| This is Bloomberg Opinion Today, a scalding vat of Bloomberg Opinion's opinions. Sign up here. This just in: Ukraine says it's ready to accept an immediate 30-day ceasefire. Still waiting on Russia's response, but it sounds … promising? Though, promising doesn't exactly feel like the right word. On TV, President Donald Trump is happy to claim that nobody's been tougher than him on Russia, but Marc Champion says that couldn't be further from the truth: Nobody — including Trump — has been weaker. "The ledger on Trump's toughness toward Russia looks dramatically different since he retook the White House," he says. In the span of less than three months, Trump has turned the public psyche against Ukraine and Europe while capitulating to Russian President Vladimir Putin at every turn. "Putin has made any ceasefire talks conditional on a number of elements, the core of which is no NATO membership, acceptance of his territorial annexations, plus unconstitutional elections aimed at sowing division in Ukraine and removing Zelenskiy from power," writes Marc. "Trump has either granted or pressed for all of these conditions." Ukraine, on the other hand, was stripped of military and intelligence support after Zelenskiy asked for security guarantees to insure against further invasions. Although Secretary of State Marco Rubio indicated the US will reverse that decision now that Ukraine has agreed to a ceasefire, the message is clear: "Trump feels a personal bond with Russia's leader, and that this has strengthened since his first term," Marc explains. Writing in The Atlantic today, Trump's former national security adviser John Bolton said the president's approach to foreign policy centers on one question: "What benefits Donald Trump?" If this was some elaborate ploy for the president to get a Nobel Peace Prize, I don't think it'll work out. To win that, Andreas Kluth says he'd have to lower the risk of nuclear Armageddon. Good luck getting your buddy Putin on board with that. Riddle me this. The US has so many problems on its plate — including a 35% jump in measles cases — and yet the head of the nation's Department of Health and Human Services is busy shilling a French fry recipe on Fox News? Make it make sense:  Steak 'n Shake is the new Goya. According to Robert F. Kennedy Jr., seed oil is the root of all evil. Which is why he spent his Monday afternoon at a Florida Steak 'n Shake with Sean Hannity taste-testing their new "RFK'd fries," which are cooked in 100% beef tallow. "People are raving about these French fries," he told Hannity. Rave all you want, but if you think we're going to solve the "epidemic of chronic disease" by deep-frying potatoes in a scalding vat of melted animal fat, you've got another thing coming for you. Not to mention, nutrition experts are totally fine with seed oils! But you know what they're not fine with? The fact that millions of American families suffer from food insecurity. And — shocker! — the current administration could make things worse. "There's a group of Republican lawmakers in the White House and Congress who don't believe it's the government's job to feed people," says Mary Ellen Klas. "The anti-feeding group includes Russell Vought, one of the architects of Project 2025, who has called for cutting $400 billion in food stamps and is president Donald Trump's choice to lead the Office of Management and Budget. It also includes the House Ways and Means Committee, which has proposed a slate of changes that would leave millions of kids with less to eat, among them: cutting $12 billion for school breakfast and lunch over the next 10 years." Luckily, Mary Ellen says Republicans at the state level aren't in favor of such cruel tactics. "As rising food prices and tariffs (and even the threat of tariffs) are making the weekly grocery bill for many working families unaffordable, legislatures in several red states are quietly working to expand hunger programs," she writes. In Arkansas, a bill to provide free school breakfast to all students was signed by Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders — the same woman who was loyal to Trump when he cut SNAP — earlier this year. It's easy to understand why she had a change of heart: Nearly one in five households in her state can't afford groceries.  Lawmakers at the local level are the ones getting calls from constituents who say their grocery bills are too high. But the folks making decisions at the top — namely, the Federal Reserve — have the power to change monetary policy. And they're not really paying much attention to food inflation. Since the 1970s, Jonathan Levin says policymakers have focused on "core prices" which exclude food and energy. But, as Jonathan says, "food is critical to consumers' formation of inflation expectations." At the same time, "energy prices bounce all over the place, while food-at-home looks a lot more like core," he writes. Something's got to change. If it doesn't, Jonathan warns, "households may disengage or lose faith in monetary policy authorities if they see them as callous and out of touch with their experiences." Another way to lose touch? Stop prioritizing data altogether: Claudia Sahm says the Trump administration's slash-and-burn strategy has claimed another victim: the Federal Economic Statistics Advisory Committee, which was used as a sounding board for the Census Bureau, Bureau of Labor Statistics, and Bureau of Economic Analysis. "Putting a low-cost, high-value committee on the chopping block does not bode well for other investments in the official statistics," she writes. But who needs accurate economic data when you have beef tallow fries, right?! Riiiight. | 
No comments:
Post a Comment