The Real Reason Trump Is a Threat to the Economy

14th September 2025

If you want to look at the reason some aspects of the American economy may be going into meltdown then an article in the Bulwark may give you some idea.

The Real Reason Trump Is a Threat to the Economy” by Jonathan Cohn (The Bulwark, 14 September 2025).

“Vibes-based” Decision-Making
Trump isn’t just implementing controversial policies; Cohn argues the manner in which he does so — chaotic, unpredictable, guided by political symbolism (“vibes”) rather than a coherent economic strategy — is a major risk.
thebulwark.com

Case Study: Revolution Wind
The Revolution Wind project in Rhode Island (offshore wind turbines) is ~80% done and would power ~350,000 homes. The Trump administration paused the project, saying it needs another national security review. However, no clear security issues have been identified. Critics take this as an example of how symbolic opposition to renewables, rather than economics or evidence, shapes policy.
thebulwark.com

Effects on Workers & Costs
Halting projects like this puts workers at risk of losing their jobs, wastes investments in training, and means consumers lose out via higher energy bills. Renewables are among the cheaper ways to expand energy supply, so stopping them also hurts broader cost-and-supply pressures.
thebulwark.com

Signs of Economic Weakness & Risk

Inflation is up.

Employment indicators are falling.

Consumer confidence is weak.
thebulwark.com

Economists quoted in the piece (e.g. Justin Wolfers, Jason Furman) warn that this mixture—uncertain policy, trade tensions, halting investment—makes the economy vulnerable to a shock. It might tip into recession.
thebulwark.com

Cutting Investment in Future-Facing Sectors
Trump is allegedly pulling back support for clean energy, STEM and biomedical research, and foreign investment. These are areas many economists see as vital for long-term growth.
thebulwark.com

Bottom-Line

Cohn’s argument is that Trump’s economic risk isn’t just what he says he wants (tariffs, protectionism, rolling back renewable energy). It’s how those policies are being executed — inconsistently, with symbolic gestures, with unpredictability — which creates uncertainty, discourages business investment, hurts jobs, and threatens both short-term stability and long-term growth.

Read he full article HERE

Depending on how you view the article some thoughts about counter-arguments many give some perspective.

Counterarguments

Policy Uncertainty vs Reasonable Expectations

Some argue that while Trump’s rhetoric is chaotic, many concrete policy changes (tariffs, regulations, deregulation) are within what some business leaders and voters expect. So the “vibes” risk may be overstated.

If markets and companies build in the risk of sudden policy shifts, then incremental unpredictability might matter less.

Bipartisan / Historical Precedents of Uncertainty

Others point out that political / regulatory uncertainty is not unique to Trump — major shifts under prior administrations (Democratic or Republican) have also led to sudden regulatory reversals or trade policy changes.

Thus, some of the expected harmful economic effects may already be priced in, or mitigated via diversification and caution.

Strong Short-term Economic Metrics

One counter is that some economic indicators (employment, consumer spending, etc.) have remained relatively strong, which could suggest that the economy has resilience, and some of the worst-case risks are less likely in the near term.

For many voters and businesses, current income or job security may be more salient than long-term risks.

Tariffs / Protectionism with Local Benefits

Protectionist and trade-restrictive measures may help certain domestic industries / workers who have suffered under globalization. A critique is that the article underplays potential localized benefits (job preservation, industrial revival).

Some argue that even symbolic or “vibes-based” tariff threats can be used as negotiation tools, not necessarily always playing out in full negative economic impact.

Cost of Inaction / Alternative Risks

An argument is that delays or uncertainty associated with climate / renewables investment are themselves costly, but so is hasty regulation or forced transitions. Some critics might say that opposing postponement of certain projects ignores valid concerns about regulatory oversight or environmental & community impacts.

Also, the risk from over-regulation, or from international dependency on foreign supply chains, is a counterpoint.

Confidence and Governance Risks

Another perspective (echoed in some policy think-tanks) says the greater economic threat is not just individual policies but the erosion of trust in institutions, which undermines governance and long-term investment. This is less about any one project and more systemic. (For instance, Chatham House has written about loss of confidence in governance as a major risk.

Critics might say Cohn should engage more fully with how institutional checks (courts, Congress, states, markets) can blunt some of the risks he identifies.

Empirical Uncertainty — Hard to Predict Impacts

It’s often difficult to quantify how much damage unpredictable or “chaotic” policy actually causes vs what is due to other macro-forces (global inflation, supply chain issues, interest rate policies, international conflicts). Critics might argue that Cohn conflates correlation (policies + possible harm) with causation.

Also, some effects are delayed; short-term economic stability may persist even amid policy turbulence.

Time tell but perhaps not until after another presidential election.