Opinion - Economic populism from both parties fails working Americans
They could use a new deal. According to the Federal Reserve, real median earnings for non-college workers fell 14 percent over the past 40 years, while those for workers with a bachelor's degree or higher have grown by 14 percent.
Opportunity in America looks very different to people on opposite sides of the diploma divide. Whereas non-college workers contend with downward mobility, the highly educated rise into tonier precincts of upper-middle-class affluence.
This disparity disfigures our society, and populists across the political spectrum are right to want to redress it. Unfortunately, they have proved better at posturing as working-class tribunes than at tangibly improving their lives.
President Biden presided over a nearly $5 trillion public spending binge aimed at rebuilding a pandemic-stricken U.S. economy 'from the bottom up and middle out.' But Bidenomics ultimately struck out with working families, who identified it with rising living costs and eroding purchasing power.
Although he owes his reelection mainly to inflation, it didn't take Trump long to break his promise to focus on batting it down. Instead, he's launched a global trade war that's driving prices back up for consumers and businesses, choking economic growth and provoking retaliatory tariffs on U.S. exports.
An angry Trump lashed out at Walmart last week for announcing price increases, instructing the retail giant to 'eat the tariffs.' That's not an option for thousands of smaller businesses operating on slim profit margins.
After four years of steady growth, the U.S. economy has shrunk 0.3 percent since Trump's return to the White House. Like Bidenomics before it, MAGA populism is failing working Americans. Both are based on dubious premises about what's gone wrong and how to fix it.
Populists blame trade agreements and globalization for decimating factory jobs. This ignores structural changes that have affected all advanced economies — rising education levels, more women working, growing demand for services, the digital revolution. It also vastly overstates the power of policy to either cause or reverse deindustrialization.
Trump is taxing most imports to shield U.S. companies from foreign competition and induce them to bring manufacturing jobs home. Yet America already has nearly half a million unfilled factory jobs.
The share of U.S. workers in manufacturing has been falling steadily since 1950, to just eight percent today. Is it worth risking a new bout of inflation and possibly a recession to bump that number up a few points?
Americans aren't buying Trump's prescription for a 'new golden age' built upon protectionism and autarchy. The Chicago Council on Global Affairs reports that 84 percent of Americans say trade is good for their standard of living and good for the U.S. economy (79 percent). Strikingly, 55 percent — including nearly half of Republicans — want Washington to pursue a global free trade policy, up from 34 percent in 2024.
No wonder Trump is crawfishing away from his 'beautiful' tariffs and trying to cut new trade deals with Great Britain and China. Yet even as his right-wing economic populism implodes, progressives continue to clamor for a left-wing version.
They see it as the antidote to 'neoliberalism,' which they define as a fixation with free markets, free trade, global economic integration and fiscal austerity that supposedly gripped both parties over the last four decades.
The populist left demands a 'post-neoliberal' agenda — conveniently forgetting that in Bidenomics, it already got one. In his first major decision, Biden sided with progressive economists pushing for a massive $1.9 trillion stimulus bill. They dismissed warnings that a big dose of deficit spending would ignite inflation.
Biden also put trade policy in the deep freeze, left some Trump tariffs in place and embraced industrial policies to 'reshore' factories and supply chains, nurture domestic chip manufacturing and invest billions in electric cars and clean energy production.
The White House hired a left-wing academic to launch an unsuccessful bid to break up America's most successful tech companies. And Biden made good on his promise to be the most pro-union president ever, intervening on labor's behalf in organizing drives and even walking a picket line with striking workers.
While Biden can take credit for new investments in chip fabs and clean energy production, much of his spending on education and infrastructure, including on rural broadband, has yet to yield positive results.
From January 2023 to January 2025, manufacturing jobs dropped. And while union membership under Biden saw a modest uptick (240,000 workers), the share of unionized workers fell below 10 percent as the workforce grew.
Bidenomics won raves from progressives but Bronx cheers from working-class voters. They linked heavy government spending to high prices and resented what they saw as Democrats' inattention to their economic struggles.
As The Atlantic's Jonathan Chait concluded in a Bidenomics post-mortem, 'The notion that there is a populist economic formula to reversing the rightward drift of the working class has been tried, and, as clearly as these things can be proved by real-world experimentation, it has failed.'
Non-college Americans aren't asking for statist 'solutions' — protectionism, unrestrained deficit spending and industrial policies larded with superfluous social policy mandates — that flout basic economics and common sense.
Populism, as practiced by Biden and Trump, has foundered on the patronizing premise that working families want yesterday's factory jobs back. But they know the economy has changed and want to be part of where it's going, not where it has been.
