

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Data released by the University of Michigan and Gallup this week showed US consumer sentiment cratering even as stock markets hit record highs.
Multiple polls and surveys released in recent days have shown US consumer sentiment cratering—and all the while, the US stock market keeps hitting record highs.
The Kobeissi Letter, a financial newsletter, posted a graphic Saturday that matched consumer sentiment as measured by the University of Michigan's Surveys of Consumers with the performance of the S&P 500 stock index over a 30-year span.
The graphic shows that, up until around 2020, consumer sentiment matched stock market performance closely, although there was a large divergence between the two leading up to the 2008 financial crisis, where stocks briefly outperformed consumer sentiment before crashing downward as the housing bubble burst.
But throughout the last six years, the graphic shows, the S&P 500 has produced an almost continuous upward surge even as consumer sentiment spirals downward.
Absolutely incredible:
Over the last 6 years, the S&P 500 has risen +130% while US Consumer Sentiment has collapsed by -55%, to its lowest since data began in 1952.
We are witnessing the formation of the biggest wealth divide in modern history. https://t.co/XGMR6DfuNc pic.twitter.com/2w7cRvn7ok
— The Kobeissi Letter (@KobeissiLetter) May 23, 2026
"Absolutely incredible," commented Kobeissi Letter. "Over the last six years, the S&P 500 has risen +130% while US Consumer Sentiment has collapsed by -55%, to its lowest since data began in 1952. We are witnessing the formation of the biggest wealth divide in modern history."
Kobeissi Letter produced the graphic one day after the University of Michigan's latest survey found consumer sentiment hitting the lowest level on record.
Joanne Hsu, director of the survey, observed that "the cost of living continues to be a first-order concern, with 57% of consumers spontaneously mentioning that high prices were eroding their personal finances, up from 50% last month."
On the same day, Gallup published new data showing that Americans' economic confidence has fallen to its lowest level since October 2022, with just 16% of Americans rating the economy as excellent or good, and nearly half describing it as poor.
Axios reported on Saturday that even Republicans have been growing sour on the US economy, citing a recent poll from The Associated Press showing GOP approval of President Donald Trump on the economy to be at around 60%, down from 80% just three months ago.
"The growing GOP gloom could hardly come at a worse time for Trump and the party," Axios noted, "less than six months out from a midterm election that's likely to turn on the economy."
The gap between overall consumer sentiment and stock market performance also lines up with recent consumer spending trends. Data published by The Financial Times earlier this year showed that the top 10% of earners in the US now account for nearly half of all consumer spending, while the bottom 80% of earners now account for less than 40% of all consumer spending.
A February report from TD Economics economist Ksenia Bushmeneva noted that “the economic divide between America’s households at the top of the income spectrum and everyone else continued to widen last year,” as “upper-income households benefited from the still-robust wage growth, strong gains in equity markets, and better access to consumer credit.”
Given that oil is a depleting, polluting, non-renewable resource, industrial society is due for a reckoning at some point. Will Trump's Iran War finally force us to look down?
Pop culture has long memorialized the Warner Brothers cartoon gag in which Wile E. Coyote, lured by his nemesis the Roadrunner, races off a cliff. Instead of immediately falling, Coyote keeps running, then looks down and realizes there’s nothing beneath him but empty space. His expression turns from anger to panic, whereupon he plummets. Coyote’s belated moment of realization is a trendy metaphor for our response to inevitable, though not yet fully realized, consequences of foolish behavior.
For the past couple of decades, we at Post Carbon Institute have been pointing out that energy is the basis of the economy, that oil is our foremost energy source, and that a transition to alternative energy sources will necessarily be slow and incomplete. Given that oil is a depleting, polluting, non-renewable resource, industrial society is due for a reckoning at some point. We are all in an extended Wile E. Coyote moment.
But now, as the United States’ war on Iran has set off a global energy crisis, humanity has arrived at a more immediate and critical Coyote moment. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has issued a report suggesting that continued oil shortages could reduce global economic growth by 2% and raise inflation by 2.3%. Some analysts say the IMF warning is far too weak and that the crisis could trigger a global recession or worse.
Oil is a key ingredient in most consumer products and their packaging; expensive oil therefore translates to price hikes for toys, car parts, electronics, clothing, and more. It powers or is a critical input into essential elements of industrial society, including the food system. And oil moves everything: Global supply chains depend on transportation by truck, rail, ship, and air, and over 90% of transport energy is oil based. That means an extended crisis would likely lead to stagflation, in which the economy is hobbled simultaneously by inflation and slow growth or economic contraction. When prices for food and medicines are eventually impacted, no one will remain unaffected.
America’s status as oil-production king and its cushion of reserves have indeed helped it weather the early stages of the crisis. But the nation won’t be insulated from serious economic damage for long.
