Nevins is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.
This is the first in a two-part series examining the economic blame game.
The Republican National Committee recently published a research document stating: “ Biden Is Desperate To Blame Anyone But Himself For The Worst Inflation In 40 Years, But The American People Know He Is Responsible.”
Of course blaming the other party for the inevitable ups and downs of the economy is not reserved for Republicans. On June 4 President Biden blamed congressional Republicans for record-high inflation in a speech he gave in Philadelphia:
“Under my plan for the economy we made extraordinary progress, and put America in a position to tackle a worldwide problem that’s worse everywhere but here: inflation. ... The problem is, Republicans in Congress are doing everything they can to stop my plans to bring down costs on ordinary families.”
It is no wonder the American public is confused about the economic difficulties our country and the world are experiencing, given the lack of a reasoned discussion by our political leaders and given the complexity of global economics that even economic experts have difficulty understanding – much less predicting.
As renowned economist John Kenneth Galbraith once said, “The only function of economic forecasting is to make astrology look respectable.”
There is no doubt that the U.S. economy is experiencing the worst inflation in over 40 years, hitting 8.6 percent in May. The impact on the lives of everyday Americans is causing hardship as the price of essentials such as gas, food and rent go through the roof. Yet at the same time as we are experiencing extremely high inflation, we are also experiencing a historically low unemployment rate of 3.6 percent and thus the messages are mixed and confusing to say the least.
Low unemployment is usually very positive but with inflation running at the fastest pace since 1981, the Federal Reserve is tightening monetary policy, which very well might lead to higher unemployment. The possibility of higher unemployment and high inflation, the worst of both worlds, is a real possibility in the coming 12 to 18 months.
With so much confusion and uncertainty it is no wonder politicians use the fears associated with economic uncertainty to rally support. But instead of falling for the rhetoric, consider first that the problems facing the U.S. economy are not limited to only us. Inflation and supply shortages are a worldwide phenomenon and thus, given the global nature and interdependency of global economics, the reaction of any individual nation is unlikely to solve the problem.
If Biden were to blame or if the Republicans were to blame, how does one explain that the problems facing the United States are shared with the world? First a pandemic changed the dynamics of the world economy in a multitude of ways. The disruptions from Covid continue to this day as the supply chain shortages and zero-Covid policy in China disrupt the world economy.
Subsequently, as the world economy was adjusting to the decreasing impact of Covid we were hit with another global financial shock: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which resulted in the limiting of energy and food supplies, thus stimulating the inflation we are currently experiencing. While the economic costs have been severe, the human tragedy of death and displacement of innocent people is immeasurable. We must not lose sight of the human toll as we explore the economic impact especially since the burden falls disproportionately upon lower-income families as they struggle with the higher energy and food prices.
All this adds to the desire of politicians to find scapegoats to take advantage of the situation rather than practically address the issues at hand. And while politicians play this blame game, our nation and the world become more fragmented. Given the interconnectivity of the world economy, we need cooperation in our nation and in the world more than ever. If we are to solve the threats facing the economies of the world, plus address the existential threat of climate change we need unparalleled world cooperation not political rhetoric that separates and divides.
This is not a pipe dream. Cooperation has occurred in the past when needed. After the devastation of World War II the world’s financial experts came together in 1944 in the historic Bretton Woods summit, creating a set of unified rules and policies that provided the framework for an orderly world economy.
As politicians and world leaders bicker, the understanding of a few economic maxims will serve us well.
The first is that there are no quick fixes. Economists euphemistically have been know to say “Investing should be more like watching paint dry or watching grass grow. If you want excitement, take $800 and go to Las Vegas.” There will be no quick fixes no matter what politicians tell you. We must think clearly, analyze costs and benefits, and realize that changing the cycle we currently are going through will take time. Given the limited options in these polarized times there is little Congress or the Federal Reserve can do in the short term to address the problem.