Will Marshall is president and founder of the Progressive Policy Institute.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Newsweek
a minute ago
- Newsweek
Vladimir Putin 'Got Everything He Wanted' at Trump Alaska Summit—Senator
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Senator Chris Murphy, a Connecticut Democrat, did not hold back on his assessment of the Trump-Putin summit that took place last week, saying in a Sunday appearance on NBC News' Meet the Press that the meeting was a "disaster" that gave Russian President Vladimir Putin "everything he wanted." Newsweek reached out to the White House by email outside of normal business hours on Sunday morning for comment. Why It Matters President Donald Trump hosted Putin in Alaska for a summit during which they spoke for two-and-a-half hours and addressed various aspects of a potential ceasefire deal that would end Russia's assault on Ukraine, which started with its invasion of the Eastern European country in February 2022. The two leaders took no questions immediately after their talk, and Trump walked away from the high-stakes summit without a deal, leading many to criticize the entire meeting, which included a lavish red-carpet ceremony, a gift to Putin, a shared ride between the two leaders in Trump's armored limousine, and a military flyover. What To Know Prior to the talks, Trump told Fox News that he would consider the meeting a failure if he did not secure a deal, and Putin walked away from the meeting saying he found it "constructive and useful," emphasizing a desire for a long-term resolution that must not be obstructed by Europe. Murphy gave a harsh assessment of the meeting, telling NBC News' Kristen Welker that he saw the meeting as a "disaster" and "an embarrassment for the United States." "It was a failure. Putin got everything he wanted," Murphy said, adding that Putin "wanted that photo op" and "to be absolved of his war crimes in front of the world." "He was invited to the United States: War criminals are not normally invited to the United States of America," Murphy said. "He is intentionally murdering civilians, he's kidnapping children, and now he got to stand next to the president of the United States, legitimized in the view of the world." However, the senator focused most on the outcome of the meeting, saying Putin "didn't have to give up anything" and that "it appears the ceasefire wasn't even seriously discussed." "Trump said, 'If I don't get a ceasefire, Putin is going to pay a price,' and then he walked out of that meeting saying, 'I didn't get a ceasefire, I didn't get a peace deal, and I'm not even considering sanctions,'" Murphy said. "You heard Secretary [of State Marco] Rubio downplay sanctions. And so, Putin walks away with his photo op with zero commitments made and zero consequences. What a great day for Russia." Further talks are planned, with Putin inviting Trump to Moscow. President Donald Trump greets Russian President Vladimir Putin as he arrives at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson on August 15 in Anchorage, Alaska. Inset: Senator Chris Murphy, a Connecticut Democrat, is seen on February 8, 2024, in... President Donald Trump greets Russian President Vladimir Putin as he arrives at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson on August 15 in Anchorage, Alaska. Inset: Senator Chris Murphy, a Connecticut Democrat, is seen on February 8, 2024, in Washington, D.C. More//What People Are Saying President Donald Trump wrote on Truth Social on Sunday: "It's incredible how the Fake News violently distorts the TRUTH when it comes to me. There is NOTHING I can say or do that would lead them to write or report honestly about me. I had a great meeting in Alaska on Biden's stupid War, a war that should have never happened!!!" Senator Adam Schiff, a California Democrat, wrote on X on Saturday: "Trump marvels at Putin's statement that the 2020 election was rigged, and that Trump really won. Can Trump really be so gullible as to think Putin is doing anything more than telling him what he wants to hear? Yes he can. And yes he is." What Happens Next? Trump has discussed plans to secure a trilateral meeting between Putin and Zelensky, which he is likely to discuss with the Ukrainian leader when he visits the White House on Monday along with some European leaders.

Politico
a minute ago
- Politico
States are trying to keep disasters apolitical in the new Trump era
'This decision was petty. This decision was partisan, and this decision was punishing.' Moore said. And after the Los Angeles wildfires in January, California Gov. Gavin Newsom was quick to propose that politics could play a role in Trump's approval or denial of funding for his state. 'He's done it in the past, not just here in California,' Newsom said on Pod Save America. 'The rhetoric is very familiar, it's increasingly acute, and obviously we all have reason to be concerned about it.' A review by Seattle-based public radio station KUOW in June found that FEMA denied six of the 10 major disaster requests that Democratic states filed between February and June, while denying just one of 15 requests from Republican states. Asked about the analysis, a White House official said that 'Democrat state requests were denied in the first six months because they were not disasters. In the past, states have abused the process. President Trump is right-sizing FEMA and ensuring it is serving its intended purpose to help the American people.' Democratic Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs became the rare governor to criticize the federal government's disaster management in mid-July when she called for an investigation following a destructive fire on federal land that burned down a beloved Grand Canyon lodge. Hobbs said that she does not intend her call for an investigation to be viewed as a criticism of the Trump administration. 'I don't, and I think it's really important,' Hobbs said in an interview, adding that good working relationships between officials managing tribal, federal and state land are key. 'This is not intended to undermine that collaboration, but … we need to look at what led to that decision being made.' Steve Ellis, former deputy director of the Bureau of Land Management who worked for the agency and the U.S. Forest Service under multiple administrations, said that any federal agency involved in managing a fire of the magnitude and destructiveness as the one in the Grand Canyon should be launching an investigation without a governor's need to call for it.


Bloomberg
a minute ago
- Bloomberg
Trade Partners Grow Restless Waiting for Trump's Tariff Breaks
UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer declared at a Jaguar Land Rover factory in May that his world-leading trade deal with President Donald Trump included a cut in US tariffs on British steel to zero. More than three months later, steel lobbyist Peter Brennan was still waiting for that relief to become reality.