However, for the moment, the stock market is hardly signaling imminent economic peril; instead, the Dow Jones is near peak levels. Further, the US, which started the war, seems somewhat spared from its consequences, when compared with many other countries. And oil prices, while higher than before the hostilities, are nowhere near inflation-adjusted historic peaks.
What’s keeping Coyote airborne?
Myanmar, Bangladesh, Slovenia, Sri Lanka, Cambodia, and Vietnam are rationing or restricting the purchasing of fuel. Germany’s Lufthansa airline has cut 20,000 summer flights due to rising fuel costs. The examples could be multiplied: Countries in Asia, Europe, and Africa are already experiencing symptoms of energy scarcity, while Australia faces dire impacts to its agriculture.
But in America, the worst fallout so far is expensive gasoline. Before the first attacks on Tehran in late February, the average price of gas in the US was $2.98 a gallon. It’s now above $4—a political worry for the president and other Republicans, but a price that’s not quite as high as ones motorists faced in the 1970s. US airlines have raised their checked baggage fees in response to higher fuel costs. Yet, otherwise, business hums along more or less as usual. Why have Americans seen so few repercussions?
Two reasons are widely cited. The first is that the US is currently the world’s biggest oil producer and is therefore far less vulnerable to shortages than nations that import most, or all, of their fuel. The second is that the US has the world’s second-largest strategic petroleum reserve (after China), which, in an emergency, can be brought to market to lower prices and avert scarcity.
However, these two pillars of US energy resilience are shaky. First: Even though the United States produces over 13 million barrels of oil per day, it uses almost 20 million barrels. Further, the kinds of oil extracted from American wells are not always the kinds that the nation’s refineries are set up to use. So, oil companies export light crude and import heavier crude to produce the blends of gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel that the US market demands. The result: America is the world’s second-largest oil importer, even though its politicians love to brag about “energy independence.”
Second: Strategic petroleum reserves are only meant to last a relatively brief time. Currently, the US has about 400 million barrels of oil stored in four underground salt caverns along the Gulf of Mexico. That’s 20 days’ worth of total American consumption at current rates. Therefore, the government has limited ability to influence oil prices during a months-long supply crunch.
America’s status as oil-production king and its cushion of reserves have indeed helped it weather the early stages of the crisis. But the nation won’t be insulated from serious economic damage for long.
Oil has been trading at roughly $100 a barrel since the start of hostilities, a price somewhat lower than ones seen in June and July 2022 when Russia invaded Ukraine. The closure of the Strait of Hormuz would intuitively seem a much graver threat to world oil supplies. Given that a fifth of the world’s petroleum flow is now unavailable, why haven’t prices shot even higher?

One factor is the so-called TACO trade. US President Donald Trump has repeatedly shown the tendency to make threats and then back away; hence the meme “Trump Always Chickens Out” (TACO). The term “TACO trade” gained currency during 2025, when the president announced steep tariffs, then canceled or moderated them, ostensibly to leave time for negotiations but also perhaps in response to negative impacts those announcements had on stock prices (stock market activity appears to influence Donald Trump’s behavior more than most other factors). Savvy stock traders learned that if, instead of taking Trump’s most belligerent threats seriously, they bet against price dips, they could make more money.
We’re all dancing somewhere off the end of history’s biggest cliff, sensing that something isn’t quite right but blaming that sensation on people whose politics we disagree with.
The TACO trade has also followed Trump’s recent statements about the Iran War. When he said, in a late-night Truth Social post, that “a whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again” if a deal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz was not immediately reached, many oil traders sat tight, assuming Trump would renege on his threat. He did. If Trump’s backdowns happen on a Tuesday, as on April 21, the internet explodes with “TACO Tuesday” comments.
However, the longer the crisis drags on, the harder real shortages will bite oil-importing economies worldwide. And there are reasons to expect the impasse between the US and Iran to continue. Trump’s instinct is to bully and bluster, but every time he attacks Iran or threatens to do so, oil prices rise (despite the muting effect of the TACO trade) and the stock market dips. Both trends are political kryptonite. However, it would be even worse politically for Trump if he were to accede to a long-term Iranian peace deal that looks like a defeat for America. So, the standoff persists, with the Strait of Hormuz blocked, 20% of world oil supplies offline, and the global economy held hostage.
The strait has been closed for over two months. Analysts say that if it remains shut to tanker traffic for months longer, oil prices could soar to $200, which would almost surely send the global economy into contraction.
