Trump's 2nd Term & The Economy AI transcript and summary - episode of podcast Fresh Air

Go to PodExtra AI's episode page (Trump's 2nd Term & The Economy) to play and view complete AI-processed content: summary, mindmap, topics, takeaways, transcript, keywords and highlights.

Go to PodExtra AI's podcast page (Fresh Air) to view the AI-processed content of all episodes of this podcast.

Fresh Air episodes list: view full AI transcripts and summaries of this podcast on the blog

Episode: Trump's 2nd Term & The Economy

Author: NPR
Duration: 00:45:30

Episode Shownotes

Economist David Wessel talks about Trump's plans on tariffs and tax cuts, and the potential economic impact of Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy's Department of Government Efficiency.Maureen Corrigan reviews Niall Williams' novel, Time of the Child.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

Summary

In this episode of Fresh Air, economist David Wessel examines Donald Trump's economic strategies, primarily focusing on proposed tariffs and tax cuts. Wessel critiques the idea that tariffs could revive manufacturing jobs, emphasizing that automation is a more significant contributor to job loss. The discussion extends to potential impacts on negotiations with Canada and Mexico and the historical context of tariffs. Wessel also addresses the challenges of government fiscal management, the sustainability of national debt, and the influence of figures like Elon Musk on Trump's initiatives for government efficiency. The episode raises concerns about the coherence and long-term implications of Trump's economic policies.

Go to PodExtra AI's episode page (Trump's 2nd Term & The Economy) to play and view complete AI-processed content: summary, mindmap, topics, takeaways, transcript, keywords and highlights.

Full Transcript

00:00:00 Speaker_01
This message comes from Mint Mobile. From the gas pump to the grocery store, inflation is everywhere. So Mint Mobile is offering premium wireless starting at just $15 a month. To get your new phone plan for just $15, go to mintmobile.com slash switch.

00:00:16 Speaker_02
This is Fresh Air. I'm Dave Davies.

00:00:19 Speaker_02
In his presidential campaign, Donald Trump promised sweeping changes—high tariffs, big tax cuts, mass deportations of undocumented immigrants, and deep spending cuts—guided by his friends Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy.

00:00:34 Speaker_02
If anyone thought Trump might pause after his win, take a few weeks to consider his cabinet choices, and plot a phase-in of his policy moves, they were mistaken. Trump quickly announced a host of high-level appointments, some quite controversial.

00:00:48 Speaker_02
And then three days before Thanksgiving, he declared that on day one of his administration, he'd impose 25 percent tariffs on goods from Mexico and Canada to remain in effect until they crack down on illegal immigration and drug trafficking into the U.S.

00:01:03 Speaker_02
That prompted a visit to Mar-a-Lago from Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and a phone call with Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum.

00:01:11 Speaker_02
Trump also chose an economic policy team, including Treasury Secretary nominee Scott Besant, a Wall Street veteran who's not only supported Democrats in the past, but as recently as 2015 was chief investment officer for George Soros, a figure widely reviled by conservatives.

00:01:29 Speaker_02
For a look at what all this means in the second Trump administration, we turn to David Wessel, a senior fellow in economic studies at the Brookings Institution and director of its Hutchins Center on Fiscal and Monetary Policy.

00:01:41 Speaker_02
Wessel spent three decades at the Wall Street Journal. He shared two Pulitzer Prizes for journalism, one at the Journal and the other at the Boston Globe, and has written three books on economic issues. We recorded our conversation yesterday.

00:01:55 Speaker_02
Well, David Wessel, welcome back to Fresh Air. Good to be with you. I want to talk about tariffs for a moment.

00:02:02 Speaker_02
This idea that he can raise tariffs on other countries and get results, it kind of hails back to the mercantilism of a few centuries ago like when the British Empire would get cheap raw goods from other countries and then manufacture stuff.

00:02:17 Speaker_02
You manage trade policy to benefit your own industries. And his notion is that if we raise enough tariffs, manufacturers will eventually decide they need to locate in the United States to avoid them.

00:02:30 Speaker_02
And I'm interested in your view on how realistic that is.

00:02:34 Speaker_02
I mean as a thought experiment, if we could take the clock back decades and instead of embracing free trade in the 90s, erected tariffs, could we have prevented the loss of manufacturing jobs over the last few decades?

00:02:49 Speaker_03
Well, it's a good question and I am sympathetic to the view of many economists that the period of trade liberalization after World War II benefited both the United States economy and those of the rest of the world.

00:03:04 Speaker_03
But I also recognize that globalization, such as the surge of imports from China after they joined the World Trade Organization, was very damaging to many American businesses and communities and workers.

00:03:21 Speaker_03
As a society, we didn't do enough to manage that. I think that you're absolutely right in your question.

00:03:28 Speaker_03
Jameson Greer, who will be the new US trade representative if he's confirmed, said in a webcast with JPMorgan before the election that President Trump's advisors do not see trade as a tool of foreign policy like many people in Washington do or historically have.

00:03:46 Speaker_03
They think of it as a tool of domestic policy and industrial policy, very focused on building manufacturing jobs in the United States. OK. So, a couple of things to think about here.

00:03:58 Speaker_03
One is a lot of manufacturing jobs in the United States have been lost. not to imports, but to automation. And that's not because of trade.

00:04:07 Speaker_03
That's because of technology has advanced and profit-seeking companies looking to cut costs, don't use workers where they can use machines if it's more efficient. And secondly, you sometimes hear from President Trump and his

00:04:21 Speaker_03
people who agree with him on trade that somehow we should go back to the late 19th century when we had a lot of tariffs and the economy grew slowly.

00:04:30 Speaker_03
I take my wisdom on that from a very good trade historian at Dartmouth College, Doug Irwin, who has looked at this and he points out it is true that we had tariffs and we had a high growth in the late 19th century, the Gilded Age.

