In raging against companies raising prices, Trump is just like Biden
Gus Carlson is a U.S.-based columnist for The Globe and Mail.
Popular culture is littered with references to the gullibility of the average consumer, from the apocryphal declaration that there's a sucker born every minute to the infamous movie line 'What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public.'
To be sure, U.S. companies have grown rich by finding ways to sell people things they don't need at prices they can't afford. And they will look for every excuse to improve profit margins by raising prices.
The latest case in point: U.S. President Donald Trump says big companies, particularly retailers such as Walmart and Amazon, but also manufacturers such as Ford and Mattel, are using tariffs as a convenient excuse to raise prices.
In a shot across the bow, he said, 'I'll be watching,' then suggested they should 'eat' the tariffs rather than pass on any pain to consumers in the form of higher prices.
Mr. Trump's detractors say he picked this fight and that any knock-on effects of his tariff policy are self-inflicted. In short, he has no one but himself to blame.
His supporters counter that any price gouging and attendant whining simply make his strategic point – that tariffs are meant to encourage more U.S. manufacturing, more sourcing of materials and products domestically and, as a result, lower prices, more job creation and broader economic prosperity.
Big retailers say that until U.S. manufacturing comes online at scale, they have no choice but to go offshore for goods to meet demand. Especially for companies such as Walmart WMT-N, price is everything; their business model is rooted in offering low-priced goods at high volumes to value-minded Americans.
More businesses weigh tariff surcharges as trade wars drag on
The gap between what Mr. Trump sees as a new era of homegrown prosperity and the current reality is a valley of death for consumers, especially those on tight budgets.
Research from the Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America circulating on Capitol Hill tries to make the point. It shows how a theoretical pair of children's shoes made in China and sold in the U.S. for US$19 would cost US$24 post-tariff. With U.S. retailers ordering millions of pairs of shoes, that US$5 per pair adds up.
The math is simple. Importers must pay the tariff, and the most obvious way to recoup the cost is to pass it along to consumers.
Despite his widely controversial tariff policy, Mr. Trump is not the first U.S. president to wrestle with the corporate sector over consumer prices and inflation levels, which are consistently among the top issues among voters.
Joe Biden claimed – and his vice-president, Kamala Harris, echoed in her 2024 presidential campaign messaging – that big U.S. retailers were price gouging, using high inflation as cover for price hikes. During Mr. Biden's term, inflation averaged about 5 per cent and was often much higher.
The real question is this: Are tariffs really hurting companies to the point where they need to raise prices?
Many economists suggest the impact of tariffs at the retail level won't really be felt until the summer or later in the second half of the year because most big retailers are still selling pre-tariff inventories.
That point of view supports Mr. Trump's concern that companies are already looking to gouge consumers now by using tariffs as a convenient excuse to jack up prices.
Most interesting in the latest standoff on pricing is that Mr. Trump and Mr. Biden, while at opposite ends of the spectrum on most issues, and while dealing with different root causes of consumer dissatisfaction, are aligned on how to deal with companies who raise prices unfairly.
Mr. Trump is reported to be considering several tactics from Mr. Biden's policy toolbox – from having the Federal Trade Commission launch industry-wide investigations to more targeted probes into specific products and company profits and new legislation. Even price controls imposed by executive order are an option, harking back to Mr. Nixon's Economic Stabilization Act of 1970.
Whether government intervention can counter the effects of tariffs, real or imagined, remains to be seen. In the meantime, consumers are caught in the middle, waiting to see if Mr. Trump's strategy of reigniting domestic manufacturing will catch fire quickly enough to offset tariff-based pricing pressures.
