BlackEconomics.org®
Purpose: To recognize (again) the adverse effects of uncertainty, the usual/typical autonomous responding efforts to reduce uncertainty, and to explore why Black (Afrodescendants) and other Americans are not responding as just described to the uncertainty created by the current U.S. Presidential Administration.
In September 2022, BlackEconomics.org released a Brief Essay entitled, “The Black Economics of Uncertainty.”i The essay explains that the multiplicity of uncertainties experienced by Black Americans (Afrodescendants) complicate and exacerbate negatively our already reduced levels of (economic) wellbeing when compared to other racial/ethnic groups in the country.
Arguably, no previous U.S. Presidential Administration has created as much uncertainty as the Trump Administration; this is certainly true for any administration during the last 70 years. Given this reality, it is appropriate to pose the most important related question: “Why is the Administration imposing such uncertainty on the nation and the world?”
But before asking “Why?” we should define the nature of the uncertainty; i.e., what is causing the anxiety and uneasiness that is so deleterious to the wellbeing of a wide spectrum of the nation’s and world’s population. The administration, in puzzle piece-like fashion and with some seeming randomness has been disruptive from a variety of perspectives. However, we believe that the reference to “randomness” is likely inaccurate because surely a U.S. Presidential Administration must have a “plan.” Some contend that the plan is presented in a Heritage Foundation product popularly known as The Project 2025 Plan.ii However, while the Administration’s uncertainty-engendering policy initiatives that have been launched since inauguration are featured in the plan, the timeline for the strategic rollout of those policy initiatives is absent from the plan. Such details are purported to be reflected in a “classified” (secret) document that may carry the title, First 180-Day Playbook.iii
Following the course of events from 7:00 a.m. January 20, 2025, when the Administration was seated, we find that: Hefty tariffs were announced; DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency) audits were performed that led to proposed budget reductions to Federal departments and agencies; there was cancellation of diversity that has far wider implications than just reductions in prospective benefits to racial/ethnic groups; there were announcements and actual reductions in expenditures to support international aid programs; new ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) efforts were initiated and expanded to remove unwanted immigrants; there was the operationalization of already announced tariffs; and most recently, decisions were announced to impose dramatic cuts in social benefit programs—from healthcare, to education, to supplemental nutritional programs.iv
This uncertainty has at its core the imposition of: Fretting about the mental and physical pain that accompanies a loss of nutrition and/or employment; fear that is linked to the loss of one’s home and an inability to provide properly for the care of one’s family; and then there is the double uncertainty of how an uncertain future will be affected by the pain, loss, and fear that were just described.
Considering the initially posed “why” questions, the following reasons come to mind: (1) The nation’s astronomical debt level may have caused nations that serve as U.S. Government creditors to issue a warning to pay it down to reduce risk; (2) absent reasons “1,” there is the reality that the higher the debt level, the greater is the likelihood of persistently higher interest rates than were confronted in the past due to an increased risk premium, which is another reason to save to reduce the debt; (3) accompanying reasons “1” and “2” is the prospect of the U.S. dollar ($) losing its “risk” free asset status (i.e., the world’s primary reserve currency) if the debt level is not reduced; (4) there may be new public and/or private research that points to future global crises caused by population growth—especially in regions of the world least capable of supporting that growth;v (5) Western World nations may have recognized their commission of strategic errors (mainly permitting Asia’s rise and the significant infiltration of its populations from the Global South that compromises their internal integrity) and the related need to undergo a complete operational overhaul;vi (6) there may be recognition of a need to create and sustain confusion and knock-on dependency effects within the U.S. population for which major technological (robotization and (AI) artificial intelligence-based) disruptions may be in the offing; and (7) to prepare the nation fiscally and operationally for a major war. Additional reasons may be identified by others.
The seven reasons provided for the current U.S. Presidential Administration’s uncertainty- generating actions presented in the foregoing paragraph are rational, but they are conjectural. Therefore, Americans—especially Black Americans who are likely to be injured most by this uncertainty—should call for the People House (should no longer be called the “White House”) to explain not only the rationale for the uncertainty-generating actions, but to also provide insights concerning how these actions constitute an integrated and comprehensive framework or plan through which the Administration intends to achieve its predicted results.
