This message comes from progressive insurance, where drivers who switch could save hundreds on car insurance. Get your quote at progressive.com today, progressive casualty insurance company and affiliates. A quick word before the show, the 2024 election is over and as a new administration prepares to assume power, it's our job across the entire NPR network to report on what they do with that power. That's why we're here because information is power too.
Your support makes it possible for us to break down big stories, to fact check and to make sure you understand what's going on. When you donate, you make a difference in our ability to do this work tomorrow. If you're already a supporter, we're taking this moment to say thank you. And if you're not, go to donate.npr.org to give. donate.npr.org. All right, here's the show. Hi, this is Ted Arthur at the Winter Garden Theatre in New York City about to conduct another
performance of Back to the Future on Broadway. This podcast was recorded at 1.39 pm on Monday, November 11th, 2024. Things may have changed by the time you hear this, but we'll still be going back in time thanks to our flux capacitor, an incredible cast, musicians, and crew. Here's the show. I'm thrilled. Must see. I'd like to go back in time with the Flex capacitor. Hey, there it's the NPR Politics podcast. I'm Deepa Shiver. I cover the White House.
I'm Mara Liason, Senior National Political Correspondent. And NPR, Scott Horsley is here to talk about the economy. Hey, Scott. Good to be with you all. Thanks for coming. So big takeaways from this election kind of hard to be an incumbent when the last four years have been, you know, years of people struggling with the cost of living and trying to afford basic needs like groceries, childcare, et cetera. How are you thinking about how the election played out last week?
I think you can think of lots of different reasons people had to vote the way they did, but one clear takeaway is that people really, really hated when the cost of living goes up. When they have to pay more for rent or groceries or insurance, they really don't like that. And they tend to take it out on whichever person or party is in charge at the moment. We've seen that through the decades and we've seen it across national boundaries. Governments have been toppled
from Pakistan to the UK to Brazil and Italy. Because of the inflationary spike, we saw all over the world in the wake of the pandemic. And that was a very difficult environment for Democrats and Kamala Harris. So Scott, obviously, we know that inflation defeats presidents. Inflation is the most important political economic indicator. And we know that if Biden could have reversed prices and gotten them down, he would have. What can presidents do to lower prices? I mean,
Donald Trump told people he would get this fixed as soon as he won. That's right. He hasn't really offered a prescription to get prices down. He has talked about increased oil production. But of course, we're already producing oil at record levels. And actually gasoline prices have come down quite a bit from their peak in the summer of 2022. Lots of other prices have stayed high
even though they're not still going up really fast. You are seeing a lot of democratic economist questioning the decisions that were made early in 2021 to really go big with the American rescue plan. Now, of course, the government also went very big with economic stimulus on the Trump administration back in 2020 to counter the effects of the pandemic. But those aggressive efforts to cushion the blow from the pandemic continued into 2021. And that may have put some further upward pressure on
prices. The main causes of inflation were the aftershocks of the pandemic itself and all the resulting supply chain snarls. And then, of course, the war in Ukraine, which supercharged energy prices and food prices. But the $1.9 trillion American rescue plan may have also put upward pressure on prices at the margins. And the reason Democrats did that was they were burned by the experience coming out of the great financial crisis when they didn't think the government had
done enough. You might remember Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen saying, it's better to do too much than to do too little. And in fact, doing perhaps too much did really help to boost job growth and made for a very tight labor market where wages went up pretty rapidly. But it also maybe affected prices and people really, really hate those high prices. So it sounds like you're saying that there are things presidents can do that will exacerbate inflation. But there isn't anything they can
do to bring prices down. Is that what you're saying? It's pretty tough. I've not seen any magic one that's that's going to work. What they can do is try to boost wages so they they keep pace with inflation and eventually overtake it. And over time we have seen wages start to catch up with these high prices and they will presumably overtake it. And people see real increases in their buying power. We've seen wage growth outpacing price growth for well over a year now. But people are
still really unhappy with those cumulative price increases of the last few years. And Scott, part of this is also that people, you know, consumers, voters, etc. We're looking maybe for a faster fix here, right? There was a lot that the Biden administration tried to do. Obviously, we know there's no magic lever that the president can pull to fix the economy overnight. But a lot of these efforts and initiatives took time and we'll we'll have continued to take a lot
of time. We'll see what president Trump does with some of these things. But there's part of what you are seeing is that voters wanted a faster solution here. Yeah, the people people wanted prices to come down. And we're probably not going to see prices come down for the most part. What we hopefully will see is prices level off or go up only slowly and eventually wages catch up with that. Now, that's, you know, what you can really do in
real economic terms. There are certainly other questions about messaging. Could the administration have done a better job of messaging what it was doing? Could it have done a better job of explaining why prices were high? Possibly. But the facts are, it's really tough in an inflationary environment for incumbents to hold on their jobs. And we've seen that whether the incumbent party is left, right or center all over the world, inflation is just a killer of incumbent politicians.
