GOP's Kennedy compares dire Trump tariff predictions to 'late-night psychic hotlines'
While senators Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Ben Ray Luján, D-N.M., cited economists' projections that President Donald Trump's tariffs will cost American families an extra $5,000 per year, GOP Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., insisted, "We don't know," suggesting those who claim they do are making fools of themselves.
"I followed what all these economists are saying. Most of them make these late-night psychic hotlines look respectable," Kennedy told Fox News Digital at the Capitol. "They don't know any more than anybody else. We're in uncharted waters here."
According to Schumer and Luján, Americans can likely expect to see costs rise enough to equate to a $5,000 per year tax on American families.
Stephen Miller Says Americans Have To Understand How 'Badly' We've Been Ripped Off As A Country
"When the average American family sits down and tries to figure out how they're going to pay for things, and they hear they may pay $5,000 more than they've had to pay before — and they may not be able to buy a new car, they may not be able to support that new drug that grandma needs, they may not be able to take that vacation they were planning for a year — they're going to be outraged," Schumer told reporters.
"It's a huge tax on American families. All – all – to help billionaires get a tax cut."
Read On The Fox News App
Luján seconded the sentiment from Schumer, pointing to the economists that Kennedy blasted as less respectable than a "late-night psychic hotline."
Trump's China Tariffs Face Legal Challenge From Conservative Group Calling Them 'Unlawful'
"There's no question that the American people are the ones that are going to be paying the brunt of this," Luján argued. "The actuaries that have been putting out reports and other economists are suggesting that this is going to be a national sales tax on the American people of about 5,000 bucks year. That's just not right.
"If the president would be open to using targeted tariffs as a tool — something that I'm open to and I think others are — that's one thing," Luján added. "But when he's arbitrarily just going across the board and trying to slap on numbers … I'm very concerned for my constituents that are going to be paying out of pocket."
Kennedy argued such projections had no basis in fact.
"The truth is we don't know. These economists don't know," Kennedy insisted. "These are uncharted waters. We've not had these kind of tariffs in a long time. It may be a net positive. President Trump implemented tariffs in his first term. Didn't seem to hurt the economy. It could be a negative. All I'm saying is that in Washington, D.C., for every economist, there's an equal and opposite economist, and they're usually both wrong."Original article source: GOP's Kennedy compares dire Trump tariff predictions to 'late-night psychic hotlines'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
9 minutes ago
- Yahoo
CartCon 2025: Tariffs, turbulence and the future of resilient retail
At second-annual CartCon conference in Napa Valley, CA, the tone was electric with anticipation but also laced with urgency. Billed as a summit for the company's expansive ecosystem of brands, vendors and strategists, the event served as both a product showcase and a pressure valve. Nowhere was that tension more visible than during one of the conference's hardest-hitting panels, a deep dive into the complexities of tariff policy and its ripple effects on global sourcing, consumer pricing and retail resilience. The panel consisted of three voices with rare insight into the collision of policy and commerce: Chris Smith, president of Summit Global Strategies; Tim Manning, former White House supply chain coordinator under President Joe Biden; and Nick Stachel, logistics strategy adviser at Izba Consulting. What followed was not a high-level overview, but a granular exploration of the legal, political and operational forces shaping how, and where, products are made, moved and sold. From globalization to geo-economics Smith opened the discussion by tracing the historical arc of U.S. trade policy. For decades following World War II, American trade strategy revolved around multilateralism. The U.S. saw global trade not just as an economic imperative but as a geopolitical tool, creating allies, raising standards of living and preventing conflict. But in 2016, that long-standing consensus fractured. The bipartisan abandonment of the Trans-Pacific Partnership signaled a sharp pivot. As Smith explained, the political center collapsed under the weight of the 'China Shock,' a term describing the decimation of American manufacturing towns due to offshoring. Smith described President Donald Trump's tariff policy as a psychological reset. Before Trump, U.S. tariffs averaged around 2%. Within months, they jumped to 18% in key categories. This wasn't just an economic strategy, it was anchoring. 