00:04:47 Speaker_03
But he observes that much of that had to do with the expansion of the population and on capital accumulation, that is investments, rather than on getting benefits from tariffs. In fact, he thinks tariffs may even discourage

00:05:02 Speaker_03
businesses from investing because it made the imported capital goods more expensive.

00:05:07 Speaker_03
And finally, he points out that the growth in that period, the growth in productivity or output per hour of work was most rapid in sectors like utilities and services, which had nothing to do with tariffs.

00:05:18 Speaker_03
So it's one of those economic things where there's a correlation. We had tariffs and a lot of growth in the late 19th century, but one didn't cause the other.

00:05:27 Speaker_02
Now Trump did impose tariffs in his first term and when he imposed tariffs on steel and clothing and kitchen cabinets and the like, did companies in the United States make more of that stuff? Did it have a benefit?

00:05:40 Speaker_03
Some, but not very much. Those tariffs are a lot more modest than the ones that he is proposing now. Basically, what tariffs do is they raise the cost of imported goods.

00:05:51 Speaker_03
By raising the cost of imported goods, the idea is it's easier for American manufacturers to make this stuff because they have higher cost than say the Chinese or the Malaysians or the Koreans or whatever.

00:06:05 Speaker_03
In many cases, they impose tariffs on things that we don't make in the United States or don't make very much of, shoes and clothing and stuff like that. So all that does is raise costs.

00:06:16 Speaker_03
And then there's a separate set of tariffs, and these are the ones that President Biden continued. They have to do with preventing China from surpassing us as the world's leading economic power.

00:06:27 Speaker_03
And I was taken by something that Alan Wolf, who used to be a trade representative, said in a piece he wrote for another think tank, that tariffs are like medicine. If you have a little bit, it can cure you, and if you have too much, it's poisonous.

00:06:43 Speaker_03
And I think the risk here is that President Trump, if he does what he has threatened to do, will end up with the kind of poisonous tariffs that raise costs in the United States.

00:06:54 Speaker_03
After all, a lot of stuff we import goes into making other things in the United States. We import a lot of food. Does he really want to raise the price of food in the United States?

00:07:04 Speaker_03
So these across-the-board tariffs are economically unwise and I think would be quite damaging if there's something more than a negotiating tool.

00:07:11 Speaker_02
Trevor Burrus Right.

00:07:12 Speaker_02
It's interesting that Trump actually signed new trade agreements with Canada in Mexico in his first term after some of these tariffs were imposed, which I guess – the 25 percent tariffs would violate but I guess that's all negotiable.

00:07:27 Speaker_02
But it does seem that a lot of industries have taken advantage of the trade agreements among the United States, Mexico and Canada and have built a lot of integrated supply chains.

00:07:37 Speaker_02
Sending material to Mexico to be manufactured and then bringing it in as a part for a different process, this would really shake things up if these tariffs went up, wouldn't it?

00:07:47 Speaker_03
Absolutely. And remember, one of the things that happened was we told people we didn't want to import a lot of stuff from China. So, some of them responded by producing things in Mexico for sale into the United States.

00:08:01 Speaker_03
So, the business community, not only the Canadian and Mexican leaders, but the business community is all up in arms about this threat to essentially tear up the renegotiated Canada-Mexico-U.S.

00:08:13 Speaker_03
free trade agreement that President Trump was so proud of before. But I think that on the tariffs and stuff like that, I think that's a negotiating thing. Look, it's perfect. He has made this threat to do something on day one. Day one is January 20th.

00:08:30 Speaker_03
But he's already started the negotiations with the Canadian and Mexican governments. If it goes right, he'll be able to say on day one, I already cut a deal with Mexico and Canada.

00:08:41 Speaker_03
They're going to stop immigration, stop illegal drugs and I won't have to impose tariffs on them and see what a great deal maker I am. So I think this is just Trump negotiating in advance. It's rather unusual to say the least.

00:08:53 Speaker_03
It's almost as if we have two presidents at the same time. But I think that's a deliberate strategy and we'll see how well it goes.

00:09:01 Speaker_02
You know, one of the things that I didn't know until I read this in the New York Times was that when these tariffs were imposed in the first term, you know, a process was set up so that individual companies could apply for exemptions.

00:09:13 Speaker_02
And I think the Times reported that the Commerce Department fielded up to a half a million of such requests.

00:09:20 Speaker_02
I mean that would seem to be the kind of thing that could both undermine your trade policy and also just prove, you know, ripe for favoritism and corruption.

00:09:30 Speaker_03
Absolutely. And I think we already see industry lobbyists gearing up for this.

00:09:37 Speaker_03
If you can get – if you can make a case that you need an exemption and you can convince the Commerce Department or whoever that you need it and you get it, then you're happy. How do you get that? Well, is this tied to campaign contributions?

00:09:52 Speaker_03
Is it tied to supporting other parts of their policies? A lot of really the worst of what we sometimes call crony capitalism.

00:10:00 Speaker_02
Before we move on to other stuff, I just want to come back to where I began. Is it realistic to think that tariffs can force or compel or encourage companies to actually establish manufacturing in the United States?

00:10:12 Speaker_03
Encourage, yes. Look, we have a lot of foreign automakers who make their cars in the U.S. and some of that was the result of trade policies where we made it more attractive for them to build a plant here than to import the cars from Germany or Japan.

00:10:28 Speaker_03
At the margin, yes, it will encourage some investment in the United States, but at a cost. And the question is, how much are we going to pay in higher consumer prices for every job that's created here?

00:10:40 Speaker_03
And how many of these manufacturing plants that open here are actually going to employ a lot of workers as opposed to be highly automated facilities? So yes, at the margin, it'll make a difference.

00:10:51 Speaker_03
But as a macroeconomic thing, if you think of the good of the US economy as a whole, I think it's pretty clear to me it's a negative.

