Connect with us

Business

Column: Voters are finally noticing that Bidenomics is working

Published

on

Column: Voters are finally noticing that Bidenomics is working

The turning point in Americans’ perception of the economy — that despite months of doom-colored predictions of a looming recession — may have occurred on Jan. 25.

That was the day that Fox Business economic commentator Larry Kudlow, a former official in the Trump White House and consistent dispenser of grim economic predictions during President Biden’s term, went on Fox’s “America Reports” telecast and acknowledged that the Biden economy was, you know, good.

That day, government figures had been released showing a 3.3% annual increase in the gross domestic product for the fourth quarter of 2023, on top of a 4.9% growth rate for the third quarter.

Instead of contracting, the economy has continued to grow….Inflation has come down significantly. …The labor market is healthy.

— Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen

Advertisement

Candidly, if a bit glumly, Kudlow stated, “It was a good quarter, don’t get me wrong, and the last quarter was a good quarter, 4.9.” Biden, he said, “gets his due. If I were he, I’d be out slinging that hash too, no problem.” Asked by the host if this meant that the economy was not as bad as he had been saying, he answered, “I would say, probably, I would agree.”

Fox being Fox, Kudlow couldn’t resist sticking the shiv in: “Wages are rising more slowly than prices,” he said, which doesn’t happen to be true: Wages and benefits for rank-and-file workers have grown faster than prices throughout the post-pandemic period.

The bottom line, however, is that if the bad-economy camp has lost even Larry Kudlow, they’re on the wrong side of the argument.

The truth is that the Biden economy (“Bidenomics,” if you prefer) has been chugging along for some time. The fundamental question that has circulated about his record is not about the economy’s strength, but about why he hasn’t gotten credit for it.

Sentiment may now finally be shifting. In January, the University of Michigan saw the largest two-month jump in its consumer sentiment index since the end of the Gulf War in 1991. News coverage, which throughout 2023 relentlessly forecast a recession, now touts the prospect of a “soft landing” — that is, a successful battle against inflation without an increase in the unemployment rate or a general economic slowdown.

Advertisement

As it happens, some news outlets seem reluctant to give up on the old theme. “A soft landing, for now,” was Politico’s headline on a mid-December roundup of economic statistics including unemployment below 4% and inflation having been brought down to 3%.

But even White House aides, who last year were reported to be uneasy at trumpeting the term “Bidenomics” in the president’s reelection campaign, are now reported to be hoping that “a strong economy will sell itself to Americans,” according to NBC News.

Administration officials have been trying to spread the word. “Instead of contracting, the economy has continued to grow,” Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen told the Economic Club of Chicago on Jan. 25. “It now produces far more goods and services than it did before the pandemic. … Inflation has come down significantly. … The labor market is healthy.” The unemployment rate, she noted, “has been below 4% for 23 months now, a stretch that has not been seen during the last 50 years.”

Moreover, Yellen said, the current recovery has been “the fairest recovery on record,” with wage and employment gains for the middle class and demographic groups such as Black and Hispanic workers. And the U.S. recovery from the pandemic has outstripped those of other developed countries: “The increase in real wages is unique to our country’s recovery: in other economies, real wages have declined since 2019.”

Hourly earnings growth for rank-and-file workers (blue line) has exceeded inflation (red line) since the onset of the pandemic in March 2020. Gray stripe signifies a recession.

Advertisement

(Bureau of Labor Statistics)

Unionized workers have been among the leading beneficiaries of economic growth, achieving strong improvements in wages and working conditions at unionized auto plants and United Parcel Service.

Some economic commentators have been perplexed at Americans’ failure to recognize the good news about the Biden economy. “Something weird is happening in America,” John Burn-Murdoch of the Financial Times observed on Dec. 1.

Even though GDP growth for the third quarter had just been pegged at higher than 4.9% and job growth remained strong, Burn-Murdoch wrote, “the public is up in arms about economic conditions, with consumer confidence dropping to a six-month low. There really is no pleasing some people.”

Advertisement

The disconnect should not have been so mysterious, however. As I’ve noted in the past, changes in economic conditions, especially improvements, often take time — even many months — to filter into public awareness. People will typically think that a recession is still in full cry long after a recovery is underway.

This happens partly because the news media keep projecting gloom, because bad news always sells better than good news and no reporters want to get caught out as Pollyannas if conditions worsen again.

Marketers of economic nostrums such as cryptocurrency and gold investments flood the airwaves with come-ons, and they don’t win customers by proclaiming that sunny days lie ahead. Opposition politicians don’t win votes by praising incumbents for implementing effective economic policies.