And Kamala Harris had that incumbent label wrapped around her neck. Yeah, definitely. All right, we're going to take a quick break and more in a moment. This message comes from NPR sponsor, Satva. You hear a lot of statistics during elections. But one number isn't getting enough attention over a third of Americans suffer from sleep deprivation. Satva plans to change that with mattresses crafted to lull you to sleep and keep you sleeping
soundly and they cost just a fraction of the price of retail. Visit swtva.com slash NPR to save $200 on orders of $1,000 or more. Support for NPR and the following message come from Simply Save. If you're ever worried about the safety of your home and family, there's no better time to act. Get 60% off a new Simply Safe Security System today. Old school alarm systems only kick in once
someone is already inside your home. Simply save stops criminals from entering your home with its exclusive active guard outdoor protection to get 60% off any new system with a select professional monitoring plan. Head to SimplySafe.com slash NPR politics. There's no safe like Simply Safe. This message comes from NPR sponsor Rosetta Stone, an expert in language learning for 30 years. Right now NPR listeners can get Rosetta Stone's lifetime membership to 25 different languages for
50% off. Learn more at RosettaStone.com slash NPR. And we're back and I want to turn to what's coming next. President Electrum's policy plans when it comes to the economy on his end. Starting off with his plans on tariffs. He's talked a lot about this. Scott, how will that impact the economy both in the short term like the coming months after he sworn in in January, but also potentially years down the line? Well, I think we're going to have
to wait and see exactly what form the tariffs take. You know, the President Elect talked about universal tariffs on all imports of 10 to 20% and then a much higher tariff, maybe 60% on imports from China. If he actually did that, it would have a huge inflationary impact in this country. But there's some thinking that, you know, maybe that's all talk and he's going to use this as a bargaining chip and that the actual tariffs that take place won't be that large or that costly.
In general, when you slap a tariff on a product, it's attacks on imports. It drives up the price. Trump likes to say that the foreign suppliers pay that price, but in general, it's the US importer that pays the price and in many cases then pass that cost onto the ultimate consumer. Now, when we had tariffs, we had a lot of tariffs imposed during the first Trump administration. That did raise costs for consumers. It certainly raised costs for businesses. Some of those costs
were passed on to ultimate consumers. The Trump administration, the first time around, didn't slap tariffs on a lot of consumer goods from China. They stopped short of doing that. So we didn't necessarily see the full brunt of tariffs on consumer prices. But if he actually went through with a 10 or 20% tariff on all imports, that would sharply raise costs for consumers.
Yeah. One of the things about covering Donald Trump is there's often a very big difference between what he says he wants to do or what he says he is doing and what he actually does when he starts to decide how he's going to put tariffs on things. Maybe these tariffs will not be as broad, sweeping, and draconian as he has described them during the campaign. And if he does go through with tariffs, you can certainly expect our trading partners will retaliate
with tariffs of their own on US exports. That's not good for US companies that try to sell products overseas. It's not good for our farmers who tend to rely heavily on export markets. We have very productive farmers who make a lot more food than we can eat in this country. So they sell a lot of it overseas. We saw farmers lose a lot of market share the first time around when other countries
retaliated against US tariffs. Another thing that the president-elect has campaigned on talked about a lot is this concept of mass deportations carrying these out in areas all over the country. There are a lot of people, Scott, who have echoed a lot of concern about this, of course, and the impacts on groups like agriculture and things like that. How does something like that plan, like that potentially play out for how that would also impact consumers?
Yeah, I mean, if you're worried about the high cost of groceries, deporting the people who pick and process our food is probably not the best response. Here again, we don't really know what the reality of policy under a Trump administration will be in comparison the way he's talked about it, but mass deportation is potentially inflationary. Now, Trump and his running mate, J.D. Vance, said, well, if you deport a bunch of people who are living in the country illegally,
that will free up housing and lower rents. I suppose there are pockets of the country with high concentrations of undocumented immigrants where a mass deportation might actually put some downward pressure on rents. But for the most part, mass deportations would drive up the cost of living. It would certainly make it hard. It would hurt the agricultural industry. It would hurt
the construction industry, which we need to build more housing. It would certainly hurt hospitality at any industry that depends heavily on immigrant labor. The other thing is that the large number of immigrants we've seen in the last few years certainly have caused strains on schools and hospitals and all sorts of government infrastructure. But they have also allowed the United States to add a whole lot more jobs than it otherwise would have been.