An acute Wile E. Coyote moment is also happening in global stock markets. Many people (including most investors) tend to think of stock prices as a barometer of the overall soundness of the economy. Others disagree, pointing out that stock prices just measure future profit expectations of listed companies, not current employment or wages, much less the health of the biosphere. Further, stock ownership is highly concentrated, so market booms often benefit only the wealthy. Nevertheless, the opinions of the rich tend to be amplified throughout society, so even many non-investors watch the Dow Jones and S&P 500. And, despite the Iran war and resulting higher oil prices, and despite warnings from experts about rising fertilizer costs and the possibility of global food shortages, the Dow seems to be doing just fine. The major market indexes dipped significantly between late February and late March but have recovered since then and are once again near record highs.
The market’s resilience is puzzling for another reason as well. Most investment action during the past couple of years has centered on artificial intelligence (AI). Nvidia, which makes computer chips for AI, is now the world’s most valuable company by market capitalization, even though the AI industry is struggling to be profitable. Many analysts say that AI is a classic financial bubble—and a historically big one.
So, are investors stupid, or what? A more nuanced take might be that they exhibit herd mentality, and that they tend to chase short-term profits, hoping to sell shares just before prices plunge.
Here’s another factor. According to some analysts, the markets are simply high on cash. Governments created enormous amounts of money to stanch problems created by the Global Financial Crisis of 2008 and the Covid-19 epidemic, and much of that money eventually found its way to investors. When the US federal government racks up giant fiscal deficits, it is creating new money, much of which winds up inflating bubbles.
In short, the market runs on investor sentiment, which is now detached from both consumer sentiment and business prospects—as well as from long-term biophysical reality.
But sooner or later, reality imposes itself.

In the cartoon, it’s not until Coyote looks down that he realizes his predicament. This sudden awareness triggers his fall.
Of course, in the real world, temporary ignorance can’t cancel gravity. Actual coyotes don’t hover until they glance groundward. However, the human economy can do something like that—because it’s a hybrid of a real-world component comprised of energy and material flows (which ultimately depend on nature), and an imaginary-world component comprised of money, prices, hype, and speculation. This hybrid semi-reality can run up ecological deficits and undermine the conditions of life for future generations while still maintaining affluence and entertainment for hundreds of millions of mostly clueless people. For now.
It’s our bigger, longer-playing Coyote moments to which we should be paying most attention—climate change, resource depletion, chemical pollution, and the disappearance of wild nature. Markets and prices are of little help in shifting our awareness in that direction: Cutting down an old-growth forest for timber can result in corporate profits and a bump in GDP, but the human and environmental impacts that will linger for generations don’t figure into this quarter’s P&L reports. We’re all dancing somewhere off the end of history’s biggest cliff, sensing that something isn’t quite right but blaming that sensation on people whose politics we disagree with. We do anything we can to avoid looking down.
Returning to the main subject of this article: Will oil prices skyrocket? Will Trump continue to TACO? Will the economy crater? Or will the US and Iran reach a deal and open the strait, so that normalcy can resume? Your guess is as good as anyone’s. But if you’re starting to have nagging worries, you’re not crazy and you’re not alone. Do something. Plant a vegetable garden. Talk to your neighbors about sharing tools and skills. Examine your oil dependency and see how you can reduce it. Imagine how your life might look if the economy were smaller, not bigger, and start making adjustments. Most of all, focus on building community with those around you.
Trump’s defenders argue that his contradictory actions are strategic. It’s more likely that panic has him flailing. His gut instinct led him to make a colossal mistake, and he has no idea what to do next.
President Donald Trump launched the Iran war based on his “gut instinct.” Global financial markets—the North Star that guides Trump—are telling him what his advisers and congressional Republicans won’t: His “gut” blew it badly, and his efforts to appease the markets are making the debacle worse.
He has proceeded in three phases. We’re now at the Trump panic phase.
Trump ignored the facts and relied on gut instinct to launch the war without making the case to America’s allies or the public:
We were having negotiations with these lunatics, and it was my opinion that they were going to attack first.
Trump’s baseless opinion contradicted the justification for war that Secretary of State Marco Rubio had provided to Congress a day earlier. Rubio said that Israel was going to attack and that Iran would retaliate by attacking US interests in the region.
Even worse, Trump ignored long-predicted consequences:
Trump’s initial assurance that the war would be over in “four to six weeks” offered the markets only sporadic and temporary relief. So he started down the slippery slope of eliminating longstanding sanctions on Russian oil.
Oil and natural gas are Russia’s most important sources of revenue, accounting for 30% to 50% of the federal budget. Sanctions had forced Russia to charge India $22 per barrel in January, putting Russian President Vladimir Putin’s economy on an unsustainable path. But on March 5, Trump issued a 30-day waiver allowing India’s purchases from Russia.
Trump’s waiver was a boon to Putin, but the global price of oil kept rising and the markets kept falling.
On March 11, Trump released 172 million barrels from the nation’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve—the world’s largest supply source of emergency crude oil. But the oil would not make a dent in the global market, would take 120 days to deliver, and would leave the Strategic Reserve at its lowest level since 1982.
