Just Wait

Commentary By Stephen Macaulay

One thing that seems not to have happened, at least not in any major way, is the economy hasn’t gone on tilt since Liberation Day.

Of course, there are a few things to consider.

First of all, given the on-again/off-again nature of the tariffs for various countries, it has been difficult for businesses to figure out their pricing strategy going forward.

But this not to say that the tariffs aren’t having a negative effect on consumers’ pocketbooks.

You may have noticed stories about people who are rushing to buy their Christmas gifts. This is a whole other sort of “Christmas in July” — one predicated on people realizing going forward those toys and clothing are going to be considerably more expensive.

This buy-ahead phenomenon is making it seem that things are more robust than they are, or will be.

Those going into a Ford dealership to buy a Bronco Sport, Maverick or Mustang Mach-E today will find themselves paying several hundred dollars more — up to $2,000 — for one of those vehicles today than pre-Liberation Day.

Why? Because they are built in Mexico, which was just fine because of the USMCA that the Trump administration signed the first time to level the playing field. Somehow that no longer holds.

Its cross-town rival, General Motors, announced that in Q2 — meaning the inclusion of Liberation Day — it lost $1.1 billion because of tariffs. And it anticipates before the year is out there will be several billion added in red ink.

Why does that matter? Well, when the company loses billions of dollars, it has to find that money somewhere, and it will find at least some of it by raising prices.

And let’s add the other company that used to be in the “Big Three,” Stellantis, which has in its North American portfolio Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep and Ram. The international company announced its first half net revenues, €74.3 billion, which is down 13% compared to the first half of 2024.

Notably, the company estimates the “2025 net tariff impact to approximately €1.5 billion, of which €0.3 billion was incurred in H1 2025.”

In other words, a fraction was in the first half. The second is going to be seriously not good.

That is reflected in a statement from The Conference Board which says “the bulk of the economic weakness would likely affect Q4 and early 2026, later than we previously anticipated.”

It isn’t here entirely quite yet. But get ready.

Going back to autos, according to a statement by Charlie Chesbrough, senior economist at Cox Automotive, on July 28, things in the auto industry aren’t’ going particularly well: “And there’s no reason to believe trends are improving from here. We are seeing more tariffed products replacing existing inventory, and costs are trending higher. As those higher costs trickle through to retail, sales will likely soften in the coming months unless the economic direction improves.”

If a company is selling fewer cars, then it needs to make fewer cars. If it is making fewer cars, then it needs fewer people to build them.

While the unemployment rate is at a good level now, 4.1%, it is worth noting that according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics the number was a much better 3.5% in July 2023. It will be interesting to watch that figure in the second half when the tariffs really hit.

And while the University of Michigan survey on consumer confidence has the number rising to 61.8 points in July, up from 60.7 points in June, a year ago in July the number was at 66.4 points. If we take October 2024 as being the last month that can be ascribed to the Biden Administration, the number was 70.5 points. So again, while consumers are getting more confident than they were in April and May 2025 (both 52.2 points), they are a lot less confident now than they were a year ago.

According to a recent CBS News YouGov poll (and it is surprising that CBS let these numbers out, given the $16 million it paid to a lawsuit filed by the president):

60% of US adults disapprove of the way Donald Trump is handling the economy
64% disapprove of the way he is handling inflation
59% think the national economy is fairly bad (33%) or very bad (26%)
55% think the economy is getting worse

And realize this is before the tariffs really kick in.

Somehow I am mystified about the “Golden Age” ahead.

Macaulay is pundit-at-large for The Hustings, where he writes primarily – though clearly not always – as a conservative for the right column.

_____
THURSDAY 7/31/25

GM is Dialing it in for the Dollars

By Michelle Naranjo

In 2008, then-President Barack Obama set a goal of 1 million electric vehicles on U.S. roads by 2015, but that goal was hardly met. Fewer than 400,000 EVs had been sold. Plug-in vehicles accounted for less than 1 percent of all vehicle sales, about the same as the number of convertibles sold in the nation annually.

Despite the looming warnings from climate scientists, car buyers were more concerned with range anxiety and the cost to buy an EV.

General Motors joining other automakers to follow more progressive Biden-led goals is admirable, but it is truly nothing short of GM seeing dollars.

The President-elect sees his climate change policy to be an opportunity to create more jobs for millions of Americans. His vision includes investments in infrastructure, the auto industry, transit, the power sector, buildings, housing, and agriculture.

Setting sights on a national standard is the right thing to do. The challenge will be to unite consumers into understanding that it is the right thing to do and holding the automakers accountable.

Case in point, several manufacturers - including GM - have made vehicles for years that, while not plug-ins, were an attempt at bettering emissions, but they absolutely failed in following up with any significant customer education or marketing. Take any PZEV (partial zero-emissions vehicle). Most car buyers aren’t aware of what they are buying. In GM’s case, they had a mild hybrid system in the Buick LaCrosse, for example, but were almost afraid to tell that story to car buyers.

But those car models were not the bread and butter that supports a global company, so there wasn’t much effort from the marketing companies.