Until then, the biggest opportunity in this land of opportunity remains duping the consumer.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBC
an hour ago
- CBC
Mayor says city should repair buildings if landlords don't, but it hasn't in years
After recently touring an apartment building badly in need of repairs, Toronto's mayor sent a message to landlords: if they can't repair their property, the city should do the work themselves and send them a bill. But city data shows that Toronto hasn't exercised that power since 2021, when it was done once. Though the mayor is working to make the city more prepared to use it, through a successful motion at city council in May. Chow spoke about the enforcement measure known as remedial work Saturday — which the city has the power to use under the property standards bylaw — while addressing tenants of a Rexdale apartment building who are dealing with pest infestations, chronic flooding and other issues. But a 2024 report on RentSafeTO, the city's rental enforcement program, shows the tool has been used infrequently in recent years. It was used four times in 2017, once in 2018, ten times in 2019, once in 2020 and once in 2021. Remedial action wasn't used in 2022, 2023 or 2024, according to the RentSafeTO year in review for 2024. Chiara Padovani, with the York-South Weston tenants union, says renters have been demanding the city use its remedial work enforcement mechanism for years. "What we need the city to actually do is use that tool to use that power and actually implement remedial action when tenants are living in conditions that are impacting their health and safety," Padovani said. "When a landlord is not upholding their basic responsibilities and the bylaws that are in place to protect tenants to have a decent place to live, then the city needs to stop playing nice." WATCH | Residents of Toronto apartment in need of overdue repairs call for mayor's help: Residents of Toronto apartment in need of overdue repairs call on mayor's help 3 days ago Duration 2:52 Mould, insects, and plumbing problems are just some of the issues tenants at a Rexdale apartment complex are raising to Toronto Mayor Olivia Chow. Tenants say their landlord isn't doing anything to address the problems, and the city's enforcement is failing them. CBC's Naama Weingarten reports. In a statement, the city said the goal of RentSafeTO is to use "progressive enforcement action" to achieve compliance, reminding tenants that any issues they're having with a building should be brought to the landlord first. It says remedial action is used in "extenuating circumstances." Padovani says a perfect example of the city's lack of enforcement came in a recent ombudsman's report delivered in May. In it, the city's municipal licensing and standards (MLS) department, who are responsible for bylaw enforcement, was criticized for unfairly responding to requests for help from tenants at a building in need of repair. City didn't consider remedial action, homes lost: report The report looked into the city's handling of a rooming house with no heat and water, a loss of vital services that caused 10 of 11 tenants to lose their homes. "MLS never considered using its own power to restore the vital services itself," the report reads. It goes on to say there is no indication MLS considered remedial action for the building. After that report was made public, the mayor put forward a motion requesting city staff to make sure Toronto has a roster of contractors who, if needed, can carry out emergency repairs to keep buildings livable. The property standards bylaw is meant to ensure rentals are free of pests, kept clean and have running hot water, among a variety of other things. If the city has to step in and do work itself, a fee of $74.36 per hour is added to the owner's property tax bill. The head of the city's federation of tenants' associations also can't remember an instance of the city actually using its power to do repairs for tenants. Yaroslava Avila Montenegro, executive director of the Federation Of Metro Tenants' Associations, said if the city exercised that mechanism more regularly, it would make a huge impact. "We at the Federation of Metro Tenants' Associations get calls on maintenance work with different buildings every single day," she said. "I would say around 50 per cent of our intake calls deal with some kind of maintenance issue." She believes there needs to be a shift in the way the city approaches enforcement. "Broadly speaking, in Canada we have this culture that puts homeowners first in terms of priorities. But when it comes to folks who rent, and tenants, we are seen as second-class citizens," she said. The city's website says in some cases issues are resolved by educating landlords, while in others further action is required. A 2024 RentSafeTO report says the enforcement team's objective is to "work with building owners."
CBC
an hour ago
- CBC
Are there 'snooping provisions' in Carney's massive border bill?
Social Sharing Conservatives and New Democrats don't agree on much, but it appears both have issues with provisions tucked into Bill C-2, the Carney government's Strong Borders Act. The 140-page bill would modify many existing laws, from the Criminal Code to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Canada Post Corporation Act and the Oceans Act. Much of it is about the border and the movement of people and goods, licit and illicit, across that border, as its full name suggests: An Act respecting certain measures relating to the security of the border between Canada and the United States and respecting other related security measures. But some MPs are having difficulty seeing how everything in the bill is at all "related" to the border. WATCH | Privacy concerns over Liberal border bill: Strong Borders Act raises concern about police access to personal data 1 day ago Duration 2:28 Civil liberties groups are concerned that the federal government's proposed Bill C-2, the Strong Borders Act, will give law enforcement agencies sweeping new powers, like making it easier for police to search your internet activity and data without your knowledge or a warrant. "I think the title of the act is for show for the Trump administration," said New Democrat MP Jenny Kwan. "A lot of the components in the bill target Canada's own processes that have nothing to do with the U.S." Conservative MP Michelle Rempel Garner said C-2 includes "snooping provisions" that are "a massive poison pill." A long fight over 'lawful access' Perhaps the most controversial parts of the bill relate to police powers and "lawful access," the ability for police to demand subscriber information from internet providers and other online companies. Police have been seeking such powers for two decades in Canada, and there