00:10:59 Speaker_02
the jobs of the 50s and the 60s aren't coming back.

00:11:02 Speaker_03
No, and remember, manufacturing employment is a very small fraction of all employment in the United States, less than 10%.

00:11:09 Speaker_03
So Bob Lighthizer, who was the intellectual machine of the trade policy in the first Trump administration, who for some reason didn't get one of the jobs this time around, in his book, he basically says, I think it's a good deal for America if consumers pay more

00:11:27 Speaker_03
for what they consume in order for us to have more manufacturing jobs in the United States? Well, I'm not sure that if the question were put that way, a lot of consumers and voters in the United States would actually agree with that.

00:11:41 Speaker_03
But they elected a president and some members of Congress who do believe that. And it'll be interesting to see what happens. Remember, in Trump's first term, inflation wasn't an issue. Well, we've learned that Americans do not like inflation.

00:11:56 Speaker_03
And Democrats are going to point out every price increase that's tied to Trump tariffs. They're going to blame it on President Trump and his trade policies.

00:12:05 Speaker_03
And they're going to get some support from the Fortune 500 and maybe the Walmarts and Amazons of the world. And we'll see how popular these policies prove to be if they're really put in effect.

00:12:17 Speaker_02
Speaking of rising prices, is it smart for consumers today, anticipating higher tariffs and higher prices, to make big purchases or stock up on stuff?

00:12:27 Speaker_03
I don't know. I read that some people are doing that and some companies are pushing that as a tactic to get more sales.

00:12:34 Speaker_03
I can understand if you're a company and you sell something that's imported from China, that it might make sense to fill your warehouse now in the hopes that you can get in before the tariffs are imposed.

00:12:46 Speaker_03
I don't think that most consumers are that sensitive to – not that many things we buy that would go up in price so much that it'd be worth – you're going to buy 10 years' worth of socks to avoid a price increase? I don't know about that.

00:13:01 Speaker_03
I mean, you know, there's always this game with cars. You know, if there's going to be tariffs on cars, do you want to buy one now?

00:13:09 Speaker_03
But you have to offset that by what's happening in the auto market and what incentives are available and what tax credits for EVs are available now that might not be available if Trump and the Republicans do away with them.

00:13:21 Speaker_03
So it's a pretty big calculation. I'm personally not like stocking my cellar with French wine in anticipation of tariff increases.

00:13:30 Speaker_02
So let's talk about tax cuts, the tax cuts that Trump has said he wants to get accomplished. The tax cuts that came from the 2017 bill passed in his first term, the Tax Cuts and Job Act.

00:13:45 Speaker_02
Many of the provisions in that law will expire at the end of 2025, so that's going to be an issue and he wants to renew those, right? First of all, what was the impact on the deficit of the tax cuts of 2017?

00:13:59 Speaker_03
Well, they increased the deficit. You cut taxes, you bring in less revenue. You can hope that it will make the economy grow faster and you recover some of that and increased revenue but not all of it.

00:14:10 Speaker_03
Most of the corporate tax cuts in the 2017 act are permanent. The ones that are expiring are the ones that affect all of us, all individual income tax payers, and some businesses.

00:14:24 Speaker_03
I think now the overwhelming assumption is that Congress will vote to basically extend all the tax cuts that are expiring.

00:14:32 Speaker_03
Then they'll maybe do some kind of fancy gimmickry to say it's not going to cost very much, but basically that's about $4 trillion over 10 years above what the Congressional Budget Office predicts what happened if the law was not changed.

00:14:47 Speaker_02
Right. So if that happens, where are we on the deficit? What do economists think? Is it reaching alarming levels?

00:14:54 Speaker_03
The right answer to this question is it depends. If they do the tax cuts that they're talking about, it will raise the deficit unless they can do some aggressive spending cuts.

00:15:05 Speaker_03
My guess is they're going to get the tax cuts and the spending cuts will be harder to get, but we'll see. The problem here is that the fundamental budget problem that the United States government has is that we are an aging society.

00:15:18 Speaker_03
And we spend more on older people than younger and working people. So the deficit and the federal debt, the amount we've borrowed over time, is going to rise inexorably because we're an aging society. We have low fertility rates.

00:15:34 Speaker_03
There's going to be more retirees for every worker. And because the federal government spends a lot of money on health care, and health care spending goes up faster than everything else.

00:15:44 Speaker_03
And so unless there's some attempt to restrain spending on healthcare or on retirement programs, we're going to end up with a bigger deficit. Now you ask, is it alarming? Well, that's a good question.

00:15:56 Speaker_03
There are a lot of people who predicted for the last 25 years that we're on the verge of some fiscal crisis because the government has borrowed so much. That's a bit of the boy who cried wolf problem.

00:16:08 Speaker_03
The US government is selling $2 trillion of bonds every year and they're not having any trouble selling them and the interest rates that they have to pay on them have not gone up very much.

00:16:19 Speaker_03
So, it's not clear that if we go on for another couple of years that somehow automatically the rest of the world will say, oh my God, we're not buying your bonds and we'll be in trouble and we'll have a crisis. We could have a crisis.

00:16:32 Speaker_03
I think the crisis is more likely to be caused by political events like if global investors and markets think that our government is dysfunctional, if Congress really goes crazy and they cut taxes a lot and don't cut spending.

00:16:46 Speaker_03
if President Trump does some things that he sometimes says like we're going to not raise the debt ceiling or we're going to renegotiate our bonds or things like that.

00:16:56 Speaker_03
What we've seen in other countries, we saw it in the UK with List Trust and we're seeing it now in France. When investors think that the government is sort of out of control and unable to manage its fiscal situation

00:17:09 Speaker_03
responsibly, markets can turn and that could lead to an increase in interest rates that I'm sure the president and the rest of us want to avoid. We don't want interest rates to go up because people no longer think we're a safe credit.

