From Economy to Immigration: Will Trump's New Policies Trigger a Financial Crisis?

The curtain is about to fall on the 2024 presidential election, with Trump becoming the first Republican presidential candidate in the past 20 years to win the popular vote, and also the first president to be elected despite a criminal conviction. The Republican Party has secured the Senate and, barring any surprises, is also expected to take the House of Representatives, along with a right-leaning Supreme Court. With control over all three branches, Trump, who will enter the White House next January, will be able to push legislation, confirm judicial appointments, and set a broader agenda with less opposition.

Who is saying that America is further torn apart because of Trump, when in fact it seems that America stands united behind him, coming together as one? What causes the American public to overlook his 34 felony charges, one conviction, and two pending cases that could send him back to the White House? An interview with a young college student may provide some insights. This student said that during Trump's presidency, his family had saved enough money to buy a house, but in the years following his departure, inflation made everything too expensive, and their savings were depleted, forcing them to rent again, with rent becoming unaffordable. He mentioned that although he is a Christian and disagrees with Trump's divorces and numerous children, he must vote for Trump simply based on economic issues.

In the comments of this video, one person stated that their entire savings amount to only $300, and they cannot afford the current high prices. Another person mentioned that most of their income comes from tips and hopes to have this portion of income tax-exempt so they can afford to travel and see other cities.

The Federal Reserve's "2023 Report on the Economic Well-Being of U.S. Households" conducted an in-depth study of the financial situation of American households and their adults based on the 11th Annual Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (SHED). Among all surveyed American adults, 18% reported that they could only cover their largest emergency expense with savings of less than $100. Even more alarming, only 14% said they could handle expenses between $100 and $499, and only 10% said they could manage expenses between $500 and $999.

Only 63% of American adults can fully pay for a $400 emergency expense using "cash or equivalents" (referring to cash, savings, or credit cards paid off by the next billing date). Among the remaining 37% of adults, 13% reported that they could not pay this expense in any way. This data has not changed compared to 2022, but has increased by 11% compared to 2021.

The interview with this young person and other comments make this research more vivid and concrete. As the wealthiest country in the world, Americans are genuinely struggling over $100 In contrast to the soaring U.S. stock market, capitalists with substantial capital, or high-income workers who can afford to invest monthly, have seen their assets multiply several times over the past few years. A few individuals who can live off dividends have the leisure to read, care about politics, and pay attention to events happening in every corner of the world, having time to research companies to make better investment decisions to earn more money.

However, this is not the life of the silent majority. Imagine an ordinary adult working 8-12 hours a day, who spends their spare time comparing where to buy groceries more cheaply to save money. How could they have the leisure to care about what a politician said or about climate change? Trump can mock anyone at will, but this does not shake the fact that up to 70% of the public believes he would perform better economically.

Mass Deportation and Tariffs

During Trump's first term, within months of taking office, he signed the "Muslim Ban," which resulted in green card holders from those countries being denied entry. This farce ended with a ruling from a local court. However, this time, a more prepared Trump has a mass deportation plan that will not just be a farce.

Trump's long-time advisor and immigration hawk, Stephen Miller, has publicly stated that invoking the Enemy Alien Act to replace current immigration laws would allow Trump's future administration to "suspend the due process typically applicable to deportation proceedings." The Enemy Alien Act, formally known as the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, grants the U.S. president the power to arrest, detain, or deport any citizen of a hostile nation during wartime.

Using this law, enacted 226 years ago to deal with nationals of hostile countries during wartime, to manage U.S. immigration in 2024 is certainly not alarmist. When the four conservative justices of the Supreme Court faced questions from Congress during their nominations, they all affirmed the legalization of abortion established in the "Roe v. Wade" case half a century ago, stating that it was American law and they would respect precedent. However, when the precedent was overturned in the 2022 case of "Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization," Justice Alito cited the views of Sir Edward Coke, a British jurist born in 1609, as part of the legal basis for overturning Roe v. Wade.

Trump's mass deportation primarily targets illegal immigrants, but according to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), anyone earning income in the U.S., regardless of immigration status, is required to pay taxes. Despite their illegal status, many undocumented immigrants still pay taxes through Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers, payroll taxes, and sales taxes. A 2017 study estimated that illegal immigrants contribute approximately $11.6 billion in state and local taxes annually.

The American Immigration Council (AIC) recently estimated that mass deportation would result in the loss of 1.5 million workers in the construction industry, 220,000 workers in agriculture, and about 1 million undocumented workers in the hospitality industry. The AIC also estimated the impact on the U.S. Gross Domestic Product (the value of goods and services produced and sold annually) and predicted that "mass deportation would lead to a loss of 4.2% to 6.8% of U.S. GDP, equivalent to $1.1 trillion to $1.7 trillion in 2022 dollars." "In comparison, the committee pointed out that during the economic recession from 2007 to 2009, the United States lost 4.3% of its GDP.

In summary, immigration is important, whether legal or illegal. Without immigrants, the U.S. would face an economic disaster. Taxpayers would have to bear the costs of deportation. According to analysis data, among the estimated 11 to 12 million undocumented immigrants in the U.S., arresting and deporting just 1 million could cost taxpayers about $20 billion, or $19,599 per person, and the time required would far exceed Trump's four-year term.

Between 2017 and 2018, Trump implemented a series of tariff policies. His tariff policies primarily targeted countries and regions such as China, the European Union, Canada, and Mexico. In 2018, he imposed large-scale tariffs on China, which were implemented in multiple phases, ultimately imposing tariffs of 10% to 25% on approximately $370 billion worth of Chinese imports. The goods involved included electronics, industrial parts, textiles, consumer goods, and more. Economic research on the impact of the new tariffs implemented during this period indicated that the majority of the economic burden was ultimately borne by American consumers.

