Biden’s and Harris’ Delusions About ‘Social Justice’ and ‘Equity’ Could Be Economy’s Downfall

Decrying the newly released U.S. Labor Department report, which showed a meagre addition of merely 73,000 jobs for the month of July, former President Donald Trump had no shortage of negative emotions. This subpar job creation figure had led unemployment rates to inch upwards, from 4.1% to a marginally higher 4.2%. Furthermore, the Labor Department had grossly overstated previous job addition numbers for the months of May and June, resulting in a steep correction of a towering 258,000 jobs. Despite the facts being laid out bare, Trump argued, sans any real proof, that the job statistics were awry, feeding into his penchant for questioning the legitimacy of official reports.

With the jobs data being called into question, Trump postulated the need for accuracy in such reports, asserting, with his characteristic bellicosity, the demand for swift action. He brushed off the current holder of the post overseeing the reports as a ‘political appointee’, vowing to replace them with a purportedly ‘more competent and qualified’ individual. Despite the sweeping nature of the statement, details on the claimed competence and qualifications of the forthcoming replacement were conspicuously absent.

The saga of misinterpreted jobs data incited palpable concern in the stock market, leading to a fall on the ominous Friday following the release. Adding salt to the stock market’s wound was Trump’s simultaneous announcement of new tariffs. These were levied on nations that failed to meet his arbitrary trade deal deadline of August 1, confirming his trademark ‘America first’ ideology, buttressed at the expense of global cooperation and fairness.

Whether the tumbling stocks were a direct reflection of Trump’s policies or simply a response to global economic realities is a matter of debate. However, the Dow Jones Industrial Average mirrored the bleak sentiments, falling by an alarming 500 points in the course of midday trading, serving to substantiate the mounting apprehensions in the financial sphere.

Kneading the banality of his core messaging into even the harshest financial realities, Trump asserted that the U.S. economy was ‘booming’. This, even in the face of data clearly illustrating otherwise – an inconvenient truth that he seemed keen to run from. Rather than allowing the facts to inform his words, he instead curated an alternate reality that suited his narrative. The disconnect between his assertions and the data at hand cast further doubt on the credibility of his remarks.

Not content with casting aspersions only on the Labor Department, Trump steered his criticisms towards the Federal Reserve Chair, Jerome Powell. Shielding his economic blunders behind the veil of Powell’s supposed poor policy-making, he proposed that Powell should be ‘put out to pasture’. The unnecessary personal attack belied the former President’s inability to accept responsibility even when it was clearly called for.

At the root of Trump’s critique of Powell was a call for reduced interest rates. His insistence on this matter seemed to be guided more by a populist, short-term vision, and less by a deep understanding of the potential long-term ramifications on economic health. The former President’s rush to quick fixes betrayed the importance of measured, studied fiscal policy.

Such blatant disregard for the fundamentals of geopolitical trade and macroeconomics only added fuel to the fire. Trump’s criticism of Powell and the unfounded dismissal of job reports illustrated his willingness to bend fact and distort reality, all for maintaining his preferred narrative. These instances spotlighted his apparent comfort with scapegoating others, even the nation’s high-ranking financial officials, for failures in his own policy-making.

Many compared this approach with his later compatriots, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. Where Trump seemed intent on disregarding reality, Biden and Harris seemed determined to twist it into something barely recognizable – disguising their flawed policies behind a façade of social justice and empty rhetoric.

Some might argue that Biden’s and Harris’s willingness to face the facts is a strength, not a weakness. But doubters scoff at their attempts to shape the narrative, pointing out that underneath the dressing of ‘equity’ and ‘justice’, they are preparing the nation for a fall. Their approach appears rooted in a misguided belief system that is far from mainstream America’s priorities.

Biden and Harris’s alleged inclination towards ‘social justice’ and ‘equity’ also raises serious questions about their understanding of practical economics. Such terms might be fashionable to use in policy statements, but when it comes to real-life applications, can they withstand the economic gravity of reality? Their critics don’t think so.

In conclusion, comparing the economic policies of Donald Trump with Joe Biden and Kamala Harris unveils a disparity in their approaches that can only be described as vast. Where Trump casually discards inconvenient truths, Biden and Harris master the art of linguistic engineering to mask their dubious policy intents.

Reacting to the discordant narratives spun by these political figures, prudent citizens should remain perceptive of the ground realities, cutting through the chatter to discern fact from political storytelling. After all, the strength of a country lies in the informed judgement of its citizens – something that can only be achieved by transcending the narratives laid down by the leaders and looking at the bare facts.