Sasic – The debate in the United States of America continues on the credibility and accuracy of the data and indicators issued by many government economic institutions and the consequent fundamental decisions such as interest rates and growth rates.
This debate intensifies against the background of the sharp contrast at times between what is issued by those institutions and the political evaluation issued by the administration of President Donald Trump, which raises many questions about the independence of American economic and financial institutions and the implications of this on the economy of America and the world.
The controversy raged about days ago about the “Labor Statistics Office”, against the backdrop of President Trump’s decision on August 1 to dismiss the office of the office, Erika Macinarv, after announcing numbers indicating the decline in job growth expectations in America in July.
The controversy is still intense regarding that decision, given the role of that office, a federal agency affiliated with the Ministry of Labor, whose basic mission is to diagnose the state of the American economy through its reports and periodic data on job growth, consumer price indicators, inflation, import and export.
The discussion focused on Trump’s justifications to justify his decision, as Erika McNerver was accused of manipulating jobs, which was supported by senior economic consultants at the White House when they later came to defend that decision, and they ruled out that it would undermine confidence in the official American economic data.
On the same day (August 1), the White House posted on its website a article in which he stated that the “Work Statistics Office” drags a long history of inaccuracy and incompetence under the leadership of Macoverf, which was appointed by former President Joe Badin, which led to “erosion of public trust” in that government agency.
Counterparts
On the other hand, the New York Times confirmed in a special editorial that Trump’s accusations against Erika Macinverv are in reality, and that the labor market data report is prepared by a non -partisan team based on the statistics of each economic sector separately.
American writer Thomas Friedman, who has tendencies towards the Democratic Party, went away in criticizing this step, and said in an article in New York Times, it is not the first of its kind in Trump’s second state, but rather comes within a series of measures that undermine the independence of the state and turn it into a tool in the hands of the president to polish his image and achieve his political goals.
Former officials at the Trump Statistical Statistics Office also criticized the Congress to investigate the dismissal of Macoverf, and warned of the repercussions of that step and said that it would shake confidence in that office.
The dismissal of Macovarv has sparked more concerns and doubts about the accuracy of the US official economic data, in light of the repercussions of the new American customs duties imposed on dozens of commercial partners, which led to the decline in global stock markets.
The statistics issued by the “office” are usually considered among the most influential indicators in the directions of American economic policies, and they are often cited by the media and are based on companies, academic circles and policy -making circles to make their decisions.
Federal Reserve
Meanwhile, American and international public opinion is following with great interest Trump’s statements about the Federal Reserve (US Central Bank) and its ongoing pressures on its president, Jerome Powell, in the direction of reducing interest and waving prices more than once by compensating him with an official closer to his political and economic orientations.
Attention to the topic began since the beginning of the second term of President Trump last January, given the role of that institution in drawing the landmarks of the country’s financial policy, especially with regard to the interest rates on loans.
During his election campaign, in an effort to return to the White House, President Trump has repeatedly promised to reduce interest rates on loans along the lines of what he did in his first term, but he collided with the management of the council that adheres to its independence and keen to make its decisions based on the facts and data.
Despite Trump’s violent criticism sometimes and waving him with the dismissal weapon, Jerome Powell, whose term ends in May 2026, continues to adhere to the policy of caution, and decided about a week ago to install the interest rate at 5.25% to 5.50%, based on the continued inflation and labor market indicators in an unstable scope and to give the economy an opportunity for more balance, amid global market fluctuations.
Powell pledged that he would continue in that approach, and justified that approach to what he called the blurring caused by the effects of the customs duties that Trump announced for the first time last April and continued to be announced later.
A threat to investor confidence
It appears that the tension and escalation between the federal reserves and Trump will continue in the coming months after hints from the White House not to dismiss Jerome Powell before the end of his custody, although the law theoretically allows the country’s president to isolate him if it is proven against him “a violation of duty, embezzlement or incompetence.”
A report published by Forbes Magazine indicated that the Federal Reserve Law provides for specific reasons to dismiss the president of the federal, such as corruption, neglect or betrayal of trust, but it is not considered the dispute in the critical vision that is adequately formulated.
The magazine warned that Trump’s endeavor to touch the independence of this central financial institution will have a high cost of investor confidence, and would open the door to sharp fluctuations and severe consequences for the country’s monetary policy.
In this regard, the Bloomberg website quoted economic expert Mary Williams from Georgetown University as saying that “public political intervention in the federal work undermines the credibility of American monetary policy against global markets.”
Mary Williams warned that “short -term returns may come at the expense of long -term stability.”
These tensions would cast a shadow in the coming months, before the end of Jerome Powell’s custody of the country’s entire economy and the independence of economic and financial institutions in the country.
Also, these differences exacerbate doubts about the data and indicators issued by those institutions, which are supposed to serve as a mirror that honestly reflects the state of the American economy in order to allow all parties concerned to make proper decisions in investment, export or borrowing.
(Tagstotranslate) Economy (T) the American (T), USA