The second principle is from Sir John Templeton, noted global investor, contrarian thinker and founder the the Templeton Growth Fund in the 1950s. In 1954 he noted that the most dangerous four words in the English language are “This time it’s different.” Given the economic pain many are experiencing, it is easy to get swept away with the need for a quick fix, for a free lunch that will immediately cure the economic ills we are facing. Politicians will encourage us to make emotion-driven decisions with rhetoric that is intended to make us believe that this time it is different and we must therefore buy into their political dogma. We must instead rely on sound economic policy that helps those most in need without destroying the incentives that fuel future economic growth
As citizens, we can play an important role in co-creating innovative solutions that change future patterns of the economic cycle. President Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal was combined with Keynesian economic theory to lessen the severity of economic cycles after the Great Depression, which lasted over a decade after the crash of 1929. However, emergent strategies don’t just happen. They require that we recognize that the richness of the American identity is due to our ability to accept our differences and embrace our cultural, ethnic, racial and political diversity with dignity and have an open-mindedness. Only by exploring and learning from each other will we be able to seek aligned efforts that raise all boats.
Our country will be stronger if informed citizens are actively involved in the economic discussion rather than simply responding to political banter. A difficult task indeed given that the blame game is central to politics and unlikely to change.
In my next writing I’ll offer thoughts on a new vision for managing the economy of our nation and the world. Economic discussions must be about far more than the size of our gross domestic product. While politicians focus on this as the panacea (i.e higher production means we are better off), a new vision must include subjects often ignored such as societal well-being, sustainability, equity and other aspects of life often excluded from economic analysis.




















U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during a campaign rally at Pinnacle Bank Expo Center on the Nebraska State Fairgrounds on October 05, 2026 in Grand Island, Nebraska.
The President Invited Iran to Bomb My Home
I was driving home to San Diego from Los Angeles on Monday night when I heard that the President of the United States had offered both cities up to Iran as bomb targets. At a rally in Nebraska, defending his war, Trump told the crowd, “let [Iran] take out Los Angeles, let ‘em take out San Diego.” It was, he said, “a very small price to pay.”
I was coming from a Bernie Sanders rally for Proposition 40, the one-time tax on California billionaires that would send 90% of its revenue to healthcare. We desperately need it to pass because, in order to give tax breaks to billionaires, Trump signed a law that will strip health coverage from 10 million Americans; this tax will make sure we can still cover Californians. Call me crazy, but I think taxing billionaires one time so we can make sure kids in California get to see a doctor is a very small price to pay. I also think that even if Trump were joking, it is indefensible to make jokes about the potential destruction of so many lives. Human life is never a small price to pay. Human life is priceless.
Plus, the reality is: here in San Diego, we’re already paying the price for Trump’s actions, and it’s not small at all. He has gutted FEMA, tried to kill climate resiliency programs, and destroyed public health standards, while his signature law is set to cut off health insurance and food support for hundreds of thousands of San Diegans. Like plenty of American cities, San Diego is already busy finding local solutions to respond to the problems this president has recklessly created.
Not to mention, at least 19 American service members have been killed in this war already. Human rights monitors have documented more than 3,600 dead in Iran by April alone. Here at home, gas is sitting just pennies below its all-time record. Taxpayers have already spent more than $45 billion on the war, while Trump’s oil and gas portfolio has grown by roughly $15.5 million this year alone. Of course anything is a “small price” to someone paying free.99 for this war, and profiting from it. Meanwhile, We the People are paying twice: first for the war, and then for the consequences of that war. But now he wants San Diego to pay a third time, flippantly offering us up to Iran.
It is worth noticing which cities he thought to name. Were San Diego and Los Angeles strategically chosen to signify something to his audience, or were they simply the first cities that came to mind as expendable places? Either way, the effect is to normalize—-and to gauge a crowd’s reaction to–the idea of massive violence in major California cities, suitable targets because of their perceived liberal lean. So what if Iran needs to bomb a little bit of America before the war can be over? Who cares, says Trump, if they target Los Angeles and San Diego?
