Don't Underestimate Trump's Plan to Kill Higher Prices: He Knows Exactly What He's Doing

James Carville once famously quipped, "It's the economy, stupid." This phrase still resonates today because, in many ways, it's true. People often vote with their wallets, and while by far it wasn't the sole reason for Donald Trump's historic comeback in 2024, it played a significant role.

As I've mentioned before, we can't simply erase past inflation and suddenly see lower prices at the grocery store or for other items that we buy. Inflation is a past event. It has already happened. The only thing that can truly bring prices down is deflation, and one doesn't need to be a master economist to understand that deflation is worse than inflation.

However, there is one area of our economy that has the potential to reduce costs on goods and services and profoundly impact the overall economy.

The cost of energy.

Energy costs are factored into every aspect of everything we buy because energy is a crucial part of production and transportation.

Factories rely on electricity to run their machines, while trains, ships and trucks all run on diesel. Although the cumulative inflation we have experienced over the past 3 1/2 years was not solely due to energy costs, they still represent a significant portion. By reducing these costs, the savings can be passed on to consumers, potentially lowering prices.

This is a crucial aspect of Donald Trump's plan to alleviate some of the pain we've endured. It addresses at least some of the root issues that were a contributing factor to inflation in the first place. By opening the U.S. to more exploration and drilling, we can better control our energy costs.

The thing is, and it's very important here, that it's never been about price gouging. And of course, I think most Americans outright rejected that ridiculous claim anyway. "Mrs. Harris," the American people said. "If you think that's why prices are higher, you have no real idea how to make them lower." It's one thing Trump does understand and made it a point to make it a strong part of his campaign.

Granted, some may argue that businesses will just pocket the savings and keep prices the same. Those damned greedy corporations, right? But I believe businesses are fully aware that Americans are simply exhausted by higher prices. They've had enough, and consumer pullback from spending has clearly shone to be a real thing that could have a very negative impact on business' bottom lines.

Discretionary spending has slowed significantly. People have been opting for store brands over name brands and cutting back on fast food. Businesses are suffering more than people realize. The reality is, they can't just charge whatever they want and expect to get it. Consumers decide.

Again, this absolutely denies the idea that price gouging is not only a thing, but any real benefit to businesses who would engage in it.

In other words, gouging customers would literally be biting the hands that feeds them, and in the most fundamental of ways, it makes no sense to do it. They aren't dumb. They know their customers and what drives them.

Any good business, if it wants to be successful, knows full well what makes their customers come and what makes them go away. And they know customers are tired. Their wallets are worn out at the seams. Companies will be more than eager to pass along any cost savings to consumers because they desperately want to regain customer confidence and have them waltzing back through their doors.

Trump understands the economy. He knows how money moves and what drives spending. So naturally, it makes sense that he's going to target the very things that make an economy thrive and grow and home in on stimulating the economy in a way that supports more jobs and even better wages. And if wages can grow, we can catch up to past inflation more quickly.

Energy is the first step in the bigger picture plan Trump has—an important one, but just the beginning. What drives an economy? Money. The more people and businesses have, the better the economy performs. Trump understands this. By lowering costs, reducing prices, and cutting taxes, you essentially put more money in everyone's pockets to spend on what matters most.

Commerce.

Even for those who argue that Trump's tariffs could negatively impact efforts to reduce consumer costs, I think they are thinking about this rather narrowly. There's more to consider. His threat of tariffs, combined with his desire to cut the corporate tax rate to 15% could have more benefits than drawbacks. These measures not only encourage businesses to operate within the country, but it also incentivizes other businesses to open new factories or return labor to the U.S.

It's the economy, stupid, is right. James Carville nailed it. But I think the more important thing here is that the person we put in charge understands how to make it go. And I think Trump does. It doesn't mean there isn't still a long road ahead. It doesn't mean it will be easy. The impact won't be felt overnight. But what we do know is that Trump will be leading the charge day and night, putting in place ideas and policies that can have a major positive impact on our wallets and more importantly, giving people back a large portion of the spending power that was stripped away from them during the Biden years.