'It's like burger sizes,' Smith said, relating back to Wendy's psychological marketing strategies. 'Before Trump, we had singles and doubles. Now the triple is on the menu, and everything else looks small by comparison.' Tariffs, he added, have become Trump's 'cat toy' — a provocative distraction wielded without consistent strategy. Even if future administrations soften tariff policy, Smith warned, the structure of global trade has already shifted. Retailers and manufacturers alike are building permanent workarounds. Inflation, particularly in consumer goods, is the slow-burning consequence. While Smith provided the philosophical backdrop, Manning broke down the legal tools underpinning today's tariff landscape. The real disruption, Manning emphasized, has come through the use, and misuse, of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Originally designed as a tool for national security sanctions, IEEPA has been repurposed by the Trump administration to enact sweeping tariffs with little congressional oversight. Manning described the legal and logistical chaos for businesses from these tactics. In just six weeks, the Trump administration issued 17 executive orders using IEEPA authority, stripping trade policy of its usual predictability and process. For businesses, this has been catastrophic. Sourcing strategies built over years have unraveled in days. 'We're in a volatile environment,' Manning said. The cost of doing business now includes factoring in the potential for abrupt, unexplained swings in tariff exposure. Long-term investments have become high-risk bets, and in many cases, they're simply not being made. On-the-ground retail strategy Bringing the policy talk down to the warehouse floor, Stachel outlined how brands are actually coping with this new reality. In the short term, some are fast-tracking inventory from China before new tariffs hit, relying on expedited ocean freight and cross-docking at West Coast ports to minimize delays and avoid customs bottlenecks. Others are making subtler moves — like holding prices steady on high-visibility products – say, a gaming console – while raising prices on accessories and add-ons to recoup margin. Stachel noted that many brands have moved beyond the now-familiar 'China Plus One' strategy, opting instead for a 'China Plus Three' approach. They are spreading risk across Vietnam, India and Mexico, often working with global manufacturing giants like Foxconn that can seamlessly shift production across borders without retooling or retraining labor. In essence, brands are outsourcing flexibility itself. For those planning beyond the current election cycle, geographic diversification is no longer enough. Brands are factoring in port access, transportation infrastructure, exposure to natural disasters and local workforce stability. Some are eyeing countries like Morocco, Colombia and Thailand as next-generation sourcing hubs. Nearshoring to Mexico has particular appeal, not just because of its proximity to U.S. consumers, but because of the downstream economic benefits. 'We're still benefiting from a cross border perspective, from a transportation trucking perspective, from a warehousing perspective, as these border towns are growing, the economies in the small border towns are growing as well,' said Stachel. These sourcing shifts are backed by hard data prepared by Stachel. According to a comparative analysis of emerging manufacturing markets, countries like Vietnam, Indonesia and the Philippines are increasingly viable alternatives to China, not only in terms of labor costs but also port infrastructure and U.S.-bound vessel frequency. Vietnam, for instance, operates nearly 50 seaports, including Ho Chi Minh City and Hai Phong, both of which have multiple sailings to the U.S. each week. Indonesia boasts over 100 ports, including Tanjung Priok in Jakarta. Even Cambodia, though limited in scale, has weekly direct sailings from both Phnom Penh and Sihanoukville. These figures underscore the importance of transportation fluidity and market access in sourcing decisions. As Stachel emphasized, brands are no longer optimizing solely for cost, they're optimizing for resilience. Both Smith and Manning cautioned that the real reckoning may be ahead. While tariff impacts are already being priced in at the retail level, the broader inflationary wave has yet to crest. Smith called inflation the 'other shoe,' likely to drop later this summer as new tariffs pass through the supply chain and collide with already fragile consumer sentiment. Uncertainty, they agreed, has become the greatest tax of all. With businesses unable to predict future policy, many are frozen. Manning advised attendees to monitor key macroeconomic signals, including treasury bond activity, consumer confidence indices and safety stock drawdowns. Executive orders posted on he added, are the best early indicators of a sudden policy shift. What retailers are saying – and doing The audience at CartCon also offered candid perspectives. Through real-time polling, attendees offered a rare