have been several attempts to pass legislation. The last determined effort to expand police powers over the internet was made by Stephen Harper's government in 2014, when it was packaged as the Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act. It fell apart after Public Safety Minister Vic Toews challenged critics to either "stand with us or stand with the child pornographers." The Carney government also turned to the spectre of child pornography to make the case for their bill. And indeed, those who work in child protection have long advocated for a version of lawful access that would compel internet providers to co-operate with law enforcement. Wait times for warrants "There are pieces of information that are only in the possession of [internet] companies," said Monique St. Germain, a lawyer with the Canadian Centre for Child Protection. She said it can take months to obtain authorizations to link a computer's IP address to a suspect, and sometimes that means important evidence is lost. WATCH | Critics worry about alignment with U.S.: Critics say new border legislation aligns Canada's immigration system with the U.S. 7 days ago Duration 2:43 And Thomas Carrique of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police says communications and encryption technology used by criminals have raced ahead of existing legislation. "We are certainly not advocating to have unfettered access," he said. "[C-2] lays out in law what the police would have access to based on reasonable suspicion. And in a modern technical society, this is bare-minimum information." Reasonable expectations of privacy But the Supreme Court of Canada ruled its landmark 2014 decision R v. Spencer that the information police hope to gain through the border bill is within the bounds of a person's reasonable expectation of privacy. "I frankly thought that the prospect of government going back to legislation without a warrant, without court oversight, was simply gone," said Michael Geist, who holds the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa. He says it now feels like there's an effort to "sneak" old provisions from failed legislation into this bill — "about which there's very little to do with lawful access." He expects Canadians will "feel that they've been duped" as they learn that a bill "designed to deal with the border and border safety" has elements that "have nothing to do with the border." Content off limits The data at issue would not include the actual content of messages exchanged over the internet. In order to listen to conversations or read emails, police would still need a warrant. Rather it is biographical information about the sender that is at issue, and there is a debate about how significant the privacy interest in that is. "I think what's being asked is relatively limited, but I acknowledge that's not a universally shared view," said Richard Fadden, former director of Canada's intelligence agency, CSIS. "If you go back 20 or 30 years you had telephone books which allowed the police to do more or less the same." But Geist said police could obtain a lot more through C-2 than they ever could through an old phone book. He said law enforcement could ask an internet company what kind of things a customer has been doing online, when they were doing them and where. Geist says providers would also have to disclose what communications services the subscriber users, such as a Gmail account. WATCH | Public safety minister says C-2 is in line with Charter: Public safety minister says border bill is in line with Charter 9 days ago Duration 0:54 Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree said Bill C-2, known as the Strong Borders Act, strikes the right balance between expanding the powers of border agents and police officers, while also protecting the individual rights of Canadians. Shakir Rahim, a lawyer with the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, said such information provides "a trove of background about our lives" and that his group has "serious concerns that this bill is not compliant with the Charter." Rahim says the requirement to get a warrant offers "some level of protection" that such access is being sought in a targeted way. "But this legislation changes that. It takes away that protection," he said. That problem is compounded, says Geist, by the very low bar set to allow police to demand such information — "any violation of any act of Parliament" — giving the example of camping without a permit. Opposition parties concerned about snooping Rempel Garner raised those concerns in the House of Commons. "Whether or not I use an online service, where I use an online service, if I depart from an online service, if I start an online service, how long I use an online service, everything that C-2 says it would do — that is my personal information," she said. "That is none of the government's business, certainly not without a warrant. There has to be a line drawn here." WATCH | Conservatives express privacy concerns: Conservatives express privacy concerns over border bill 7 days ago Duration 1:57 Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree, who has a background in asylum and human rights law, said he would never advance a bill that threatens civil liberties. "It needed to be in line with the values of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms," he said the day the bill was tabled. "I fundamentally believe that we can strike a balance that, while expanding powers in certain instances, does have the safeguards and the protections in place like protecting individual freedoms or rights." The NDP's Kwan isn't convinced. "I know the minister says this and believes it," she said. "But in reality, if you look at the bill, the minister is creating a situation where your personal info is being disclosed without your consent." A need for 'careful review' Even some who broadly support the lawful access provisions in C-2 wish they had been presented in a separate bill. Fadden says CSIS is too busy to waste time on fishing expeditions, and he would expect the agency to set its own protocols that agents would have to comply with before contacting internet providers. He doesn't dismiss the risk of abuse and overreach, but argues that those risks also exist under the present system of warrants. Still, he wishes the changes hadn't been buried in an omnibus bill ostensibly about the border. "I understand the desire to do it that way, but I don't think it allows for people to understand what's being proposed," Fadden said. "I'm not sure when parliamentary committees look at the bill in the aggregate, particularly given its focus on borders, that this will get the attention that it deserves … people from the civil liberties side are raising concerns that merit discussion."
