur statement is true. I was referring to those who hated Trump but also hated Harris and so DIDNT VOTE. My point being that if the Democrats had fielded a compelling candidate many of those who didn't vote may have voted for them. Enough to win. The Democrats learned nothing when they fielded Hilary Clinton and lost. Joe Biden barely won. And only because they were sick of Trump and also how he handled Covid. Also don't forget the Democrats tried to run with Joe for a second term when he was clearly unfit. Huge turn off.
So yes, my argument is the Democrat Party is partly at fault for Trump 2.0. They did not field a worthy candidate.
"Vote Blue no matter who" is a failed strategy. And rightly so.
This combined with the utter self-emasculation of the Republican Party to Trump's incoherent, or at best self-serving, garbage is the most worrisome thing of all.
For example in France their own Le-Trump aka Marine Le Pen had 41% votes last election cycle, so nothing really happened and system centrists won again, politics remained moderate and predictable. But if she or her ideological successor even takes 50%... hooboy, EU will see some Orbanification just like USA does today.
Also we need to remember that the guy responsible for the numbers was fired for allegedly political reason and that could have been political and no one will ever be sure. So how can one trust the numbers in that situation? It has been... Weird
That's slightly revisionist. He won the popular vote by almost 5 percentage points. That's a lot. He also got more electoral college votes than GWB (both times) and Trump in 2016. His victories in the battleground states were also by a higher margin than Trump's in 2016, though still close. "Barely won" is a shade of true.
I honestly don't blame the guy for believing it was his responsibility to the country to run for re-election and keep Trump out of office. His heart was in the right place, even if the rest of him wasn't up to the task anymore.
Edit: did you read these links?
“ The American people lacked any concrete policy positions from the presumptive, and then official, Democratic presidential candidate for seven weeks following President Joe Biden’s withdrawal from the 2024 presidential race.
Despite the absence of clarity on key issues, Vice President Kamala Harris quickly rose in the polls compared to Biden”
What is wrong with my logic?
It sounds like ur logic is: if u don't want trump then u have to vote for the (shitty) democrat candidate.
My point of view is based on those who DIDN'T vote at all, not people who voted for trump because they didn't like harris.
Oh wait, its entirely their (non voters) fault trump won, is what u would argue, correct?
So the democrats have no responsibility to field a candidate worthy of a vote except their not trump or Republican?
So anything a lot kess than that looks to me like ”barely". Perhaps im too harsh?
I get why Michelle Obama wont run but i think she would've trounced trump in 2020 or 2024.
The democrats need to field a candidate that has her kind of appeal to beat trump.
Or continue on with your willful ignorance.
It's no skin off my nose either way.