This time, Trump plans to impose additional tariffs of 60% to 100% on goods imported from China and 10% to 20% on all imported goods. Trump emphatically stated, "The higher the tariffs, the more likely companies are to build factories in the U.S., thus avoiding tariffs." He views this tariff policy as a long-term strategy aimed at revitalizing domestic industries such as manufacturing, creating more domestic job opportunities, and generating revenue from other countries to fund his other proposals.

Democrats insist that this policy will cost middle-class families $4,000 annually. This figure aligns with estimates from both the left-leaning Center for American Progress and the right-leaning American Action Forum.

The Peterson Institute for International Economics has set the annual cost per household at $2,600. The Tax Foundation states that by 2025, a 10% universal tariff will increase the average tax burden on American households by $1,253, while a 20% universal tariff will increase costs by $2,045.

Financial experts say that more aggressive tariff policies can also be seen as an economic confrontation. Sam Millette, Director of Fixed Income at the Federal Financial Network, stated, "Typically, when a country imposes a series of new tariffs, the affected other countries tend to respond. This can lead to a trade war. In fact, this situation often results in both affected countries experiencing government intervention, which usually leads to higher prices for consumers in both countries."

The High and Cold S&P 500 Index

The S&P 500 Index has set a historical high for the 48th time in 2024, with its price-to-earnings ratio currently close to 31 times, just slightly below the 30.5 times seen before the burst of the internet bubble in December 1999.

As mentioned above, while ordinary people struggle to come up with $100, the stock market continues to hit new highs, cryptocurrencies also reach new highs, and massive fiscal support drives budget deficits. Lowering interest rates will lead to a larger bubble, and the vicious cycle will require more rate cuts to maintain the bubble When we compare the percentage of the market capitalization of the most valuable companies during the internet bubble period to the current situation, we find that the U.S. stock market is extraordinarily expensive today. During the internet bubble, Microsoft's market capitalization as a percentage of GDP peaked in 1999, reaching 5.9% of U.S. GDP, while today the percentage is nearly double that, at 11.5%.

At that time, the market capitalization of the "Seven Giants" accounted for 31% of U.S. GDP, whereas today's market leaders account for 60% of U.S. GDP. Currently, there are three companies with a market capitalization exceeding 10% of GDP: Apple (12.7%), Nvidia (12.5%), and Microsoft (11.5%). During the internet bubble, there wasn't even one.

Buying into the index at this level is madness. If the bubble bursts, it will create a massive negative wealth effect, pushing the U.S. into a deep recession, which could become very dangerous. Therefore, the Federal Reserve will do everything possible to prevent the bubble from bursting. But one day, the bubble will become too large to sustain.

"Warren Buffett," the "Oracle of Omaha," has been hoarding cash since the fourth quarter of 2022, especially since the second quarter of this year, when his cash reserves surged from over $170 billion to over $320 billion. Buffett typically supports Democratic candidates in the U.S. His political inclinations and philosophies generally align with the Democratic Party's positions on tax policy, social equity, and economic equality. However, this year he publicly stated that he would not support any presidential candidates. The reason given was his concern about impersonation on social media, a flimsy excuse that clearly serves as a cover; perhaps he has already seen through everything and does not want to stand on the wrong side of history.

Since the 1970s, the U.S. has experienced multiple cycles of interest rate hikes and cuts, each having a profound impact on the global economy and triggering a world-class financial crisis.

From October 1979 (beginning of rate hikes) to June 1981 (beginning of rate cuts), in response to high inflation, the Federal Reserve began raising interest rates in October 1979, increasing the federal funds rate from about 10% to 20% by June 1981. Subsequently, the Federal Reserve began to cut rates, and by the end of 1982, the rate had dropped to about 6.5%. The high-interest-rate environment led to an increased debt burden for Latin American countries, particularly Argentina, ultimately triggering the Latin American debt crisis of 1982.

From March 1988 to June 1989: The Federal Reserve began raising rates in March 1988, increasing the rate from 6.5% to 9.75% by June 1989. The rate gradually decreased to 3% by 1992. The high-interest-rate environment led to the bursting of the Japanese asset price bubble, resulting in the economic stagnation of the early 1990s, known as the "Lost Decade." February 1994 - July 1995: The Federal Reserve began raising interest rates in February 1994, increasing the rate from 3% to 6% by July 1995. Subsequently, the rate fell to 4.75% in 1998. The rate hikes led to capital outflows from emerging markets, ultimately triggering the Asian financial crisis in 1997, which severely impacted the economies of Southeast Asian countries.

June 1999 - January 2001: The Federal Reserve started raising interest rates in June 1999, increasing the rate from 4.75% to 6.5% in 2000. The rate then fell to 1% in 2003. The rate hikes caused the bursting of the internet bubble, leading to the tech stock crash in 2000, which affected global stock markets.

June 2004 - September 2007: The Federal Reserve began raising interest rates in June 2004, increasing the rate from 1% to 5.25% in 2006. The rate then fell to 0.25% in 2008. The rate hikes led to the collapse of the subprime mortgage market, triggering the global financial crisis in 2008.

The current cycle began with interest rate hikes in March 2022, with rate cuts starting in September 2024. Will this time be any different? After Trump took office and began to seriously implement his campaign promises, will it trigger a financial crisis in the U.S., bursting the U.S. stock market bubble and causing negative impacts worldwide? We should be prepared