CBC
an hour ago
- CBC
G7: Why there is hope of a Carney-Trump tariff breakthrough at Alberta summit
Global trade will be a major focus at next week's G7 summit as world leaders gather in Alberta, including U.S. President Donald Trump, who will be making his first appearance at a major international event since returning to the White House in January. Experts and ambassadors are expressing some optimism that this type of event could be a difference-maker in convincing Trump to reduce the amount of tariffs charged on imports to the U.S. Any possible concessions on the trade front would be welcomed by countries such as Canada, that are facing economic hardship because of tariffs. "It's issue No. 1," said John Kirton, director of the G7 Research Group at the University of Toronto. On Wednesday, CBC News and Radio-Canada reported that talks between Prime Minister Mark Carney and Donald Trump are advanced enough that a document containing a draft economic and security agreement has been exchanged between the Prime Minister's Office and the White House. Ottawa is stepping up its efforts in recent weeks to reach an agreement before the end of the G7 summit. Global trade has slowed as a result of the ever-changing tariffs announced by Trump that have targeted various countries and also certain materials, such as steel and aluminum. In response, many countries, including Canada, have enacted their own tariffs. Canada's unemployment rate has climbed to seven per cent, which economists say is a sign the trade war with the U.S. is taking a toll on the job market, especially the manufacturing sector. Trade and tariffs are the "make or break issue" that will determine whether the summit in the Alberta Rocky Mountain village of Kananaskis Country is a success or not, said Kirton. For now, he's hopeful the various leaders' meetings and one-on-one conversations could produce results. "[Trump] likes to deliver big wins and the other G7 leaders are smart enough to deliver agreements which are real wins," said Kirton, pointing to how countries could pledge to increase defence spending and make other commitments, in exchange for lower tariffs on imports into the U.S. World leaders, including Carney, Trump and leaders from France, Germany, Italy, Japan and the United Kingdom, as well as the European Union, are meeting in Alberta from June 15 to 17 for talks on a variety of other issues, including climate change and managing rapidly evolving technology. The summit is a high-profile event, yet only involves a handful of world leaders, which is noteworthy, said Gary Mar, CEO of the Canada West Foundation, an Alberta-based think-tank. "One of the reasons the G7 is effective is because it's a small group. It's small enough that it's focused and can really be productive," said Mar, who was part of the welcoming party at the Calgary airport when world leaders arrived for the last summit held in Kananaskis in 2002. Trade was not nearly as contentious at that gathering, but rather promoted as having a profound impact on economic growth and development around the world. At the time, U.S. President George Bush even highlighted the value of trade with Canada during the opening press conference. "We've got a significant relationship together. It's a vibrant, positive friendship," said Bush. "Trade is in the interests of all of us. There are some problems on occasion, but we've got the kind of relationship where we can be very frank about it and try to work them out." The 2002 summit was held less than 12 months after the terrorist attack on the Pentagon and World Trade Center, which is why the main focus was to discuss the war on terrorism and responding to the threat of weapons of mass destruction. Geopolitical tension and conflicts are expected to be one of the talking points at this year's G7, but the tariff situation will likely top the agenda. Trade policy needs to be discussed urgently, said Matthias Lüttenberg, Germany's ambassador to Canada, while on stage at a recent event in Calgary to discuss the G7. Free trade and open markets for Germany is "one of the most important pillars of our economic world view and it's the foundation of prosperity and sustainable growth for all of us," he said. The G7 has an important role to play and the summit has value in producing results on global issues, Lüttenberg said, a sentiment shared by other ambassadors attending the G7 event. "We know how it works and we have achieved so much together already. And I'm not only talking about leader statements, but it's also the practical work," he explained, pointing to the example of how the G7 agreed on certain sanctions against Russia following its invasion of Ukraine, while also working toward how to help Ukraine rebuild. Global economic growth is slowing more than expected only a few months ago as a result of the Trump administration's trade war, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development said earlier this month. The global economy is on pace to slow from 3.3 per cent last year to 2.9 per cent in 2025 because of the tariff fallout, the agency said, trimming its estimates from March for growth of 3.1 per cent this year.