The price of oil kept rising, and the markets kept falling.
On March 13, over the objections of the European Union, Trump removed sanctions on Russian oil that was already at sea. It was another gift to Putin, but the price of oil kept rising and the markets kept falling.
On March 20, Trump lifted sanctions on 140 million barrels of Iranian oil “currently stranded at sea.” In addition to providing Iran with $14 billion windfall, his action contradicted Trump’s contemporaneous claims that he had “won” the war and was considering “winding it down.”
As Brett Erickson, managing principal at a firm that specializes in financial crime and regulatory issues, observed: “You don’t unsanction Iranian oil if you’re winding down. This is the action of an administration that has no exit ramp and knows it. The word for that is desperation.”
Meanwhile, the price of oil kept rising, and the markets kept falling.
Trump’s panic became clear on Saturday, March 21, when he threatened to commit a war crime:
If Iran doesn’t FULLY OPEN, WITHOUT THREAT, the Strait of Hormuz, within 48 HOURS from this exact point in time, the United States of America will hit and obliterate their various POWER PLANTS, STARTING WITH THE BIGGEST ONE FIRST!
By Monday morning, the price of oil was skyrocketing and Asian and European markets were sinking. Shortly before the US stock market opened, Trump panicked again. He withdrew his threat and said that because the US and Iran had held “productive” talks, he was postponing the attack on Iranian’s energy infrastructure for five days.
The price of oil dropped more than 10%, and global markets soared. Meanwhile, it appeared that insiders with knowledge of Trump’s planned announcement made hundreds of millions of dollars in pre-announcement bets that crude oil prices would decline.
But then Iran’s foreign ministry denied Trump’s assertion about settlement talks, although through intermediaries the US and Iran had exchanged messages that “appeared to be short of negotiations.”
Within a day, the price of oil resumed its upward climb and the financial markets fell.
Panic begets panic. On March 26, Trump announced a 10-day extension to April 6 of his prior threat to commit a war crime by attacking Iran’s energy facilities. He asserted that settlement negotiations were proceeding while at the same time issuing contradictory statements about his war plans:
The Iranians “were begging for a deal,” but “they better get serious” and “talks were going very well.”
He wanted US allies to help secure the Strait of Hormuz, but didn’t care if they refused.
“We already won the war,” but Trump was massing more than 50,000 US troops in the region and threatened a ground assault on Iran’s main oil production facility.
He “may or may not” use the military to secure Iran’s uranium.
Trump’s defenders argue that his contradictory actions are strategic. It’s more likely that panic has him flailing. His gut instinct led him to make a colossal mistake, and he has no idea what to do next.
Worst of all for Trump: The financial markets are finally on to him.
While the spoiled offspring of millionaires and billionaires skip out on taxes, Republicans want to take food stamp benefits away from millions of poor kids.
Republicans want to stop subsidizing Americans who benefit from government-funded health programs. But by far the greatest American subsidies go to the millionaires, the 10% of Americans who own 93 percent of the stock market.
That's in part because of the so-called tax expenditures, which include mortgage deductions, interest and dividend exclusions, and reduced rates on capital gains, and which go almost entirely to the 13.7% of Americans who report enough income to itemize their taxes. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, "the cost of all federal income tax expenditures was higher than..the combined cost of Medicare and Medicaid."
A 2015 NBER study found that 70 percent of federal spending on housing was in the form of tax-based deductions that largely benefit the rich. Families with expensive homes can take a tax break of up to a half-million dollars when they decide to sell. And the wealthiest among us can take a mortgage interest deduction for a second home, which might even be a yacht.
Yet while the millionaires subsidize their estates, the proposed Republican budget would make drastic cuts to low-income housing programs.
Daddy-Made Millionaires
It gets worse. The tax designers have figured out how to gift their heirs with billions in redirected tax revenue. In a massive subsidy for the super-rich, the tax code includes a so-called stepped-up provision which allows the super-rich to leave much of their multi-trillion-dollar stock market fortunes to their children with all the accumulated gains magically erased, and thus, in many instances, without a single dollar in taxes coming due.
If daddy and mommy's stock has grown from $10 to $100 over the years, the kids won't pay any taxes on that $90 gain, and society's potential revenue is wiped out. As baby boomers age and pass away, more and more privileged children will become accidental millionaires.
Yet while the kids of millionaires skip out on taxes, Republicans want to take food stamp benefits away from millions of poor kids.
Subsidies on American Lives
With regard to big business subsidies, economist Dean Baker says: "These government-granted monopolies likely transfer more than $1 trillion a year ($8,000 per household) from the rest of us to [those] in a position to benefit from them. In 1980 we were spending about 0.4 percent of GDP...on prescription drugs and other pharmaceutical products. Currently we spend more than 2.3 percent of GDP."