Nor are opinion polls the best way to gauge people’s feelings about the economy; polls consistently show Americans to be discontented with economic policies, but their spending shows them to be profoundly optimistic. That said, the public’s feelings about the economy are often tempered by the fear that things could turn down again in the blink of an eye.

One source of confusion about economic affairs is that public perceptions of the economy are generally snapshots of longer-term trends, and are therefore inevitably distorting. Professionals aren’t immune from the same error.

Advertisement

Federal Reserve and Treasury officials have been consistently pilloried for wrongly predicting that the inflation that emerged in late 2020 would be “transitory.” Indeed, the Fed, smarting from this criticism, arguably has kept interest rates high for longer than has been warranted.

Yet, viewing things in a rearview mirror, team transitory was right. As Kevin Drum has observed, the painful inflationary era of the 1970s and 1980s — which peaked at an annualized 12% in 1974 — actually began in the late 1960s, when the annual rate first exceeded 5%, and persisted into the 1990s, when the rate fell below 3%. That’s more than two decades. (The measure at issue is personal consumption expenditures excluding food and energy, the Fed’s preferred metric of overall inflation.)

By contrast, the recent bout of inflation that supposedly is a black mark against the Biden administration began in mid-2020 (under Trump), peaked at an annualized 6% at the beginning of 2022, and has now fallen to 2%. The period of high inflation lasted less than three years, and never came close to the 1970s peak. In other words, it was the definition of “transitory.” Yet people remember it as a long stretch of relentless price increases.

People also imagine inflation today to be as high as it was in 2022, yielding persistently high prices. But they may not yet have fully recognized the extent to which overall inflation has moderated or that some prices are coming down.

The average gasoline price nationwide is $3.15 per gallon of regular, down from the peak of $4.54 reached in mid-June 2022, according to the AAA; across the Midwest, average prices have fallen below $3 per gallon. Prices of staple foods, many proteins and vegetables are falling.

Advertisement

In political terms, the economy is a moving target. There is always something for naysayers and pessimists to point at to make the case that all is not well. The generally good news in job growth, with the blowout report of 353,000 new jobs in January and months of gains in manufacturing, is confounded by employment bloodbaths among tech and media firms.

But there’s certainly a case to be made that Biden has been an effective steward of the U.S. economy — and one who has succeeded in pushing to favor ordinary Americans through initiatives such as infrastructure spending. That’s a big change from Trump, whose most significant economic achievement was an enormous tax cut for corporations and the wealthy.

Despite all that, opinion polls show that Biden still gets low marks for his management of the economy. But recognition of the truth may soon come his way.

Advertisement

Business

Trump orders federal agencies to stop using Anthropic’s AI after clash with Pentagon

Published

on

Trump orders federal agencies to stop using Anthropic’s AI after clash with Pentagon

President Trump on Friday directed federal agencies to stop using technology from San Francisco artificial intelligence company Anthropic, escalating a high-profile clash between the AI startup and the Pentagon over safety.

In a Friday post on the social media site Truth Social, Trump described the company as “radical left” and “woke.”

“We don’t need it, we don’t want it, and will not do business with them again!” Trump said.

The president’s harsh words mark a major escalation in the ongoing battle between some in the Trump administration and several technology companies over the use of artificial intelligence in defense tech.

Anthropic has been sparring with the Pentagon, which had threatened to end its $200-million contract with the company on Friday if it didn’t loosen restrictions on its AI model so it could be used for more military purposes. Anthropic had been asking for more guarantees that its tech wouldn’t be used for surveillance of Americans or autonomous weapons.

Advertisement

The tussle could hobble Anthropic’s business with the government. The Trump administration said the company was added to a sweeping national security blacklist, ordering federal agencies to immediately discontinue use of its products and barring any government contractors from maintaining ties with it.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who met with Anthropic’s Chief Executive Dario Amodei this week, criticized the tech company after Trump’s Truth Social post.

“Anthropic delivered a master class in arrogance and betrayal as well as a textbook case of how not to do business with the United States Government or the Pentagon,” he wrote Friday on social media site X.

Anthropic didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Anthropic announced a two-year agreement with the Department of Defense in July to “prototype frontier AI capabilities that advance U.S. national security.”

Advertisement

The company has an AI chatbot called Claude, but it also built a custom AI system for U.S. national security customers.

