Sunday, July 22 , 2018, 11:55 pm | Fair 70º

 
 
 
 

Joe Conason: Why Trump Won’t Bring Jobs

Within a day after Donald Trump's triumphal visit to Indiana, where he claimed credit for "saving" 800 jobs at a Carrier factory, the Department of Labor released its first monthly unemployment report since his election victory — and one of the last that will come out during the presidency of Barack Obama. 

Together those events illustrated the contrast between a real strategy for economic growth and the dubious gambit of a Twitter addict.

During his presidential campaign, Trump repeatedly warned that if he became president, companies moving U.S. manufacturing plants abroad would suffer punitive tariffs of 35 or even 45 percent when they tried to sell their overseas products here.

More than once he specifically mentioned Carrier Corp., which builds cooling and heating units.

After post-election conversations with company officials that included his running mate, Indiana governor Mike Pence, Trump declared that he had fulfilled his promise by "saving" those Carrier jobs.

Yet rather than punish Carrier for taking most of its Indiana jobs to Mexico, Trump and Pence actually rewarded the company with $7 million in state tax booty — plus any additional promises concerning the billions in Pentagon contracts held by Carrier's parent company, United Technologies.

Spending Indiana taxpayers' money, Trump did precisely the opposite of what he had promised.

The next day came the latest proof of the steady success of Obama and his economic team, with yet another monthly tick upward in job growth and another tick downward in unemployment — now at 4.6 percent, its lowest point in almost a decade.

Even with all the caveats about slow wage growth, reduced workforce participation, and continued manufacturing losses, the revival of the American economy under Obama is the envy of the world. 

Among the achievements that led to America's low unemployment rates was the preservation of well over a million auto industry jobs, in the same battleground states where Trump carved his excruciatingly narrow win.

When Obama decided to bail out auto, he faced enraged opposition from Republicans claiming to defend "free market" principles. (The auto industry repaid its federal loan, with interest.)

Yet Republicans now praise Trump for wielding government power to cajole a private company so he could "save" well under a thousand jobs.

Over the past year, Trump has uttered lots of bigger promises that will be much harder to fake than the Carrier deal. He vowed to create 25 million jobs, for instance, and rebuild the nation's infrastructure — without increasing the deficit.

But to accomplish even half of what he has pledged, Trump will have to overcome more than a century of American economic history.

During the years since 1900, unemployment has consistently increased under Republican presidents, while employment has increased under Democratic presidents, as NYU professor James Gilligan proved years ago using data from the National Bureau of Economic Research (run by Reagan economist Martin Feldstein) and the Bureau of Labor Statistics. 

The partisan contrast is stark enough for any voter to understand: Whenever a Republican president left the White House, unemployment was higher than when his term began, while the opposite was true whenever a Democratic president completed his term. 

So when George W. Bush took over from Bill Clinton, the unemployment rate was at 4.2 percent (defined by economists as close to full employment); when Obama took over, the unemployment rate was 7.8 percent and rapidly rising. And now Trump will inherit a jobless rate of 4.6 percent, perhaps even lower.

Can Trump break the patterns of a century?

Despite his populist rhetoric, what he proposes is scarcely different from his Republican predecessors: He intends to deliver gigantic tax cuts to the wealthiest households in the country.

Even his infrastructure plan is another enrichment scheme for the super-rich, designed to attract investors by granting them an 82-percent tax credit.

But only projects that can deliver a return by charging tolls or fees will draw such investments, while trillions of dollars in desperately needed projects will languish without public funding.

While Donald Trump's proposed corporate tax cut may well bring home money for business investment, the history of tax cuts as economic panacea is disappointing at best.

Every signal suggests that he will pursue the same plutocratic approach favored by all presidents of his party. The "success" of the Carrier deal will be long forgotten if and when he delivers the same bitter results.

Joe Conason is editor in chief of NationalMemo.com. Click here to contact him, follow him on Twitter: @JoeConason, or click here to read previous columns. The opinions expressed are his own.

Support Noozhawk Today

You are an important ally in our mission to deliver clear, objective, high-quality professional news reporting for Santa Barbara, Goleta and the rest of Santa Barbara County. Join the Hawks Club today to help keep Noozhawk soaring.

We offer four membership levels: $5 a month, $10 a month, $25 a month or $1 a week. Payments can be made through Stripe below, or click here for information on recurring credit-card payments and a mailing address for checks.

Thank you for your vital support.

Become a Noozhawk Supporter

First name
Last name
Enter your email
Select your membership level
×

Payment Information

You are purchasing:

Payment Method

Pay by Credit Card:

Mastercard, Visa, American Express, Discover
One click only, please!

Pay with Apple Pay or Google Pay:

Noozhawk partners with Stripe to provide secure invoicing and payments processing.

  • Ask
  • Vote
  • Investigate
  • Answer

Noozhawk Asks: What’s Your Question?

Welcome to Noozhawk Asks, a new feature in which you ask the questions, you help decide what Noozhawk investigates, and you work with us to find the answers.

Here’s how it works: You share your questions with us in the nearby box. In some cases, we may work with you to find the answers. In others, we may ask you to vote on your top choices to help us narrow the scope. And we’ll be regularly asking you for your feedback on a specific issue or topic.

We also expect to work together with the reader who asked the winning questions to find the answer together. Noozhawk’s objective is to come at questions from a place of curiosity and openness, and we believe a transparent collaboration is the key to achieve it.

The results of our investigation will be published here in this Noozhawk Asks section. Once or twice a month, we plan to do a review of what was asked and answered.

Thanks for asking!

Click Here to Get Started >

Reader Comments

Noozhawk is no longer accepting reader comments on our articles. Click here for the announcement. Readers are instead invited to submit letters to the editor by emailing them to [email protected]. Please provide your full name and community, as well as contact information for verification purposes only.

Daily Noozhawk

Subscribe to Noozhawk's A.M. Report, our free e-Bulletin sent out every day at 4:15 a.m. with Noozhawk's top stories, hand-picked by the editors.

Sign Up Now >