Big Pharma welfare forces us to pay much more than other countries for our medicine. According to The National Library of Medicine, "In 2022, U.S. prices across all drugs (brands and generics) were nearly three times as high as prices in 33 OECD comparison countries....In 2022, U.S. prices for insulin products were nearly ten times as high as prices in 33 OECD comparison countries."
And taking the pain to an absurd extreme, Forbes reports that "Sovaldi (a breakthrough treatment for hepatitis C) cost $84,000 for a 12-week course when it was initially launched in the U.S. In contrast, the same treatment is available in other countries, such as India, for less than $1,000."
Yet while medication for the elderly becomes evermore expensive, Republicans have proposed the largest cuts to Medicaid in history, taking health insurance away from millions of Americans.
Republicans: It's Good to Lose Your Medicaid
House Speaker Mike Johnson said, "Work is good for you. You find dignity in work." Oklahoma Senator James Lankford said, "It’s not kicking people off Medicaid..It’s transitioning from Medicaid to employer-provided health care."
Condescending enough?
Republicans say they only want to eliminate waste, fraud and abuse. To do this they're wasting lives, defrauding their constituents, and abusing the privilege of leadership.
To win back voters, Democrats should propose a nationwide public fund through a Financial Transaction Tax.
The Alaska Permanent Fund, established by a Republican governor nearly a half-century ago, has allowed Alaskan residents to share in the profits from oil and mineral extraction in the state.
As The New York Times explains, "Similar socialized funds—sometimes called sovereign wealth funds—are common in other conservative states." In fact, The National Interest reports that "the great majority of states that have a domestic sovereign wealth fund are solidly Republican states." Texas, Wyoming, and North Dakota, for example, all maintain multi-billion dollar public wealth funds.
Democrats need to think even bigger if they want to win back respect—and the vote. They need to consider that American productivity goes well beyond oil and gas, that it's the result of 75 years of progress in technology and medicine and finance and numerous other industries, and that it derives from the sweat and inspiration of all of our parents and grandparents. Stock market gains reflect our productive past. All of us should reap some reward from that long-term effort.
All families, rich or poor, would share in America's prosperity.
New wealth should not be taken only by the 10% of Americans who own 93% of the stock market. While the S&P 500 has gained a pre-inflation average of over 10% annually over the past half-century, the returns on that growth have accrued passively to the richest among us.
Large-scale public wealth funds have been proposed to correct the imbalance. Funding will ideally come from a Financial Transaction Tax or some form of levy on market capitalization. The argument for a Financial Transaction Tax has been made for years by Dean Baker and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). An alternative is a small tax on stock holdings. The Peoples Policy Project noted that "at the end of 2017, the market capitalization of listed domestic companies was $32.1 trillion. A one-off 3% market capitalization tax would thus bring in around $1 trillion of assets."
Current U.S. stock value is over $50 trillion. Just a 2% tax on that amount would return $1 trillion. Each one of America's 127.5 million households would earn nearly $8,000 per year. All families, rich or poor, would share in America's prosperity.
Of course, the millionaires who own almost the entirety of the stock market will resist even a small percentage payback to the country that made them rich. Despite the unlikelihood of getting the super-rich to part with their money, there's a good reason—other than the fairness of recognizing society's contribution to long-term wealth gain—for stockholders to embrace an American Permanent Fund. As noted by reliable financial sources, consumer spending directly influences stock market performance. With the massive trillion-dollar surge in consumer spending, stock market growth is likely to make up that tiny transaction or capital holdings tax, and then some.
It's certainly worth paying a nominal amount to stimulate the economy and boost one's own stock portfolio.
But where is the political will to make this happen? Perhaps a proposal by Democrats for a nationwide public fund through a Financial Transaction Tax will convince a cynical middle-class America that the Democratic vision focuses on the needs of society rather than on rich individuals.
"Our economy is crumbling under President Trump's mismanagement," said the head of one progressive group.
The United States economy decelerated during the first quarter of 2025, as businesses braced for sweeping tariffs from U.S. President Donald Trump, according to a Wednesday "advance estimate" from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis—marking the first contraction of the country's real gross domestic product since 2022.
Real GDP declined at an annual rate of 0.3% in January, February, and March of 2025, according to the report. That headline figure is a dramatic turn around from the final quarter of 2024, when real GDP increased 2.4%.
According to the report, "the decrease in real GDP in the first quarter primarily reflected an increase in imports... and a decrease in government spending." When calculating GDP, imports are subtracted, meaning more imports will yield a lower number.
A number of outlets have cautioned that the 0.3% contraction figure is somewhat misleading. Axios pointed to solid business investment and consumer spending data in the report as evidence "signaling at least some underlying momentum in the economy—at least once volatile measures like trade are stripped out." The New York Times offered similar analysis.