On Thursday, Amodei signaled the company wouldn’t cave to the Department of Defense’s demands to loosen safety restrictions on its AI models.

The government has emphasized in negotiations that it wants to use Anthropic’s technology only for legal purposes, and the safeguards Anthropic wants are already covered by the law.

Still, Amodei was worried about Washington’s commitment.

“We have never raised objections to particular military operations nor attempted to limit use of our technology in an ad hoc manner,” he said in a blog post. “However, in a narrow set of cases, we believe AI can undermine, rather than defend, democratic values.”

Advertisement

Tech workers have backed Anthropic’s stance.

Unions and worker groups representing 700,000 employees at Amazon, Google and Microsoft said this week in a joint statement that they’re urging their employers to reject these demands as well if they have additional contracts with the Pentagon.

“Our employers are already complicit in providing their technologies to power mass atrocities and war crimes; capitulating to the Pentagon’s intimidation will only further implicate our labor in violence and repression,” the statement said.

Anthropic’s standoff with the U.S. government could benefit its competitors, such as Elon Musk’s xAI or OpenAI.

Sam Altman, chief executive of OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT and one of Anthropic’s biggest competitors, told CNBC in an interview that he trusts Anthropic.

Advertisement

“I think they really do care about safety, and I’ve been happy that they’ve been supporting our war fighters,” he said. “I’m not sure where this is going to go.”

Anthropic has distinguished itself from its rivals by touting its concern about AI safety.

The company, valued at roughly $380 billion, is legally required to balance making money with advancing the company’s public benefit of “responsible development and maintenance of advanced AI for the long-term benefit of humanity.”

Developers, businesses, government agencies and other organizations use Anthropic’s tools. Its chatbot can generate code, write text and perform other tasks. Anthropic also offers an AI assistant for consumers and makes money from paid subscriptions as well as contracts. Unlike OpenAI, which is testing ads in ChatGPT, Anthropic has pledged not to show ads in its chatbot Claude.

The company has roughly 2,000 employees and has revenue equivalent to about $14 billion a year.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

Video: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk

Published

on

Video: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk

new video loaded: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk

In mapping out Elon Musk’s wealth, our investigation found that Mr. Musk is behind more than 90 companies in Texas. Kirsten Grind, a New York Times Investigations reporter, explains what her team found.

By Kirsten Grind, Melanie Bencosme, James Surdam and Sean Havey

February 27, 2026

Continue Reading

Business

Commentary: How Trump helped foreign markets outperform U.S. stocks during his first year in office

Published

on

Commentary: How Trump helped foreign markets outperform U.S. stocks during his first year in office

Trump has crowed about the gains in the U.S. stock market during his term, but in 2025 investors saw more opportunity in the rest of the world.

If you’re a stock market investor you might be feeling pretty good about how your portfolio of U.S. equities fared in the first year of President Trump’s term.

All the major market indices seemed to be firing on all cylinders, with the Standard & Poor’s 500 index gaining 17.9% through the full year.

But if you’re the type of investor who looks for things to regret, pay no attention to the rest of the world’s stock markets. That’s because overseas markets did better than the U.S. market in 2025 — a lot better. The MSCI World ex-USA index — that is, all the stock markets except the U.S. — gained more than 32% last year, nearly double the percentage gains of U.S. markets.

That’s a major departure from recent trends. Since 2013, the MSCI US index had bested the non-U.S. index every year except 2017 and 2022, sometimes by a wide margin — in 2024, for instance, the U.S. index gained 24.6%, while non-U.S. markets gained only 4.7%.

Advertisement

The Trump trade is dead. Long live the anti-Trump trade.

— Katie Martin, Financial Times

Broken down into individual country markets (also by MSCI indices), in 2025 the U.S. ranked 21st out of 23 developed markets, with only New Zealand and Denmark doing worse. Leading the pack were Austria and Spain, with 86% gains, but superior records were turned in by Finland, Ireland and Hong Kong, with gains of 50% or more; and the Netherlands, Norway, Britain and Japan, with gains of 40% or more.

Investment analysts cite several factors to explain this trend. Judging by traditional metrics such as price/earnings multiples, the U.S. markets have been much more expensive than those in the rest of the world. Indeed, they’re historically expensive. The Standard & Poor’s 500 index traded in 2025 at about 23 times expected corporate earnings; the historical average is 18 times earnings.

Advertisement

Investment managers also have become nervous about the concentration of market gains within the U.S. technology sector, especially in companies associated with artificial intelligence R&D. Fears that AI is an investment bubble that could take down the S&P’s highest fliers have investors looking elsewhere for returns.