Even if the Administration were to provide a thorough and reasonable explanation for its uncertainty-generating actions, there would remain a sizeable information gap concerning how the American People can reduce the adverse physical and mental effects of the actions. Americans should be provided with more than just a cursory idea about where the Administration plans to lead the nation. Its disruptive actions are producing widespread adverse impacts on Americans who secure their livelihoods from numerous industries at home and abroad. Realize that we are not only referring to the impact of uncertainty on households, but also on firms. Generally, uncertainty reduces the precision with which the likely upside or downside results of actions can be determined, which can then cause households and firms to delay decisions that can increase or decrease their income/receipts and wellbeing. Therefore, it seems fair and proper that the Administration would provide its substantively detailed industry-by-industry or economic sector-by-sector plan that shows transparently the estimated improvements or decrements in wellbeing that are to be produced for Americans that are affected by the plan.
Viewed in its entirety, this essay makes a set of simple points: (1) The Administration is executing novel, and partly unexpected and disruptive actions that are producing unfavorable outcomes for many Americans across numerous industries or economic sectors; (2) most American may not comprehend fully and accurately the “why” of this action; and (3) it appears only fair and proper that, to reduce the harmful effects of these actions, the Administration should not only explain the “why” of these actions, but it should also provide sufficient details about its plan and its estimated results of what the fully executed plan is expected to produce.
However, while all the foregoing is necessary, it should not be sufficient for the American People who are steeped in a governance tradition that requires liberty, justice, and truth (for some). The fact that we prepared this essay is evidence enough that something is missing, something is awry, and that the just-given description of the American people may only represent the past. We should ask: Why are Americans countenancing such deleterious uncertainty now? It is not natural for Americans to sit idly by and eat apple pie while all around them are faltering, thoroughly disrupted, or destroyed lives. That is not the American way no matter one’s perspective or what one might say. The American way requires and expects transparency, justice, and truth (for some), and history is replete with actions taken by Americans when these requirements are not met. But under the current Administration, Americans may not impose these requirements because they may be fearing some form of retaliation—including death. And if this proves to be true, then it is a sad and inauspicious sign that America as we knew her may be nearly through.
B. Robinson
©10/31/25
Endnotes
i Brooks Robinson (2022). “The Black Economics of Uncertainty.” BlackEconomics.org: https://www.blackeconomics.org/BELit/tbeou.pdf; September 29. (Ret. 103025)
ii See 2025 Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, which was released by the Heritage Foundation in 2023. It is the work of nearly 400 scholars and experts. The plan features a “personnel database” that assists those who value and adhere to the plan to identify a favorable position(s) for helping execute the plan. The plan incorporates a training program (an “academy”) that instructs those on the team to optimize their efforts to achieve plan objectives and goals. The final major part of the plan is a so-called Playbook that provides details on the methods, procedures, and timing for operationalizing the full intent and purposes of The Project 2025 Plan.
iii A scanty note on this volume appears when it title is searched using Google’s Geminia AI Bot.
iv Importantly, today a Federal Court ordered the Administration to resume provision of benefits under certain social protection programs.
v It is interesting that billionaire Bill Gates recently released a new memorandum (report) that modifies the perspective he adopted earlier on “Climate Change.” He now contends that, while “Climate Change” remains an important concern, policymakers should balance their efforts to increase wellbeing by agreeing to tradeoff reductions in greenhouse gas emissions for support of economic development (which typically increases such emissions)—particularly in the developing world. [See Bill Gates (2025). “Three Tough Truths About Climate.” GatesNotes.com. https://www.gatesnotes.com/home/home-page-topic/reader/three-tough-truths-about-climate (Ret. 103025).] A question that we should explore with no intent to impugn Mr. Gates’ integrity is: “Is it not logical to announce a change in a strategic policy position if it can help reduce prospects of a global panic while promoting prospects for improving economic wellbeing?” This question takes on even more significance as we see the unprecedented power of Hurricane Melissa, which just ripped through the Caribbean.
vi An important “strategic error” of the Western World is highlighted on the final page (3) of Brooks Robinson (2024). “How Unfair is the Global Economic Strategic Game.” BlackEconomics.org. https://www.blackeconomics.org/BEFuture/hugesg071224.pdf (Ret. 103125).