But even with this caveat, the economic picture is less than rosy. "Maybe some of this negativity is due to a rush to bring in imports before the tariffs go up, but there is simply no way for policy advisors to sugar-coat this. Growth has simply vanished," said Chris Rupkey, chief economist at Fwdbonds.
Several observers were quick to point the finger at the Trump administration.
"Our economy is crumbling under President Trump's mismanagement, and today's falling GDP data confirms our slide toward a recession," said Lindsay Owens, the executive director of the progressive group Groundwork Collaborative. "Trump is creating the conditions for a particularly brutal recession."
"It turns out that when you launch a trade war with blanket tariffs, layoff federal workers en masse, cancel federal contracts, and reduce skilled immigration, you will have negative GDP growth," wrote Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) on X.
Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) said that "Trump's chaos is clearly and significantly raising the risk of a recession, and the economic warning lights are all flashing red."
In response to the release, markets slipped on Wednesday.
Trump, for his part, took to his social media site Truth Social on Wednesday to say that "This is Biden's Stock Market, not Trump's." He added that "tariffs will soon start kicking in, and companies are starting to move into the USA in record numbers … This will take a while, has NOTHING TO DO WITH TARIFFS, only that he left us with bad numbers, but when the boom begins, it will be like no other."
Economists say they think Wednesday's numbers are related to tariffs. According to reporting from the Times, the main takeaway from the report is that consumers and businesses started to modify their behavior even prior to Trumps "Liberation Day" tariffs on April 2, which rattled markets.
A surge in the trade deficit edged GDP into negative territory, said Dean Baker, senior economist for the left-leaning economic think tank the Center for Economic and Policy Research, in a statement on Wednesday. "This was due to massive stockpiling of inventories and purchases of durable goods in anticipation of tariffs."
"The negative GDP number could also mean the end of the big upswing in productivity growth under Biden. This is bad news for both real wage growth and inflation," continued Baker.
"No surprise that GDP took a hit in the first quarter, mainly because the balance of trade blew up as companies imported goods like crazy to front-run tariffs. The more telling number for the future of the expansion was consumer spending, and it grew, but at a relatively weak pace," said Robert Frick, corporate economist with Navy Federal Credit Union, according to CNBC.
Wednesday's report also registered increased inflation. The personal consumption expenditures price index, the Federal Reserve's favored inflation gauge, registered a 3.6% gain for Q1, up from 2.4% in the final quarter of last year.
The numbers from the Bureau of Economic Analysis come a day after reports of consumer confidence in April dipping to lows not seen since early in the COVID-19 pandemic.
There is still major economic data set to be released this week. On Friday, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics will release its jobs report for the month of April.
This article was updated with a comment from Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.).
"Donald Trump in a nutshell: doing everything he can to make the ultra-rich even richer," said Sen. Elizabeth Warren. "We need to find out if Trump's tariff chaos was used as cover for insider trading."
A video clip of U.S. President Donald Trump openly boasting about enriching his billionaire friends is drawing outrage as the administration faces growing scrutiny for possible market manipulation and insider trading in the aftermath of his partial tariff pause.
"He made two-and-a-half billion today," Trump said in the Oval Office on Wednesday, just hours after announcing the pause, "and he made $900 million."
"That's not bad," the president added.
Trump was referring to wealth gains that investor Charles Schwab and businessman Roger Penske—both billionaires—notched during a historic stock market rally sparked by the president's decision to pump the brakes on massive tariffs he imposed on most countries across the globe. (Trump left in place a 10% universal tariff on imports.)
The market surge added over $300 billion to the collective wealth of the world's top billionaires in a matter of hours, according to Bloomberg. Shortly before announcing the tariff pause, Trump posted to his social media platform that it is a "great time to buy" stocks, prompting accusations of market manipulation.
Watch the Oval Office video:
After rolling back many of his tariffs Trump had Charles Schwab and others in the Oval Office.
He pointed out that his guests had made fortunes on the stock market just one hour after his announcement.
“He made 2.5 billion today and he made $900 million. That’s not bad.” pic.twitter.com/HdtujIRvLN
— More Perfect Union (@MorePerfectUS) April 10, 2025
"Donald Trump in a nutshell: doing everything he can to make the ultra-rich even richer," Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) wrote Thursday in response to the clip. "We need to find out if Trump's tariff chaos was used as cover for insider trading."
Dean Baker, senior economist at the Center on Economic and Policy Research, wrote Thursday that it's not yet clear whether Trump tipped off any of his ultra-rich associates about the partial tariff pause ahead of time.
"But does anyone think that Trump would have any qualms about sharing such a secret?" Baker asked. "Does anyone think that the people around Trump would have any qualms about trading on the ultimate inside information? I leave that to your judgment."