If people are busy trying to poo-poo what Trump is proposing, I think it's simply because they don't understand what he knows and aren't willing to more deeply explore what it is he's actually up to. The worst thing one can do is underestimate Trump's intelligence. He's way smarter than most would ever dare give him credit for.

It won't be long before that becomes all too evident that he knows exactly what he's doing. Mark my words on that.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on my Facebook page to keep up with the latest writings wherever I may write them.

© 2024 Jim Bauer

Whoopi's Wealth and You: A Tale of Two Worlds

Whoopi Goldberg made what can only be construed as a remarkable comment on The View recently, that she works for a living and empathizes with the financial struggles Americans have faced due to inflation over the past 3 1/2 years under Biden.

While it's true she is a working individual, and her job is indeed a paid position, it's rather misleading to imply that she experiences financial hardship in the same way as the average American.

Understandably, she's facing significant backlash for her comments. This Thanksgiving many will be asking, "Are you serious?" around dinner tables across the country. She's honestly comparing herself to everyday Americans with a median income of $80,020 a year?

Whoopi Goldberg earns an annual salary of $8 million for her appearances on The View alone. On top of that, she likely receives substantial income from her extensive work in TV shows, movies, and comedy albums over the years. Her estimated net worth is approximately $60 million.

She's hardly on her way to rags and a shed in the woods hunting deer for food.

Having a political stance is one thing, and understanding the dynamics and impacts of inflation is another. You don't need to be poor to grasp how inflation affects one's financial quality of life. However, to sit there with a straight face and claim to share the same struggles as your audience is quite insulting.

Her comment serves as yet another reminder of how disconnected celebrities can be from reality. It's important to remember this when they comment on issues that affect the rest of us. They don't live in our world, see things through the same lens, or experience life as we do.

It's not to say they are not people, of course. But someone like Whoopi Goldberg isn't facing the tough choices at the grocery store that many Americans do. She's merely complaining about the increased costs, not making the same sacrifices as a working mom with a family of four to feed on a limited budget.

How can she sit there earning 100 times what her audience does and be taken seriously trying to argue that she's just like you? In the most basic of ways, it simply lacks credibility.

Granted, it's Whoopi Goldberg, who is known for making controversial remarks rather frequently. However, this does not entitle her to a free pass. The significant disparity between the lives of celebrities and average Americans is evident—do they not understand this? Have they become so far removed from their past lives that they have forgotten what it's like for everyone else?

It's perfectly fine to empathize with the financial hardships of others and to voice concerns. However, comparing their own experiences to those of average Americans only highlights that they lack the same perspective to draw upon.

Personally, I think Whoopi Goldberg should apologize to her audience. She once faced financial hardships and was a regular person. It would be more sincere for her to reflect on those experiences and share that story honestly. It would be much more genuine for her to acknowledge that these aren't her struggles today but that she remembers and understands what it's like to make tough decisions at the grocery store. Instead of claiming she's just like us, she should reflect on how fortunate she is to be in a different place.

Interested in reading more opinion and commentary from The Springboard? Check out other published posts at HubPages. You can also follow The Springboard at the Facebook fan page for links to articles and YouTube posts and Reels.

© 2024 Jim Bauer 

Celebrities vs. the Real World: The Illusion

At the end of the day, there is one big detail I think is important to note as we now have confirmation that Trump's run for the White House was successful, and quite so. Celebrity's opinions in elections really don't matter.

Granted, if you were to ask them, I think they'd tell you they disagree, but that's because they are largely out of touch with the rest of the country and do not face the same challenges the rest of us do. They have money. They have notoriety. What they don't have is as much influence as they would like to believe.

Sure, some people will listen to them. People who agree with them, of course. But it's not like any message they may try to push is going to change any minds.