window into how brands are navigating the chaos. Asked what recent policy had most affected their supply chains, 68% cited China tariffs, with an additional 24% naming de minimis enforcement, or stricter checks on duty-free, low-value imports. In a sign of just how volatile the environment has become, 64% said they revisit their sourcing strategies quarterly. And nearly half, 47%, have responded by raising prices. Twenty-nine percent have changed sourcing countries, while 18% are simply eating the cost. Looking ahead, most brands aren't betting on reshoring. Asked if they expect to source more from the U.S. in five years, 70% said their sourcing would remain about the same, and 30% expected an increase. No one expected to source less. It was a striking rebuke of the idea that domestic manufacturing is due for a renaissance, at least for the retail segment. Tariffs and uncertainty are already impacting consumer demand. Thirty percent of respondents said they expect a consumer slowdown by Q4 2025, while 45% said they're already feeling one. And yet, the vast majority, 82%, said they are not cutting marketing budgets in response. In today's environment, visibility is survival. In a forward-looking poll, 81% of respondents said online shopping will be the dominant channel in the next decade, compared to just 6% for stores. Even more striking, 75% believe direct-to-consumer models can still succeed, suggesting that agility, not abandonment, is the key to survival. The post CartCon 2025: Tariffs, turbulence and the future of resilient retail appeared first on FreightWaves. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
CNBC
15 minutes ago
- CNBC
Why Elon Musk turned against Trump's $5 trillion mega tax and spending bill
President Donald Trump is pushing to pass a sweeping tax and spending bill by July 4, but the proposal is already sparking fierce internal GOP debate. The bill combines 2017 tax cut extensions with new Trump-era proposals, including deductions on American-made auto loans and changes to child tax credits. But not everyone is on board. Elon Musk has launched a high-profile feud with Trump over the bill, and key Republican senators are warning that the bill could add trillions to the national debt.
Fox News
15 minutes ago
- Fox News
Washington Post editorial admits colleges must take 'strenuous action' to restore free exchange of ideas
Harvard may win its legal battle against the Trump administration, but the fight to restore confidence in higher education as defenders of the "free exchange of ideas" would still be far from over, The Washington Post editorial board wrote on Tuesday. "In the past decade, trust in higher education has dropped precipitously. Ten years ago, a robust majority of Americans told Gallup they had a 'great deal' or 'quite a lot' of confidence in higher education; today, only one-third of Americans say the same," the editorial stated, highlighting similar concerns over an uptick in those who say they have "very little" or "no" confidence in higher education. That percentage rose to 32% from 10% a decade ago. Such discontent with higher education has created opportunities for Republicans to seize on the trend and "attack the foundations of academic independence," the board argued. A cocktail of problems, ranging from free speech concerns to rising costs and lower returns on investment, was said to have fed into the growing distrust. In one corner, conservative faculty members have reported self-censoring due to fear of how others might respond to their opinions. The Post argued this isn't isolated to one group, however, and that left-wing voices are also choosing to stay quiet when controversial topics are discussed. "In an academic community in which 'diversity statements' are required of new hires (and professors can be denied jobs merely for criticizing them), university administrations and disciplines issue official statements embracing social justice causes, journal editors apologize for or withdraw papers that offend the left, and conservative professors are becoming an increasingly endangered species, even moderates or those on the center-left can reasonably wonder what they're allowed to say, and universities can seem drastically out of step with mainstream society," the editorial said. The editorial board went on to say that institutions of higher education lack a solid foundation to demand that the government respect their "academic freedom" unless they demand the same from their own teachers and leaders. "The worst of this political fever might be behind us, but academia will have to take strenuous action to restore its reputation as defenders of the free exchange of ideas…" "Renaming the diversity, equity and inclusion office will not suffice; they need to foster a campus environment in which the frank discussion of ideas is the core value. If they do not, they will find the public yawning as conservative attacks intensify and courts struggle to contain the damage," the Post's editorial board continued.