Globally, EV sales are on the rise. Chinese EV sales currently total more than every other country in the world, combined. More than 60 percent of vehicle sales in Norway are plug-ins. Numerous countries have set dates to end the sales of traditional internal combustion engines.

“The cost of energy from wind power has dropped by a factor of 10,” energy analyst Ramez Naam said on the Orange and Outrageous podcast, by Former UN climate chief Christiana Figueres. “The cost of electricity from solar power has dropped by a factor of 30.” In an even more dramatic statistic about the future affordability of electric-powered cars, BloombergNEF, estimates the cost of lithium-ion battery packs has dropped 87 percent between 2010 and 2019.

GM can’t afford to not side with Biden.

—–

GM Moves on to the Next Administation

By Bryan Williams

The news of General Motors retreating from the Trump Administration’s fight with the California Air Resources Board and joining Ford, BMW, VW, and Honda isn’t a surprise. President Trump was peculiarly involved in the auto industry.

He berated the domestic brands for outsourcing assembly to other countries, especially Mexico. He also fought my home state of California over its stricter-than-federal fuel economy standards. Taking a hardline pro-business stance on the auto industry was supposed to win Trump votes in Michigan in 2020. We know how that turned out.

GM bailing out of Trump’s legal efforts against the California Air Resources Board (CARB), to me is just a business decision to curry favor with the next administration. That Detroit automakers have been based in otherwise deep-blue Michigan, complicit in union inefficiencies for decades, and receptive to government bailouts – three realities that follow the Yellow Brick Road to a preference for the Democratic Party -- is a story for another day.

But what about two sets of fuel economy standards? When President Obama abruptly dictated an astronomical increase in fuel efficiency, I thought there was no way the automakers could meet them by 2025. How do politicians expect a business with such long development time, such as the auto industry, to turn on a dime when platforms and engines are designed for seven- to 10-year product cycles?

There should be one national standard, and it could be the California standard as long as the automakers are given enough time to implement them, without throwing mandates or lawsuits around in an attempt to appease the political base.

The auto industry will be able to meet the California fuel economy standard, which at 51 mpg by 2026 still reflects a bit of a break from the Obama administration’s 54.5 mpg by 2025. But let’s choose one national mandate and stick with it for a while. It would provide the regulatory stability businesses need.

—–

An Agenda for Uncle Joe

By Jim McCraw

Come January, when the 46^th president takes office, we have a few words of advice for Uncle Joe. Herewith, assuming a majority in the House, a recommended agenda.

First, bring COVID-19 to a halt by example and by force of will, which President Trump never did. A quick and thorough response may shut down businesses hard in the short-term but will pay off in stemming outbreaks in the U.S. more quickly allowing us to open up again. The new president has to be in charge of this effort, has to wear a mask at every appearance, and has to coerce Americans to socially distance properly.

If we could get General Motors and Ford Motor Company to build respirators and make masks in a revival of the “Arsenal of Democracy,” why can’t we get Americans to wear masks and avoid crowding in a World War II-era display of patriotic citizenship?

Next, undo all the harm that Trump did in terms of environmental deregulation. We need, within reasonable limits, to protect our clean water, our clean air, our natural resources, our national parks from commercialization in all its forms. It’s still our country, every cubic inch of it, and we need to protect it.

We need to have a very serious look at our defense spending, which has, over the last 50 years, become a gigantic, self-sustaining pork barrel. The Defense department and the federal government have presided over a system where communities in every state count on contributing something to the military industrial complex that President Eisenhower warned us of 60 years ago, to the point where defense accounts for almost 60 percent of the federal budget. We already own enough weaponry to dominate every other country on Earth. This is ridiculous.

And, Joe, since you’re a center-left Democrat, why not some policy that would please center-right Republicans? Dismantle the Department of Education, send all those people back to real, productive jobs, and leave education to the states, counties, cities, towns and school systems.

If you have some free time, how about bringing together Treasury and Congress and figure out a new tax system that shuts the hundreds of loopholes in the current system and gives money for nothing to huge corporations. Be the new Democratic party of smaller, more effective spending and fair taxation.

And have a good look at the Department of Energy, confine its role to the original intent, and let the rest of the 108,000 direct and contract employees go out and compete for real jobs.

Now that you’re in, start talking up term limits. You may not get re-elected over this, but you will be doing a great service to your country by giving government back to the people and dismantling the Washington oligarchy. While you’re at it, have a good look at lobbying and the damage it does to the democratic process.

And, as Justice Kavanaugh said, Roe v. Wade is settled law. Let’s hope the Supreme Court keeps it that way. [McCraw is not interested in having Biden “stack the court” beyond nine justices. -Ed.]

Election spending limitation also deserves a hard look now that you’re back in office, and it’s time for a re-write of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (McCain-Feingold) as a run-around to restore portions of the legislation that were dismantled by the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission.

Oh, and how about taking In God We Trust off the money and "under God" out of the Pledge of Allegiance? Trump doesn’t believe in God, so why should the rest of us?

Thanks, Joe. Appreciate you taking the time to listen.

Jim McCraw is a semi-retired writer and columnist. He has been a resident of The Villages for nearly five years.

—–