"Well, I mean, it's Robert DeNiro. He must be on to something, right?"

The thing about celebrities, which is rather telling when you think about it, is their reaction when they don't get their way. 

They act like children that are denied their day at the park.

Children want all sorts of things, and a lot of the time they are things that are denied by the adults in the room for good reason. Adults have to be the hitch that keeps the trailer attached to the tow vehicle because the trailer is not equipped to drive itself. But what happens when the child is denied something they want so badly, even if it's not good for them?

They throw tantrums.

Isn't that what celebrities largely do? Jimmy Kimmel is on his monologue brought to tears. Sally Field is caught ripping up a Trump sign. And how many of them took to X and other social media declaring they'd leave the country if Kamala lost?

Isn't that sort of like little Johnny packing up his Radio Flyer and pulling it up the block in defiance? "Take that. I'm running away!"

What are they mad about, really, though? Is it that Kamala Harris lost, and Trump won? I mean, that's part of it. Sure. Is it that they didn't get their way? You bet. But more than that, I think, is that no one cared what they thought. In a moment like this their strong feeling of self-importance is literally crushed.

They are big stars, after all, and they must be important because so many millions of people adore them. Even when a child throws a tantrum, it's not necessarily because they didn't get what they wanted. It's because they were powerless to have things go their way.

That's a frustration that's hard to get over.

But it's the message that the reaction sends that I think is the most important to examine. What they wanted weren't rational things that would be good for them.

The reason their message was denied was because the things they wanted did not make any sense. Their message was as irrational as their response is, of course. The adults in the room stepped in and said no, and this hurts them immensely.

This can be seen in the liberal media as well. Their reactions which can only be defined as tantrums. Because just like the celebrities, they are supposed to be the news, and we're supposed to take them at their word and heed every single one they utter.

How could The People have gotten it so wrong? Why did they not listen to us? It simply can't be.

That's the pill that is hard to swallow for them all right now. The reality that their influence is imaginary. Their importance is something that really only resides in their own tight-knit circles of people there only for the ride and the benefits, that the celebrities believe is real.

They are used to the usual, "Yes sir, and certainly sir." 

And certainly, the Democrats thought this celebrity endorsement, as they usually do, would matter as well. After all, they had Taylor Swift and Beyoncé in their corner, and untold many more people on their side, delivering their message. Certainly, it would matter. Certainly, people would listen.

After all, it's Taylor Swift and she's got hundreds of millions of adoring fans.

One other thing I want to point out when it comes to celebrities—how about the conservative ones. Yes, they exist, and actually the list is longer than many might think. When Robert DeNiro was in the streets shouting down Trump supporters and calling them idiot and morons and despicable people, what were the conservative celebrities doing?

Simply supporting their candidate and explaining the reason. They weren't yelling at people and calling them names. They weren't threatening to run off to Canada if Kamala won. And even when Trump lost in 2020, they weren't throwing tantrums.

The bottom line is that it's great to have opinions and be able to share them. It's part of what makes America great is that we can have differences and voice them. But sometimes how we act when we give them, and how we react when the majority disagrees, is rather telling of the quality behind those opinions, and the reason for delivering them.

These celebrities were not interested in winning an election. They were interested in winning on the idea that their opinions mattered and could impact winning an election. When they lost the election, they didn't just lose the race they were fighting to win. They lost a sense of their importance.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on my Facebook page to keep up with the latest writings wherever I may write them. You can also watch The Springboard on YouTube for more great content and commentary.

© 2024 Jim Bauer

DEI Initiatives are a Fool's Game

Why do we need DEI initiatives anyway? Frankly, the entire idea of it is simply stupid. What the focus should be on for businesses is to simply hire qualified people. Period. End of story. No further discussion needed. If not enough gay or transgendered people get hired, or Mexicans, or blacks or any other group that might be in the DEI pool, it should not be a question of businesses creating opportunities. It should be a question for the people who would be considered to be in the DEI pool to qualify themselves better.

