One Year of 'America First': The Workers Left Behind

25 million jobs. That was Donald Trump's campaign promise for his second term. One year into his "America First" revival, the question isn't whether he delivered—it's who actually benefited.

The Promise vs. The Reality

Trump wasted no time implementing his protectionist agenda after returning to office in 2024. China faced 60% tariffs on most goods, while other nations saw 10-20% duties slapped on their exports to America. Corporate regulations were slashed, and the corporate tax rate dropped from 21% to 15%.

On paper, it worked. The S&P 500 surged 18%, corporate profits hit double-digit growth quarterly, and business confidence soared. But drill down into the employment data, and a different story emerges.

Manufacturing jobs—the supposed beneficiary of these policies—actually declined by 3.2%. The reason? Tariffs didn't just hit finished goods; they hammered the raw materials American manufacturers depend on. A steel fabricator in Ohio put it bluntly: "Sure, they taxed Chinese steel, but we still need specialty alloys from abroad. Our costs just went up 30%."

Winners and Losers: A Tale of Two Americas

The policy's benefits flowed to unexpected places. Big Tech and financial services became the primary winners. Companies like Apple, Microsoft, and Google enjoyed tax cuts while their overseas manufacturing bases shielded them from tariff impacts.

Meanwhile, the Rust Belt—Trump's supposed base—got hammered twice. Rising input costs from tariffs forced factories to cut production or close entirely. Detroit's automotive supply chain lost 12 facilities in six months alone.

The irony is stark: many of these affected regions voted overwhelmingly for Trump in 2024, believing his promises about bringing manufacturing home. Instead, they're watching their jobs disappear—again.

The Supply Chain Reality Check

America First's biggest blind spot was ignoring how modern manufacturing actually works. Over 70% of components used by U.S. manufacturers come from abroad. The policy treated this complex web as a simple "us vs. them" equation.

Take Tesla: they import batteries from China to assemble cars in America. Higher battery tariffs don't boost U.S. battery production overnight—they just make American assembly less competitive. The result? Jobs migrate to China or Mexico anyway.

Even allies got caught in the crossfire. Samsung and LG postponed U.S. factory expansions, while Hyundai shifted more production to Mexico for U.S. export. America First inadvertently pushed investment away from America.

The Political vs. Economic Calculus

The White House maintains its victory narrative. The economic advisor recently claimed that "stock market gains boosted every American's retirement account" and insisted manufacturing would "return in due time."

Wall Street sees it differently. Goldman Sachs projects another 8% decline in manufacturing jobs over the next two years if current policies persist. Their analysis: protectionism offers short-term political gains but long-term economic pain.

The real trap is political. Rolling back tariffs means admitting failure; maintaining them means accepting continued economic damage. Trump has painted himself into a corner with his own rhetoric.

The Global Ripple Effect

Beyond America's borders, the policy triggered a cascade of responses. The European Union fast-tracked trade deals with Asia, explicitly excluding the U.S. China deepened ties with Latin America, offering the kind of investment partnerships America once provided.

Most telling: global supply chains are actively "de-Americanizing." Companies are building redundant capacity outside the U.S. to avoid future policy whiplash. Even if America First policies reverse tomorrow, this structural shift will persist for years.