By the way, why didn’t he offer up San Francisco, the free-love hippie-town MAGA loves to hate (and also my birthplace)? Could it be because that’s where the tech titans live? The same ones who joined Trump for Xi Jinping’s state dinner, a guest list worth a combined $2.4 trillion?
San Diego may have fewer billionaires, but it is home to more than 115,000 active-duty service members and 230,000 veterans. One in six active-duty sailors–in the entire Navy–is stationed here. So is one in four Marines. You cannot throw a rock in this county without hitting a military family: brats and spouses and veterans are among us. I got out of the Navy last year after ten years, and eight of those were here in San Diego. When Trump says “let ‘em take out San Diego,” he’s talking about the backbone of the United States military. He’s also talking about the people fighting his war.
San Diego has not been watching this war from the sidelines. Today, the USS Abraham Lincoln returns to North Island after an almost yearlong deployment to the Middle East that featured food shortages, broken toilets, and mold in the showers after 286 days at sea without a single port call. Eight sailors in the Lincoln’s strike group attempted suicide, but in August, when a reporter asked whether the deployment had gone on too long, Trump said “not nearly long enough.” Now he has told a crowd in Nebraska that we should let Iran take out the city those sailors call home. These are sociopathic sentiments.
Last week at Quantico, Pete Hegseth closed his address to the force by telling them, “President Trump has your back and so do I.” To the contrary, President Trump has put one of the biggest military towns in the country forward as a target for our adversaries. With friends like these, the “domestic” in “against all enemies, foreign and domestic” starts to sound a lot less hypothetical.
San Diego is home to Naval Air Station North Island, Naval Base San Diego, Naval Amphibious Base Coronado, the Point Loma submarine base, Camp Pendleton, and Miramar (and I have been permanently stationed at or trained at all of them). If Iran bombed San Diego and Los Angeles, aside from the devastating loss of life, it would cripple an immense share of our national security readiness.
And for what, exactly? Trump says the war is “essentially almost over with.” This is the same man who claimed in June 2025 that Iran’s nuclear program had been “obliterated,” then launched a war over it anyway on February 28. More than seven months later, he wants us to believe two things at once: that we’ve basically won, and that we might need to sacrifice an American city or two to finish winning. If the war is almost over, why does anybody need to take out San Diego?
I wonder if Trump’s endorsed candidate for California’s 48th District here in San Diego County will respond to these remarks. He recently said “no pain, no gain,” when referring to the gas prices San Diegans are paying. Jim Desmond, would you apply that same mindset if we were bombed? Or do you have the moral courage to stand up for the people you’re running to represent?
Last November, six Democratic members of Congress, all veterans, including Senator Mark Kelly, recorded a video reminding troops of their duty to disobey unlawful orders, restating the law that says so. Trump called it “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH,” and then his Justice Department went looking for an indictment, which a grand jury refused. The president treated reading the law out loud to the troops as a capital offense, but then he himself invited a foreign enemy to destroy two American cities, possibly as a punchline. Is anyone calling the latter sedition? Who is demanding accountability?
Calling our lives a small price to pay affirms a moral bankruptcy, as well as an obvious dereliction of duty to the office he holds. While we can’t impeach him or invoke the 25th Amendment ourselves, we must stop being so quiet about what we’re paying already. We can make our voices heard by calling our representatives, writing op-eds, knocking doors, phone banking, and voting in defiance of the man who threatens the safety of our city. Ballots are already arriving in mailboxes. Vote, and vote yes on 40 (and no on 41 and 42).
Trump has been harming our cities for a while, but now he is inviting our military adversaries to join him in the harm. If we have any self-respect as Americans, we must not tolerate our leaders disregarding the dignity of lives in this way. We must fight for our home.
Julie Roland was a Naval Officer for ten years, deploying to both the South China Sea and the Persian Gulf as a helicopter pilot before separating in June 2025 as a Lieutenant Commander. She has a law degree from the University of San Diego, a Master of Laws from Columbia University, and is a member of the Truman National Security Project.