But one factor recurs in almost all the market analyses tracking relative performance by U.S. and non-U.S. markets: Donald Trump.

Investors started 2025 with optimism about Trump’s influence on trading opportunities, given his apparent commitment to deregulation and his braggadocio about America’s dominant position in the world and his determination to preserve, even increase it.

That hasn’t been the case for months.

”The Trump trade is dead. Long live the anti-Trump trade,” Katie Martin of the Financial Times wrote this week. “Wherever you look in financial markets, you see signs that global investors are going out of their way to avoid Donald Trump’s America.”

Advertisement

Two Trump policy initiatives are commonly cited by wary investment experts. One, of course, is Trump’s on-and-off tariffs, which have left investors with little ability to assess international trade flows. The Supreme Court’s invalidation of most Trump tariffs and the bellicosity of his response, which included the immediate imposition of new 10% tariffs across the board and the threat to increase them to 15%, have done nothing to settle investors’ nerves.

Then there’s Trump’s driving down the value of the dollar through his agitation for lower interest rates, among other policies. For overseas investors, a weaker dollar makes U.S. assets more expensive relative to the outside world.

It would be one thing if trade flows and the dollar’s value reflected economic conditions that investors could themselves parse in creating a picture of investment opportunities. That’s not the case just now. “The current uncertainty is entirely man-made (largely by one orange-hued man in particular) but could well continue at least until the US mid-term elections in November,” Sam Burns of Mill Street Research wrote on Dec. 29.

Trump hasn’t been shy about trumpeting U.S. stock market gains as emblems of his policy wisdom. “The stock market has set 53 all-time record highs since the election,” he said in his State of the Union address Tuesday. “Think of that, one year, boosting pensions, 401(k)s and retirement accounts for the millions and the millions of Americans.”

Trump asserted: “Since I took office, the typical 401(k) balance is up by at least $30,000. That’s a lot of money. … Because the stock market has done so well, setting all those records, your 401(k)s are way up.”

Advertisement

Trump’s figure doesn’t conform to findings by retirement professionals such as the 401(k) overseers at Bank of America. They reported that the average account balance grew by only about $13,000 in 2025. I asked the White House for the source of Trump’s claim, but haven’t heard back.

Interpreting stock market returns as snapshots of the economy is a mug’s game. Despite that, at her recent appearance before a House committee, Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi tried to deflect questions about her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein records by crowing about it.

“The Dow is over 50,000 right now, she declared. “Americans’ 401(k)s and retirement savings are booming. That’s what we should be talking about.”

I predicted that the administration would use the Dow industrial average’s break above 50,000 to assert that “the overall economy is firing on all cylinders, thanks to his policies.” The Dow reached that mark on Feb. 6. But Feb. 11, the day of Bondi’s testimony, was the last day the index closed above 50,000. On Thursday, it closed at 49,499.50, or about 1.4% below its Feb. 10 peak close of 50,188.14.

To use a metric suggested by economist Justin Wolfers of the University of Michigan, if you invested $48,488 in the Dow on the day Trump took office last year, when the Dow closed at 48,448 points, you would have had $50,000 on Feb. 6. That’s a gain of about 3.2%. But if you had invested the same amount in the global stock market not including the U.S. (based on the MSCI World ex-USA index), on that same day you would have had nearly $60,000. That’s a gain of nearly 24%.

Advertisement

Broader market indices tell essentially the same story. From Jan. 17, 2025, the last day before Trump’s inauguration, through Thursday’s close, the MSCI US stock index gained a cumulative 16.3%. But the world index minus the U.S. gained nearly 42%.

The gulf between U.S. and non-U.S. performance has continued into the current year. The S&P 500 has gained about 0.74% this year through Wednesday, while the MSCI World ex-USA index has gained about 8.9%. That’s “the best start for a calendar year for global stocks relative to the S&P 500 going back to at least 1996,” Morningstar reports.

It wouldn’t be unusual for the discrepancy between the U.S. and global markets to shrink or even reverse itself over the course of this year.

That’s what happened in 2017, when overseas markets as tracked by MSCI beat the U.S. by more than three percentage points, and 2022, when global markets lost money but U.S. markets underperformed the rest of the world by more than five percentage points.

Economic conditions change, and often the stock markets march to their own drummers. The one thing less likely to change is that Trump is set to remain president until Jan. 20, 2029. Make your investment bets accordingly.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending