Trump’s Economic Adviser Is Ignoring America’s Real Struggles

Blog

“People Are Spending More” Isn’t a Flex: Why Kevin Hassett’s Comments Miss the Crisis

When President Donald Trump’s top economic adviser, Kevin Hassett, went on Fox News and brushed off Americans’ financial struggles by saying people are “spending more,” he didn’t just offer a bad talking point. He revealed something deeper and more dangerous: a governing philosophy that confuses desperation with prosperity, and debt-fueled survival with a “strong economy.”

For anyone dating, building a life, or trying to imagine a future with someone right now, this matters. Love doesn’t happen in a vacuum; it happens in an economy. Whether you can afford rent, childcare, a night out, or a safe exit from a bad relationship depends on how seriously leaders take the cost-of-living crisis. Hassett’s comments are a reminder that many in power still don’t.

Read the full article: Trump’s Top Economic Adviser Doesn’t Seem to Get That People Are Struggling (Mother Jones)

What Happened: The Fox News Interview That Said the Quiet Part Out Loud

On a recent Sunday morning appearance on Fox News, Kevin Hassett, director of the National Economic Council and a leading architect of Trump’s economic agenda, was pressed about something millions of people feel in their bones: the rising cost of living and the mounting credit card debt that’s coming with it.

The host pointed out that Americans are falling behind on their credit card bills. Instead of acknowledging that people are struggling to pay for basics, Hassett spun it as a sign of strength. His argument, in essence:

People are spending more money.
In his view, more spending equals confidence and a healthy economy.
Therefore, the uptick in credit card use and delinquencies is framed as “not a big deal” or even a positive indicator.

What’s missing from that story is everything that matters: wages that haven’t kept up with prices, rent hikes, medical bills, childcare costs, and a decade-plus of policy choices that shifted risk onto individual households while handing rewards to corporations and the ultra-rich.

Mother Jones highlighted the absurdity in the most basic way: if people are racking up debt just to get by, “spending more” is the problem, not the proof that everything’s fine.

Hassett’s comments fit a familiar pattern from Trump-era economic messaging: cherry-pick one data point (consumer spending), ignore the context (why people are spending), and declare victory while millions quietly sink deeper into debt.

Why This Framing Is So Dangerous

Confusing Survival Spending with Prosperity

Economists often watch consumer spending as a measure of economic health. But not all spending is created equal.

Prosperity spending looks like: people buying homes, saving for retirement, paying off debt, investing in education, and having enough left over for joy and leisure.
Survival spending looks like: people putting groceries, rent, and medical bills on credit cards because their paychecks don’t stretch far enough.

Hassett collapses these into the same thing. If the number is up, he calls it optimism. But if you’ve ever checked your credit card statement with a knot in your stomach, you know that “spending more” can feel like the opposite of optimism. It can feel like a countdown clock.

Blaming Individuals Instead of Systems

When officials talk about credit card delinquencies as if they’re just a matter of “personal responsibility,” they erase the structural forces pushing people to the edge:

Stagnant wages compared to skyrocketing costs of rent, healthcare, and education.
Predatory financial products with high interest rates and hidden fees.
Weak labor protections that keep people in low-paying, unstable jobs without benefits.
Policy choices that prioritize corporate tax cuts over social safety nets.

By insisting that rising debt is just a sign that people are “confident” enough to spend, Hassett sidesteps the possibility that people are simply out of options.

The Gaslighting Effect

There’s a psychological dimension here too. When top officials insist the economy is great because “look, spending!” while you’re juggling three side gigs and dodging debt collectors, it creates a form of economic gaslighting.

You start to wonder: Is it just me? Am I bad with money? Is everyone else doing fine?

Progressive politics insists on the opposite: if millions of people are struggling, the problem isn’t individual failure; it’s policy failure.

How This Connects to Progressive Values and Movements

Economic Justice Is Relationship Justice

This isn’t just about abstract macroeconomic numbers. It’s about whether people can build the lives and relationships they want.