00:17:23 Speaker_03
And that's the risk but I think the trigger is more likely to be a political one than somehow the debt-to-GDP ratio across some threshold.

00:17:31 Speaker_02
Trevor Burrus So one way of measuring this is do investors who buy U.S. bonds still think it's a reliable credit and are they willing to give you a pretty good rate at borrowing money?

00:17:42 Speaker_02
That said, I mean interest on the national debt is something like 13 percent of the federal budget now if I recall. Is there a point at which this just becomes unsustainable that we're just – Peter Robinson Yes.

00:17:51 Speaker_03
This is not sustainable, period. It might be sustainable for another year or a presidential term, but at some point, you can't grow your debt faster than your economy forever. We don't really know what the breaking point is.

00:18:05 Speaker_03
Right now, there's very little pressure to do anything about this. The markets and global investors are willing to buy our bonds. And the public, despite what you hear from some politicians, doesn't seem to be really worried about that.

00:18:21 Speaker_03
I look at members of Congress as being pretty sensitive to what the voters really care about. And I don't see a lot of people on the Washington Mall with signs that say, cut the deficit, raise my taxes, cut my Social Security.

00:18:34 Speaker_03
There doesn't seem to be political pressure to do that. And the democrats have decided why should we be responsible and reduce future deficits when we're in charge if when the republicans take over, they just cut taxes again.

00:18:46 Speaker_03
So there's kind of like a stalemate. One of the problems is, as you point out, the more interest grows as a share of the federal budget, the more pressure there is on the rest of the federal budget.

00:18:57 Speaker_03
and that may crowd out some things that really would be good for the country, but members of Congress may be reluctant to fund them because they're worried about how much we're borrowing.

00:19:06 Speaker_02
Trevor Burrus You know, of course, when Republicans have argued for tax cuts for businesses as they did in 2017 and, you know, cuts which benefits wealthy Americans,

00:19:17 Speaker_02
What they say is this will spur investment and economic growth which will generate new revenue so that the debt doesn't spiral out of control. Did those 2017 tax cuts result in growth?

00:19:33 Speaker_03
you tend to get more investment and there was some of that after the 2017 tax cuts. Was it anywhere near sufficient to grow the economy fast enough to spin off enough revenue to pay for those tax cuts? Absolutely not.

00:19:47 Speaker_03
But one of the really interesting dilemmas that the administration is going to have and I can just hear Kevin Hassett

00:19:53 Speaker_03
saying this, I've heard him say it in academic settings, is that cutting taxes on corporate investment, encouraging businesses to buy machinery, computers, software, do R&D, you can make the case that that increases the rate of economic growth.

00:20:08 Speaker_03
But those are not the tax cuts that are expiring. The tax cuts that are expiring are the individual income tax cuts and

00:20:16 Speaker_03
There's very little evidence that cutting individual tax rates, allowing us to spend more money on food and cars and vacations, will lead to faster economic growth in the future. So they kind of have a bit of an intellectual problem here.

00:20:30 Speaker_03
If you want to do tax cuts that you think will increase growth in the future, those are not the ones that are expiring at the end of 2025. I'm sure they'll find some way around that argument, but that's the facts.

00:20:42 Speaker_02
We are speaking with David Wessel. He spent decades as a journalist covering economic issues. He's now at Economist at the Brookings Institution.

00:20:49 Speaker_02
He'll be back to talk more about what to expect from Trump and his economic policy team after this short break. I'm Dave Davies and this is Fresh Air.

00:20:58 Speaker_05
This message comes from NPR sponsor, Satva. Founder and CEO Ron Rutzen shares the experience they hope to create in their viewing rooms.

00:21:08 Speaker_04
We want our customers to feel like they've walked into a luxury hotel. That's what Satva has been inspired by from the day that we started. We take sleep very seriously.

00:21:17 Speaker_04
We believe it unlocks a superpower if you get the right sleep on the right mattress. We believe we can provide that.

00:21:22 Speaker_05
To learn more, go to s-double-a-t-v-a dot com slash NPR.

00:21:28 Speaker_01
Support for this podcast and the following message come from Autograph Collection Hotels, offering over 300 independent hotels around the world, each exactly like nothing else.

00:21:39 Speaker_01
Hand-selected for their inherent craft, each hotel tells its own unique story through distinctive design and immersive experiences, from medieval falconry to volcanic wine tasting.

00:21:49 Speaker_01
Autograph Collection is part of the Marriott Bonvoy portfolio of over 30 hotel brands around the world. Find the unforgettable at AutographCollection.com. Support for the following message come from LinkedIn ads.

00:22:02 Speaker_01
With LinkedIn ads, you can reach professionals relevant to your business. Target them by job title, industry, company, and more by launching your next campaign with a free $100 ad credit at linkedin.com slash results. Terms and conditions apply.

00:22:18 Speaker_02
So let's talk about plans to cut government spending, which takes a unique form in Donald Trump's plans.

00:22:24 Speaker_02
He has enlisted Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy to head what he's calling the Department of Government Efficiency, which will find ways to save a lot of money, according to its charge, and do it quickly.

00:22:40 Speaker_02
What's the scale of what Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy think they can accomplish?

00:22:46 Speaker_03
Their scale is pretty big. They think that they can reduce federal regulations in a way that save money. They think they can reduce the headcount in federal agencies.

00:22:56 Speaker_03
And they think that the White House has more power to not spend money that Congress has appropriated than Congress and many lawyers think. So they're very ambitious. Of course, remember, they don't have any authority. This is an advisory group.

00:23:14 Speaker_03
We've had commissions like this before that were going to save all this money. And mostly, you can't do it unless Congress goes along.

00:23:22 Speaker_03
But they have an ally at the Office of Management and Budget in the White House, Russ Vogt, who has taken the unusual position from time to time that when Congress appropriates money, that's kind of a ceiling on what the president can spend and they don't have to spend it all.