On Thursday, a group of Democratic lawmakers led by Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) called on the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to investigate "possible insider trading and market manipulation violations that took place between Sunday, April 6, 2025, when U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent visited President Trump at his Florida resort, and Wednesday, April 9, 2025, when the president announced the pausing of the tariffs—and whether such unlawful activities are ongoing."
"Insider trading by federal officials and their friends or family is not only a breach of trust of the American people, but erodes the integrity of government institutions and raises concerns about corruption and fairness in the political system," the lawmakers wrote. "There should be zero tolerance for this kind of corruption in our society, let alone from those we entrust to lead us in the public sphere."
"The American people deserve to know if any representatives took advantage of their positions for personal gain," lawmakers said.
In the wake of U.S. President Donald Trump's decision to abruptly pause most of the sweeping tariffs he announced last week—a move that raised suspicions of possible insider trading and market manipulation—a group of Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives are urging Republican Speaker Mike Johnson to ensure any stock trades recently made by members of the chamber are immediately disclosed.
"We write to urge that you join us in requesting every member of the House of Representatives immediately file and release their Periodic Trading Reports (PTR) for any transactions conducted between April 2, 2025, and April 9, 2025," according to a letter the group sent Johnson, who represents Louisiana, on Thursday.
By law, lawmakers must file a form that is made public, known as a PTR, within 45 days of making a stock trade valued at over $1,000. The group of lawmakers is asking Johnson to join them in requesting that lawmakers immediately release their PTRs, rather than waiting for the end of the 45-day deadline.
"The public has the right to know whether anyone in the Congress profited from the considerable market instability and economic chaos caused by President Trump and his administration over the past week," according to the letter, which was penned by Reps. Joe Neguse (D-Colo.), Seth Magaziner (D-R.I.), Mike Levin (D-Calif.), Steven Horsford (D-Nev.), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), and David Min (D-Calif.).
Trump on April 2 unveiled broad tariffs that rattled markets and heightened fears of a recession. Then, on Wednesday morning he wrote on social media: "THIS IS A GREAT TIME TO BUY!!! DJT." Hours later, he sent markets soaring when he declared a 90-day pause on tariffs for many countries—though a number of levies, including on China, remain in place. The bump resulted in the largest one-day percentage gain for the S&P 500 since the financial crisis of 2008.
"Over the past week, House Republicans met with President Trump at the White House, attended the National Republican Congressional Committee dinner (mere hours before pausing the tariffs), and were in regular communication with the president ahead of the vote on the budget reconciliation resolution," according to the letter. "The American people deserve to know if any representatives took advantage of their positions for personal gain."
"We reiterate our request for immediate consideration of legislation to ban members of Congress from trading stocks," the letter concludes.
"Is there any doubt in anyone's mind they were tipped off?" asked one progressive news outlet.
As retirees, small business owners, and consumers reeled from the chaos sparked by U.S. President Donald Trump's erratic tariff policies, the richest people on the planet saw their wealth surge Wednesday as the White House partially froze the duties it imposed on most countries.
Trump's announcement of the 90-day pause sparked a historic market rally that added $304 billion to the collective wealth of the world's top billionaires, according to a Bloomberg estimate. The outlet called the jump "the largest one-day gain in the history of the Bloomberg Billionaires Index," which was launched in 2012.
"The largest individual gainer Wednesday was Tesla Inc. CEO Elon Musk, who added $36 billion to his fortune as the EV manufacturer's stock jumped 23%, followed by Meta Platforms Inc.'s Mark Zuckerberg, who gained almost $26 billion," Bloomberg reported. "Nvidia Corp.'s Jensen Huang saw his wealth rise $15.5 billion as the chipmaker's shares rebounded 19%, nearly offsetting its 13% decline in the week to Tuesday's close."
Though the stock market gave up some of the massive gains on Thursday amid continued uncertainty about Trump's tariffs, the rapid billionaire wealth surge amplified concerns about possible market manipulation and insider trading ahead of the president's announcement of a 90-day pause. Trump publicly encouraged people to buy stock just hours before announcing the pause.
"Is there any doubt in anyone's mind they were tipped off?" The Tennessee Holler, a progressive news outlet, wrote on social media. "They are laughing at us all."
In the days leading up to the president's partial tariff pause, some of his billionaire supporters publicly criticized his approach as their wealth took a hit amid the trade war-induced market sell-off.
According to Bloomberg, the 500 richest people in the world saw their collective wealth fall by $208 billion the day after Trump announced the sweeping tariffs last week. The Wall Street Journal reported Thursday that Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent was "flooded with worried calls from Wall Street over the weekend and felt strongly he had to persuade Trump that a pause was needed."