If the question comes up, "Why do you not have any transgendered (name your job title)?" the answer should be simple. "We hire the most qualified individuals to perform jobs based on criteria that is the same for everyone. If we do not have any transgendered people in that job now it is because from the pool of candidates, none were more qualified than who we ultimately hired."

Granted, there will still likely be backlash. "That's just an easy way to get out from under your bigotry," some might accuse them of. But isn't it bigotry to even have DEI in the first place? Think about it. What does it say to someone who gets hired just because they happen to be gay, black, Mexican or transgendered? 

Were it not for our DEI program, you'd never have been able to succeed in getting this job on your own.

So, now it is admirable and respectable to be chosen for a job to serve as a token for the company to wave around rather than because the job was actually earned? How degrading. At least it would be to me. I would think it would be to most people.

Of course, the reality is that DEI initiatives are unpopular, and companies are finally starting to understand this, which is why many have pulled back their initiatives. Companies like Ford and Target and Anheuser-Busch for example. 

For one thing, it serves no purpose for the business to hire unqualified people, and it alienates customers. So, it's really a lose-lose situation. Of course, any company now has to quietly walk back from their initiatives since they are afraid of back lash from the other side, even though the largest customer base will be from conservatives who will applaud pulling away from DEI.

It's another reason why businesses should always avoid treading into political waters. Their purpose is to sell stuff, and in order to be successful at doing that, they need to simply do things that sell products. All the other stuff is not conducive to good business and should be avoided.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on my Facebook page to keep up with the latest writings wherever I may write them.

© 2024 Jim Bauer

The Next Market Run Could Last 20 Years: Here's Why I Think So

No one's talking about it—not that I've seen or heard anyway. But I think the stock market is on the brink of a massive, long term growth spurt. Despite any economic pressures we might face, this could last for at least the next 20 years.

Now, I admit, I have zero data to back this up. It's purely my gut feeling. And yes, I might be a little crazy. But hear me out: Two words.

Baby boomers.

I mean, think about it—if there's one group poised to rake in truckloads of cash, it's the baby boomers. And let me tell you, there are a lot of them out there.

Now, I'm not suggesting that every single baby boomer is going to glide into retirement with a golden parachute. We know the sobering statistics about many entering their golden years financially unprepared. But still, there's plenty to consider that teases the idea of a significant influx of spendable cash hitting the market over the next two decades.

How many billions—maybe even trillions—have been locked up in 401k plans since the 1980s, now coming due for distribution? What about all those pensions and Social Security checks being cashed in? And let's not forget the baby boomers downsizing their homes, unleashing loads of cash tied up in unrealized equity.

The money floodgates are about to open, folks. In fact, they might have already begun to flow. The stock market has been on an incredible tear for a long time, marking one of the longest bull runs in history. The money has to be coming from somewhere, and a good chunk of it might just be coming from baby boomers already.

It's worth keeping in mind as well that these baby boomers are well past their saving years. They've already done that and now they're ready to enjoy the fruits of their labors, which means they will likely be more freewheeling with their spending compared to those still working and saving for their futures.

They know they can't take their loot with them when they leave this Earth, so they're going to want to have a little fun while they can.

Again, let's not ignore the very real fact that many will still struggle through their retirement years. Those darned statistics. So, it won't be all fun and games for everyone. But that doesn't negate the fact that there's a lot of old money set to reenter the markets after being locked up for so long.

The money is coming. It's out there, sitting stagnant, with no choice but to be released.

It's not to suggest we should just throw the baby out with the bathwater and go all in and flood the markets with investable cash. It's simply something to consider about the future prospects and potential for more upside than we might typically see in the markets—the money has to go somewhere, and that means it has to be spent, and that means businesses will benefit from that spending and so will investors.

Maybe. Just maybe. But I have a strong sense it's probably true.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on my Facebook page to keep up with the latest writings wherever I may write them.

© 2024 Jim Bauer