Starting a family becomes a financial risk when childcare costs rival rent and healthcare is precarious.
Leaving a toxic or abusive relationship is harder when you don’t have savings, stable housing, or access to affordable legal help.
Dating and partnership are shaped by money stress—arguments about bills, student loans, and debt are consistently among the top relationship stressors.

Progressive movements have long argued that economic policy is intimate. It touches every part of our lives, including who we can love, how we can live, and whether we have the freedom to choose what’s right for us instead of what we can barely afford.

Historical Echoes: Trickle-Down 2.0

Hassett’s comments aren’t new; they’re a remix of trickle-down economics with a modern spin. The logic goes:

Cut taxes and regulations for corporations and the wealthy.
Assume gains will “trickle down” through jobs and investments.
Point to any uptick in spending as proof the theory works.

We’ve seen this movie before—in the 1980s, 2000s, and again under Trump. The results are familiar: soaring inequality, fragile household finances, and a political class that declares victory while millions are one paycheck away from disaster.

Progressive movements—from labor unions to Black Lives Matter to the Fight for $15—have pushed back on this narrative for years, demanding an economy built from the bottom up and the middle out, not the top down.

Intersectionality: Who Gets Hurt the Most

When policymakers dismiss rising debt and cost-of-living pressures, they’re not hitting everyone equally. The burden falls hardest on:

Women, who still shoulder disproportionate unpaid care work and are more likely to be in low-paid service jobs.
Black, Brown, and Indigenous communities, who face systemic barriers to wealth-building, higher rates of predatory lending, and discrimination in housing and employment.
LGBTQ+ people, especially trans and nonbinary folks, who face workplace discrimination, housing insecurity, and often lack family safety nets.
Immigrants, who may be excluded from safety net programs and face exploitative labor conditions.

When an economic adviser waves away their struggles as “people are spending more,” he’s effectively saying that their hardship is acceptable collateral damage for a rosy headline.

Different Angles on the Hassett Comment

The Establishment Defense: “He’s Just Talking About Data”

Some defenders might argue that Hassett is simply referencing standard economic indicators: if consumer spending is up, that tends to correlate with growth. They might say he’s emphasizing optimism to avoid spooking markets.

But that defense falls apart because it ignores:

What’s driving the spending (necessity vs. discretionary purchases).
How it’s being financed (income vs. high-interest debt).
Who is benefiting (corporate profits vs. household stability).

Good economic analysis doesn’t just read the headline number; it asks what’s underneath. Hassett’s framing is less about data and more about spin.

The Progressive Critique: Policy Choices, Not Inevitable Outcomes

From a progressive perspective, the rise in credit card debt and delinquencies is not an accident or an unavoidable side effect of growth. It’s the predictable result of policy decisions:

Keeping the federal minimum wage low while costs climb.
Allowing housing markets to be treated as speculative assets instead of human necessities.
Letting healthcare remain a profit-driven industry instead of a public good.
Failing to regulate predatory lending and corporate price-gouging.

Hassett’s comment is offensive not because he doesn’t know people are struggling, but because he does—and still chooses to interpret that struggle as a sign of success.

The Human Angle: What People Are Actually Experiencing

Step away from the TV studio and into real life, and the story looks different:

Couples delaying marriage or kids because they’re buried in student loans.
Single parents choosing between paying the electric bill and paying off a medical bill.
Queer and trans people staying in unsafe living situations because they can’t afford to move.
Young people juggling gig work, no benefits, and rent that eats half their income.

No amount of “but consumer spending is up” can make that reality feel like a win.

What This Means for the Progressive Movement

Reclaiming the Economic Narrative

Progressives can’t afford to cede economic storytelling to people like Hassett. When conservatives point to one number and declare the economy “strong,” the response can’t just be “no, it’s not”—it has to be a clear, compelling alternative vision.

That means centering metrics like:

Median wages vs. cost of living.
Household savings and emergency funds.
Debt burdens, especially for young people and marginalized communities.
Access to housing, healthcare, childcare, and education as rights, not privileges.

Photo by Markus Spiske on Unsplash