The partial tariff pause came a day before the Republican-controlled House passed a budget blueprint that paves the way for another round of tax cuts that would primarily benefit the wealthiest Americans.
"These tariffs are not designed to solve an actual trade or economic challenge," Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, said Thursday. "They're designed to soak typical workers with higher taxes in order to help pay for handouts to the top."
"They're focused on yet more handouts to billionaires and corporations," Wyden added, "and everybody else is going to be on the hook to pay for them."
"Who close to Trump knew that he was going to suspend the tariffs?" asked Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy. "Which of his Mar-a-Lago friends or his billionaire advisers were able to capitalize on that inside information?"
The timing of U.S. President Donald Trump's Wednesday social media post declaring that "this is a great time to buy" stocks and subsequent announcement of a three-month tariff pause quickly raised suspicions of possible insider trading and market manipulation by the highest levels of the American government.
The S&P 500, which tracks the performance of the nation's top publicly traded companies, posted its largest single-day gain since 2008 after Trump pumped the brakes on part of his tariff scheme, which had sent global markets into a tailspin in recent days.
Trump announced his decision hours after effectively urging Americans to buy stocks in a morning post on Truth Social—though at the time there was no public information indicating that any kind of tariff announcement was imminent.
"How is this not market manipulation?" asked Rep. Mike Levin (D-Calif.). "If you're a Trump supporter and you did what he said and you bought, then you did great. On the other hand, if you're a retiree or a senior or somebody in the middle class over the last few days that didn't have the tolerance for risk and you decided to sell, you got screwed."
When Trump's pause announcement came hours later, U.S. equities skyrocketed, adding over $5 trillion in value to the market in a matter of hours. Elon Musk, a top Trump lieutenant and the world's richest man, saw his wealth—which is largely tied up in Tesla stock—soar by nearly $30 billion on Wednesday, according to Forbes' real-time billionaire tracker.
"Who benefited? And who made money?" Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) asked in a video posted to social media Wednesday evening. "This should matter to you, too, because this could be an enormous scam."
"The question is, who close to Trump knew that he was going to suspend the tariffs?" said Murphy. "Which of his Mar-a-Lago friends or his billionaire advisers were able to capitalize on that inside information?"
An insider trading scandal is brewing.
Trump's 9:30am tweet makes it clear he was eager for his people to make money off the private info only he knew. So who knew ahead of time and how much money did they make? pic.twitter.com/AJbtEq372n
— Chris Murphy 🟧 (@ChrisMurphyCT) April 10, 2025
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.)
recommended late Wednesday that "any member of Congress who purchased stocks in the last 48 hours should probably disclose that now."
"I've been hearing some interesting chatter on the floor. Disclosure deadline is May 15th," she wrote. "We're about to learn a few things. It's time to ban insider trading in Congress."
During a House Ways and Means Committee hearing on Wednesday, Rep. Steven Horsford (D-Nev.) grilled Trump trade representative Jamieson Greer on the tariff pause, saying, "It looks like your boss just pulled the rug out from under you and paused the tariffs—the taxes—on the American people."
"Is this market manipulation?" Horsford asked. "If it's not market manipulation, what is it? Who's benefiting? What billionaire just got richer?"
JUST NOW: Rep Steven Horsford GRILLS Jamieson Greer on Donald Trump’s tariff reversal: “Is this market manipulation? If it’s not market manipulation, what is it? Who’s benefiting? What billionaire just got richer?” pic.twitter.com/Wfx8VlLemu
— Marco Foster (@MarcoFoster_) April 9, 2025
Last week, Trump himself suggested that he's deliberately manipulating equity prices, reposting a video claiming that he is "purposely crashing the market" as part of a "secret game" that "could make you rich."
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the agency tasked with investigating insider trading and other violations, is now headed by Wall Street-friendly Trump appointee Paul Atkins, whom the Republican-controlled U.S. Senate confirmed on Wednesday.
The Wall Street Journal reported that all three of the major U.S. stock indexes closed Wednesday "with moves unseen since some of the most volatile stretches in recent decades."
"The S&P 500 jumped 9.5% on Wednesday, its largest one-day percentage gain since the financial crisis of 2008," the Journal noted. "The Dow surged more than 2,900 points, or 7.9%—its biggest daily increase ever in point terms and the biggest percentage gain since the coronavirus swept the globe in March 2020. The technology-heavy Nasdaq Composite soared 12.2%, its highest one-day jump since the dot-com era."
In the days leading up to the tariff pause, Trump faced widespread criticism and backlash, including from some of his billionaire supporters. Bill Ackman, a billionaire hedge fund manager, had urged Trump to enact "a 30-, 60-, or 90-day pause before the tariffs are implemented."
"This was brilliantly executed," Ackman gushed after Trump announced the partial tariff pause. "Textbook, Art of the Deal."