00:23:39 Speaker_03
This was an issue in the Nixon administration. There's a law passed in 1974 that said, no, the president can't do that. But some of Trump's advisors think that's unconstitutional and I think they'll probably try and test it.

00:23:51 Speaker_03
Look, there are clearly places that the government could save money if it has the will to do so. Most of the problems are that it's – there are political obstacles to doing so.

00:24:03 Speaker_03
If there was a line item in the federal budget for waste, fraud and abuse, it would have been cut a long time ago. So we'll see. But I think that Musk and Ramaswamy have the president's ear. They're going to be aggressive on this.

00:24:13 Speaker_03
They're going to look for some big scalps early on. It may be on the regulatory side where they can withdraw some regulations. They think there's been executive overreach and the Supreme Court has been sympathetic to that view.

00:24:27 Speaker_03
and they will say that we're saving money by cutting regulation, and if we have fewer regulations, we can have fewer workers. It's hard in the way the federal government's organized to have mass layoffs, but they can certainly eliminate workers.

00:24:39 Speaker_03
I mean, honestly, if the president declared that every federal employee in Washington, D.C. had to come to work five days a week in person, I think people would quit and they wouldn't be replaced. So they will have influence.

00:24:51 Speaker_03
They don't have any power, but they have substantial influence.

00:24:54 Speaker_03
Until the day, which I predict will come at some point, where Donald Trump decides that Elon Musk is just taking too much of the limelight and they'll have a falling apart because I don't think that Trump wants that much attention to somebody other than himself.

00:25:09 Speaker_02
Trevor Burrus Yeah. Well, it's been interesting to see the relationship so far.

00:25:12 Speaker_03
We'll see how that develops. And you mentioned earlier the conflicts. I mean, Musk has huge federal contracts. So how is this going to work?

00:25:21 Speaker_02
Right. One of the things that they say they want to do is do away with a lot of regulations. And there are regulations which apply to businesses, things that they have to do, requirements they have to meet, the environmental requirements, other ones.

00:25:34 Speaker_02
But there are also regulations that govern entitlement programs, who gets how much money. And they get really complicated.

00:25:41 Speaker_02
In a Wall Street Journal op-ed, Musk and Ramaswamy said that most government enforcement decisions and discretionary spending aren't made by elected officials but by, quote, millions of unelected, unappointed civil servants within the government, agencies who view themselves as immune from firing thanks to civil service protections, unquote.

00:26:00 Speaker_02
They say this is inherently undemocratic that these, you know, unelected people are making all these regulations and they say they'll get rid of thousands of them. You know, people have complained about regulations for a long time.

00:26:14 Speaker_02
How easy or hard is it to change them?

00:26:17 Speaker_03
Peter Van Doren Well, first of all, it is true that there are unelected people making decisions, but they are making them with authority that has been given to them from Congress.

00:26:28 Speaker_03
The Congress created the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Commodity Futures Training Commission. the Food and Drug Administration, and I don't think we want a bunch of amateurs making decisions about things that expertise really matters.

00:26:42 Speaker_03
Now, expertise is out of favor now. The process for changing regulations is complicated. And what happened in the first Trump administration, they did a lot of stuff. They didn't dot all the I's and cross the T's and the courts undid them.

00:26:55 Speaker_03
I suspect they'll be more careful this time. But the Supreme Court has said that there are agencies that have done too much.

00:27:04 Speaker_03
And they've reversed an old doctrine known as Chevron deference where the Supreme Court had said that, well, when things are not quite clear, it's up to the agencies to figure out what they mean.

00:27:15 Speaker_03
And the court has said, no, if Congress wants something, they have to say it. So there will be a lot of regulations that are vulnerable. to being undone and I suspect some of them will be by the regulators whom Donald Trump appoints. So that's a fact.

00:27:30 Speaker_03
They act as if they can do all this stuff quickly and for good reason. Government doesn't change rules quickly and there will be businesses who say like, you

00:27:39 Speaker_03
We didn't really like that rule but we've learned to live with it and it's going to really screw up our business if every time we have a new president, they change the regulations. So can we just stick with this one?

00:27:49 Speaker_03
And there are regulations that need to be modernized that are not right for the current times of AI and the internet and instant communications and trade across borders and stuff.

00:28:00 Speaker_03
So there's plenty of room for that as long as you're not mindless and you don't break the rules so the courts reverse you.

00:28:08 Speaker_02
Getting back to where we started, this Department of Government Efficiency is not a department. It's prospective advisory group. It's going to need staff, right? I mean, is it going to hire hundreds of people who can –

00:28:24 Speaker_03
The thing that makes you uncomfortable here is – so it's called the Department of Government Efficiency. Two problems with that. One is it's not a department. And secondly, the acronym is DOGE.

00:28:33 Speaker_03
That happens to be a cryptocurrency in which Elon Musk has an interest and the price of which went up when this thing was named. So that's an example of how you have to watch here. What is the real agenda for this group?

00:28:48 Speaker_03
But, you know, they will have influence and they will have influence on what the president's budget is and they will egg on the people in the administration who want to say, we don't have to spend all the money that Congress has appropriated.

00:29:02 Speaker_03
So I think they will – and, you know, a lot of this is PR in the popular sense, like getting people to be outraged about something so they can claim some victories even if the budget wonks say, you know, that didn't really save very much money.

00:29:18 Speaker_02
Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy are supposed to meet with House Republicans, I believe, this week. What would you expect from that meeting?

00:29:25 Speaker_03
I think part of it will be a pep rally, like they'll say, we want to cut spending, you want to cut spending, we're all in this together. And part of it in private will be members of Congress explaining to Musk and Ramaswamy how Congress works.