Our native born population is aging. Many baby boomers are retiring. If it weren't for the high levels of immigration that we've seen in the recent years, we would not have been able to add nearly as many jobs. We would be facing a worse labor shortage, which would also be inflationary. And the other thing Trump has talked about, of course, is, and this came up on both sides between Democrats and Republicans and this presidential race, tax cuts. Who's getting them? Who isn't
getting them? How does that impact what's coming down the line in a Trump administration? Right. Well, of course, the big part of the tax cuts that have been talked about is the extension of the 2017 tax cuts that were passed during the first Trump administration. Of course, Vice President Harris had also talked about extending most of those individual cuts for everyone making up to $400,000. So there what we're really talking about is avoiding a tax increase when
those tax cuts were set to expire next year. Trump has also talked about cutting the corporate tax further, which is one reason we've seen lots of celebration on Wall Street of his election. And then he has talked about some other targeted tax cuts for specific constituencies, like making tips exempt from taxation. That was, of course, very popular with a lot of tip workers in Nevada and elsewhere. He's talked about exempting social security benefits from
taxation. That would be certainly popular with a lot of seniors. He's also talked about exempting overtime income from taxation. Now, all of those things would be complicated and would probably invite some gamesmanship in the tax business. People trying to get more of their income classified as tips, you might see teachers asking to have some of their income classified as tips so that it would be tax-free. Lots of gamesmanship going on there. But if in fact that came to be,
it would save some people some money. It would take money away from the government. It would worsen our federal deficit, which is already large. It could drive up long-term interest rates and mortgage rates as the government has to borrow more money and that makes it more expensive for everyone else to borrow money. And the extra money circulating in the economy as a result of
those tax cuts could make it harder to get inflation under control. Scott, I have kind of like a Lucy Goosey question that I wonder if we end on here, which is like we were talking about all of Trump's potential plans and policy ideas with the context of knowing that we don't actually know if he's going to enact any or all of these things and in the exact way that they shake out.
And I'm curious how much that volatility or relative volatility, like how chaotic does that kind of make the ground that we stand on not exactly knowing what might happen in January, February, March, etc. Well, the economy is not crazy about uncertainty and certainly there'll be lots of uncertainty in the Trump administration. We learned that the first time around, but US business
community is pretty resilient. They'll find ways to work with it. We've talked about a lot of the ways that if Trump's policies were carried out, it could actually make inflation worse rather than better. I don't think by and large voters were going over a checklist of Trump policies and Harris policies and really Nichol and Diving and saying which of these is going to be better for my
pocket. I think they were just very frustrated with the high cost living as it is now. And they just said, I'm going to vote with my gut and my gut doesn't like the cost living the way it is now and I want to try something different. People were voting for change and they got that with a president-elect Donald Trump to kind of close the loop on what we were saying at the beginning choosing the person who isn't the incumbent. There were a lot of factors that motivated voters
behavior in this race. I think the economy is always number one, but in this case, prices were what drove people and they remembered that during Trump prices were lower and they were. There were also other things I think that this was a clear defeat for the cultural left, but what's not clear is what else was motivating this. And we're going to be picking through the entrails of this election for a long time. And one of the things that I'm interested in going
forward is how much Donald Trump will be held responsible for the economy. People in retrospect pretty much gave him a pass on how he handled COVID. They didn't give him a pass in 2020. That's one of the main reasons that he lost. People thought he had bungled the response to the pandemic. But then they kind of gave him a pass and I wonder if prices stay high. Will he be able to get away with saying, hey, that's Joe Biden's fault. Not mine. We'll see. All right, we're going to leave it there
for today. Scott Horsley, thanks so much for joining us. Great to be with you. I'm Deepa Shiverum. I cover the White House. I'm Mara Liason, Senior National Political Correspondent. And thank you for listening to the NPR Politics Podcast. This message comes from NPR Sponsor, one password. Creating a password that's too strong to guess it and impossible to forget can sound impossible unless you have one password. Don't let security
slow your business down. For a free two week trial, go to onepassword.com slash NPR. Support for NPR and the following message come from GiveWell. Over 100,000 donors have used GiveWell to donate more than one billion dollars. Find out more or make a donation at givewell.org. Select how you heard about GiveWell by choosing Podcast and enter NPR at checkout. This message comes from Bombas. Their socks are superplush, designed to support your arches and
support people in need. One purchase equals one donated to those experiencing homelessness. Go to