00:29:37 Speaker_03
And by the way, guys, we got elected and we're the Appropriations Committee and you're not. So we're going to call the shots here and don't think that you can dictate what it'll be. That conversation certainly won't happen in public.

00:29:53 Speaker_03
I expect it will happen behind closed doors at some point.

00:29:56 Speaker_02
We're speaking with David Wessel. He spent decades as a journalist covering economics. He is now an economist at the Brookings Institution. We'll talk more after this break. This is Fresh Air.

00:30:07 Speaker_05
This message comes from Showtime original series The Agency on Paramount+.

00:30:12 Speaker_05
The 10-episode spy thriller features a stellar cast including Michael Fassbender, Jeffrey Wright, Jodie Turner-Smith, and Richard Gere, following a covert CIA agent whose career, real identity, and mission are pitted against his heart.

00:30:27 Speaker_05
New episodes of The Agency are now streaming on the Paramount Plus with Showtime Plan. Visit ParamountPlus.com to get started.

00:30:36 Speaker_01
This message comes from Capital One. Banking with Capital One helps you keep more money in your wallet with no fees or minimums on checking accounts. What's in your wallet? Terms apply. See CapitalOne.com slash bank for details. Capital One N.A.

00:30:51 Speaker_01
Member FDIC. Support for the following message come from LinkedIn ads. With LinkedIn ads, you can reach professionals relevant to your business.

00:31:00 Speaker_01
Target them by job title, industry, company, and more by launching your next campaign with a free $100 ad credit at linkedin.com slash results. Terms and conditions apply.

00:31:12 Speaker_02
So let's talk about the team that Donald Trump has picked. I mean, two leading figures are Scott Besant, who's going to be the Treasury Secretary, assuming he's confirmed, and Howard Lutnick would head the Commerce Department.

00:31:27 Speaker_02
Let's talk about these two guys. First of all, just who they are and what their policy notions are to the extent that we know them. First of all, Scott Besant.

00:31:42 Speaker_03
useful way to think about Scott Besant is he could easily have been the treasury secretary in the George W. Bush administration.

00:31:50 Speaker_03
Unlike some of President Trump's other nominees who are really outside the box, things that other republican presidents, George Bush or if Mitt Romney had been elected, would never have picked, Scott Besant is a safe pair of hands at the treasury and I think that's deliberate.

00:32:08 Speaker_03
We don't know much about what really constrains President Trump from pursuing some of his more, shall we say, unusual or radical proposals. But we do know he cares about financial markets. He cares about the stock market's verdict on his performance.

00:32:24 Speaker_03
And he should care about what happens to interest rates in the bond market and in the Fed. And I suspect he does. If you're in the real estate business, you understand what interest rates are all about.

00:32:34 Speaker_03
So by putting Scott Besant there, he's a money manager. He's Ivy League. He went to Yale. He got famous in his late 20s for helping George Soros make a huge billion-dollar bet against the British pound that paid off.

00:32:49 Speaker_03
He's had his own money market fund – a hedge fund. So he's a finance guy. He's a Wall Street guy. He doesn't have any experience in Washington. I'm not sure he's ever had a boss or a client like Donald Trump.

00:33:04 Speaker_03
And his challenge is to convince the markets and the business community that everything is going to be all right.

00:33:10 Speaker_02
Trevor Burrus Right. He was known to say in an interview in October that Donald Trump is really a free trader at heart. I mean I guess we will see.

00:33:18 Speaker_02
Let's talk about Howard Lutnick, the other guy who runs the Commerce Department, which – and the Commerce Department has significant influence over trade policy, right?

00:33:26 Speaker_03
It does, but I think Howard Lutnick's influence is probably maybe greater than other commerce secretaries because of his relationship with Donald Trump, although you never know whether his lobbying for the treasury job, which he clearly wanted, annoyed the incoming president.

00:33:44 Speaker_03
Lutnick is a much more volatile figure. He's done a lot of – I mean he's got just an incredible heroic story. His parents died when he was in college. He happens to go into the same college.

00:33:57 Speaker_03
I went to Haverford College and the college paid his way after his parents died and he's been very generous to the college. He ran Cantor Fitzgerald. Most of their employees including his brother were killed on 9-11.

00:34:10 Speaker_03
He was the model for the main character in the TV show Billions, the hedge fund guy who got in a little bit of bad press when he cut off the benefits to the families of people who've been killed and then he set up a nonprofit to benefit them.

00:34:27 Speaker_03
So he's very outspoken. He doesn't have the same kind of moderate demeanor. He's Trump-like and he'll say sometimes things which seem outrageous. And we know that he is much more willing to be aggressive on tariffs than Besant.

00:34:44 Speaker_03
And that's going to be the interesting tension here. Because remember, yes, the Commerce Department has some say about tariffs. But basically, these are presidential decisions.

00:34:54 Speaker_03
Congress has given the president extraordinary authority on tariffs and the president's trade lawyers understand the authority they have and they are willing to push it to the limit.

00:35:06 Speaker_03
They don't need – unlike tax cuts, they don't need Congress to approve them. I think Lutnick will be egging the president on on this tariff stuff and Bessett may be trying to say, oh, you didn't really mean that. That was a negotiating tactic.

00:35:20 Speaker_02
We should talk a little bit about the Federal Reserve, you know, the central bank that's supposed to be independent from the White House. But Trump, like some other presidents, have had strong opinions.

00:35:29 Speaker_02
He appointed the current chairman of the Fed, Jerome Powell, Jay Powell, and has criticized him for not keeping interest rates low enough. What would you expect going forward between Donald Trump and the Fed?

00:35:45 Speaker_03
wants lower interest rates. Some presidents say that explicitly. Some say it only privately. Once upon a time, Fed chairmen were susceptible to this pressure. Arthur Burns in the Nixon era was.

00:36:01 Speaker_03
But in recent times, Fed chairs have been pretty resolute that their job is to deliver on their mandate of maximum employment and stable prices, even if it annoys the politicians. What do I expect? I expect President Trump will not keep his mouth shut.

00:36:17 Speaker_03
If the Fed stops cutting interest rates, he'll complain. And the Fed will not pay attention to that.

00:36:26 Speaker_03
I mean they have to hear him, but President Trump had very little support from Congress when he criticized the Fed in his first term because members of Congress kind of understand the game here. We give the Fed the power to do what's unpopular.

00:36:39 Speaker_03
We reserve the right to criticize them, but we don't really meddle. The second thing the president will do is in 2026, he has a chance to replace one of the seven members of the Federal Reserve Board whose term is up.

00:36:54 Speaker_03
And importantly, he has a chance to appoint a new chairman. And that will be a really important signal. Does he appoint somebody who

00:37:04 Speaker_03
the world expects will have a spine and will keep interest rates higher than Trump wants if necessary or does the world, meaning markets, business people, global investors, do they think he's appointed someone who will bend to his preferences?

00:37:21 Speaker_03
That's going to be the real test. If the people think that he's appointed a treasury secretary –

00:37:30 Speaker_03
If markets and global investors think that the president has appointed a Fed chair who has no spine, who will tend to bend to what the president's will is, that will lead to them to build up their interest rates they demand when they lend money to the US government and that will ricochet through the economy.

00:37:50 Speaker_02
Trevor Burrus By that explanation, it's in Trump's interest to appoint someone who will tell him no.

00:37:57 Speaker_03
It is definitely in Trump's interest to appoint somebody who the markets believe will be a politically independent Fed chairman because if he doesn't, interest rates will be higher and that's bad for the federal government because it's a big borrower and bad for the economy and bad politically because if he gets blamed for higher mortgage rates, that's going to really not be good for him and his party.

00:38:23 Speaker_02
Looking at the big picture here, if Trump pursues all of the policies that he has advocated for, high tariffs, tax cuts, mass deportations, business deregulation, expansion of energy production, do these pieces fit together or will they be pulling the economy in different directions?

00:38:43 Speaker_03
First of all, let's go back to the whole question I mentioned earlier about how much is bluff in negotiating taxes and what do they actually do.

00:38:51 Speaker_03
I think that what is the wise economic policy is to do things that we think have a good chance of increasing the rate of economic growth and sharing that prosperity broadly over the next generation.

00:39:08 Speaker_03
And there are some things we don't really know how to do that, but there's some things we know help that.

00:39:14 Speaker_03
So that means being careful not to cut federal R&D spending, not to punish companies for investing in R&D, investing in things like early childhood education or getting lead pipes out of the ground, having smart regulations so we get the benefits of new technologies like AI while guarding against some of the dangers,

00:39:35 Speaker_03
and putting forward a plausible plan for restraining the growth of the federal debt over time, changes to benefit programs and taxes that will take effect slowly. I don't see them pursuing that kind of a coherent strategy.

00:39:50 Speaker_03
They do have a clear strategy of trying to protect manufacturing jobs in the United States. And so there may be some benefits to people who are in those businesses. But if you look across the country, and also I should add,

00:40:03 Speaker_03
Like, they don't seem to think climate change is an urgent issue. I think it is an urgent issue, and they don't seem to see that as a high on their priority list.

00:40:15 Speaker_03
And so if you're thinking about what you think is good for the next generation, and you put that next to what the Trump agenda is, I don't think it delivers on what I personally think would be in the interests of the country.

00:40:27 Speaker_02
David Wessel, thank you so much for speaking with us again. You're welcome. I enjoyed it. David Wessel is an economist, author, and director of the Brookings Institution's Hutchins Center on Fiscal and Monetary Policy.

00:40:39 Speaker_02
We recorded our conversation yesterday. Coming up, Maureen Corrigan reviews Time of the Child, the latest novel from Niall Williams set in a rural village in Western Ireland. This is Fresh Air.

00:40:53 Speaker_01
This message comes from Schwab. With Schwab Investing Themes, it's easy to invest in ideas you believe in, like online music and videos, artificial intelligence, electric vehicles, and more.

00:41:03 Speaker_01
Schwab's research uncovers emerging trends, then their technology curates relevant stocks into over 40 themes to choose from. Schwab Investing Themes is not intended to be investment advice or a recommendation of any stock or investment strategy.

00:41:16 Speaker_01
Visit schwab.com slash thematic investing. This message comes from Apple Card. Apple Card is the perfect card for your holiday shopping. You can apply on your iPhone in minutes and start using it right away.

00:41:29 Speaker_01
You'll earn up to 3% daily cash back on every purchase, including products at Apple like a new iPhone 16 or Apple Watch Ultra. Start holiday shopping for your friends and family today with Apple Card.

00:41:40 Speaker_01
Subject to credit approval, Apple Card issued by Goldman Sachs Bank USA, Salt Lake City branch. Terms and more at applecard.com. This message comes from Explore Minnesota.

00:41:50 Speaker_01
Learn why CNBC ranked Minnesota in the top six states for doing business, and discover all that makes Minnesota the star of the North at exploreminnesota.com slash business.

00:42:02 Speaker_02
Niall Williams' popular novel, Four Letters of Love, is being made into a movie, starring Pierce Brosnan and Helena Bonham Carter. His new novel is called Time of the Child, and our book critic Maureen Corrigan has this review.

00:42:16 Speaker_00
A village on the western edge of a wet nowhere, populated by men who drink too much and women who smile too little.

00:42:26 Speaker_00
Throw in cows, an addled priest, an abandoned baby, and a thick cloud cover of shame, and you have the elements for a quintessential Irish story.

00:42:38 Speaker_00
So quintessential, in fact, I've held off reading Niall Williams for a long time, despite hearing raves about his work. My skepticism, it turns out, was misplaced.

00:42:51 Speaker_00
I've just emerged from a Niall Williams binge with a belated appreciation for his writing, which invests specificity and life in characters and places easily reduced to cliches.

00:43:06 Speaker_00
Time of the Child is William's latest novel, a companion piece rather than a sequel to his 2019 novel, This is Happiness.

00:43:18 Speaker_00
Both books are set in the rural village of Faha, a town in the far west of Ireland whose inhabitants were told possess the translucent flesh that came from living in an absolute humidity.

00:43:34 Speaker_00
Time of the Child takes place in the weeks leading up to Christmas 1962 and opens and closes on a set piece of mass at the parish church where most of the village gathers.

00:43:48 Speaker_00
In between lies a story that feels at once realistic in its rough and comic everyday unfolding and mythic in its riffs on the grand themes of despair and spiritual redemption. Jack Troy is the town doctor and central character here.

00:44:08 Speaker_00
He's a melancholy contained man who we're told carries himself in the manner that the townspeople of Faha might have summarized as not like us. Dr. Troy lost his wife and then the older woman he unexpectedly fell in love with who's now also dead.

00:44:30 Speaker_00
Keeping house for him is his 29-year-old daughter Ronnie, the eldest of three sisters, the one who remained at home. Ronnie, too, is a semi-enigma to the townspeople. Our narrator tells us that, added to her reserve,

00:44:48 Speaker_00
was not only the screened lives of all women in the parish at the time, but the marginal natures of all writers, for Ronnie Troy's closest companion was her notebook.

00:45:03 Speaker_00
Dr. Troy has become haunted by despair and by a particularly heart-rending question, why does no one love my daughter? The answer, he fears, is his own glowering presence that may have repelled one especially promising suitor.

00:45:23 Speaker_00
Inspired by what we're told is a mixed fuel of brandy and a parent's fear of the unmade world after them, Dr. Troy uncharacteristically resolves on a bizarre scheme to make things right. As the saying goes, man plans, God laughs.

00:45:45 Speaker_00
Instead of unfolding the Troy family narrative chronologically, Williams layers it on top of other simultaneous storylines, all of which are graced with language as bracing as salt spray from the chill Atlantic.

00:46:03 Speaker_00
We follow, for instance, the wanderings of Jude Quinlan, a 12-year-old, on the rope bridge between man and boy. Jude's father drinks and gambles, and his mother Mamie possesses the anxious look of one married to an instability.

00:46:22 Speaker_00
Listen to how Williams moves fluidly from the mundane to the wider lens of the numinous in these snippets from an extended passage where Jude helps to unload a van full of Christmas toys for the town fair.

00:46:38 Speaker_00
There were toy soldiers, kits for flying gliders, skittles in a net, balls, bats, dolls of one expression but many dresses. For Jude, carrying everything from the van was as close as he would get to handling any of these things.

00:46:58 Speaker_00
He had no resentment or bitterness. Rather, from nearness to the marvelous, something rubbed off on him.

00:47:07 Speaker_00
The other thing, the one that only occurred to him years later when he would recall what happened that day, was that what he was carrying out of the van that December morning was his childhood.

00:47:22 Speaker_00
For those who believe in such phenomena, Jude will be the instrument for bringing a miracle, a Christmas miracle, complete with a baby and a virginal mother, no less, into this story.

00:47:35 Speaker_00
The other miracle here is a literary one, time of the child itself, which gives readers that singular experience of nearness to the marvelous.

00:47:49 Speaker_02
Maureen Corrigan is a professor of literature at Georgetown University. She reviewed Time of the Child by Niall Williams. On tomorrow's show, do you ever Google your medical symptoms, give yourself a scary diagnosis, and then start to panic?

00:48:03 Speaker_02
We'll talk with Caroline Crampton, author of a new book about hypochondria and illness anxiety. She became hypervigilant after surviving cancer and constantly checking herself for signs of a recurrence. Her new book is A Body Made of Glass.

00:48:18 Speaker_02
I hope you can join us. To keep up with what's on the show and get highlights of our interviews, follow us on Instagram at nprfreshair. Fresh Air's executive producer is Danny Miller. Our technical director and engineer is Audrey Bentham.

00:48:56 Speaker_02
Our interviews and reviews are produced and edited by Phyllis Myers, Anne-Marie Baldonado, Sam Brigger, Lauren Krenzel, Teresa Madden, Monique Nazareth, Thea Chaloner, Susan Yacoundi, and Anna Bauman.

00:49:09 Speaker_02
Our digital media producers are Molly Seavey-Nesper and Sabrina Seawert. Roberta Shorrock directs the show. For Terry Gross and Tanya Mosley, I'm Dave Davies.

00:49:20 Speaker_01
This message comes from Greenlight. Parents rank financial literacy as the number one most difficult life skill to teach. With Greenlight, the debit card and money app for families, kids learn to earn, save, and spend wisely.

00:49:33 Speaker_01
Get started today at greenlight.com slash NPR. This message comes from NPR sponsor Merrill. Whatever your financial goals are, you want a straightforward path there. But the real world doesn't usually work that way. Merrill understands that.

00:49:47 Speaker_01
That's why, with a dedicated Merrill advisor, you get a personalized plan and a clear path forward. Go to ml.com slash bullish to learn more. Merrill, a Bank of America company. What would you like the power to do? Investing involves risk.

00:50:00 Speaker_01
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner and Smith Incorporated, registered broker dealer, registered investment advisor, member SIPC.

00:50:07 Speaker_01
Support for this podcast and the following message come from Autograph Collection Hotels, with over 300 independent hotels around the world, each exactly like nothing else.

00:50:17 Speaker_01
Autograph Collection is part of the Marriott Bonvoy portfolio of hotel brands. Find the unforgettable at AutographCollection.com.