Time is short, and Trump is betting everything on one word: prices. With less than a year to the 2026 US midterms, he tells Politico the outcome will ride on “our country’s success,” and “the key is the issue of prices”—pinning today’s inflation pain on the Biden administration while promising he’s pushing costs down. But even with better-looking headline numbers, Americans still feel squeezed, and Republicans stare at weak polling and the real risk of losing Congress.
Even with better numbers, Americans still feel the squeeze—and that’s the real headline.
He sells the story like a man doing a victory lap. Trump repeatedly hypes his economic “report card,” zeroing in on energy: “Energy prices are down dramatically, gasoline prices are down dramatically… everything is down… down very beautifully.” He also waves around the 4.3% annualised GDP jump in the third quarter and cracks that “the Democrats are going to explode—their heads are about to blow off.”
Click to Gallery
Even with better numbers, Americans still feel the squeeze—and that’s the real headline.
Trump sells “energy is down” like a cure-all.
The White House has stats to spin—but voters don’t live in spreadsheets.
The viral China–US comparison hits a nerve: US “must-pay” bills leave families boxed in.
Trump sells “energy is down” like a cure-all.
And yes, the White House has numbers it can plaster on every podium. Commerce Department data shows third-quarter GDP growth is the fastest in two years; Labour Department CPI data shows November inflation cools to 2.7% year on year, the lowest since July. The administration is clearly trying to turn those figures into a simple message: Trump is fixing the cost-of-living crunch.
But here’s the catch: data can cool while wallets still burn. A Politico/Public First poll last month finds nearly half of respondents still struggle with basics—daily necessities, utilities, healthcare, housing and transport. A Christmas-season poll from centrist think tank Third Way looks even uglier: 60% say the economy is not growing, 66% think unemployment is rising, and on cost-of-living competence Democrats lead 42% to Republicans’ 31%.
The White House has stats to spin—but voters don’t live in spreadsheets.
The “rigid spending” trap
The real problem isn’t just inflation—it’s what Americans can’t stop paying for. A widely shared China–US cost-of-living comparison argues that many “must-pay” items in the US tower over China’s, leaving ordinary families with almost no wiggle room. It claims electricity costs are about 11 times higher in the US (roughly US$110 per person per month versus US$10 in China), with water bills also around 11 times; on housing, it points to property taxes where US$10,000 a year is described as common, plus homeowners’ association fees of about US$100 to US$300 a month—putting property-related costs at roughly five times.
Then comes the heavyweight punch: healthcare and insurance. The same analysis says US health insurance premiums average about US$550 a month—more than five times China’s per-capita level—and that’s before out-of-pocket bills that can climb fast. It also claims annual per-capita healthcare spending hits US$13,000, exceeding China’s per-capita GDP; and on car insurance it says Americans’ per-capita spend is 15 times China’s, with drivers facing a burden about three to four times heavier.
Yes, Americans make more on paper—but the bills eat that advantage alive. The analysis says nominal pre-tax US income is more than 10 times China’s, and after-tax take-home is about six to seven times, but services that cost 10 times more can erase that quickly. Because so many US costs are “rigid,” cutting them often means a serious lifestyle cliff—or worse, homelessness—while in China, people often have more discretionary spending they can pause when income drops, giving stronger shock resistance; the result is “edge” US middle-class families watching big money flow in and out with little left, and a job loss or surprise expense can trigger a fast social “downward fall.”
The viral China–US comparison hits a nerve: US “must-pay” bills leave families boxed in.
Politics feels the squeeze
That anxiety is already turning into votes—and it’s not great news for Republicans. Democrats have notched strong results in recent local elections, winning key posts like New York City mayor, New Jersey governor, and Virginia governor, boosting morale and injecting uncertainty into next year’s midterms. Trump seems to smell the smoke: he’s trying to reframe “affordability,” moving from calling it a Democratic “scam” to blaming Biden for price spikes and insisting he’s the one bringing them back down.
He’s also pushing for rule changes to bulldoze his agenda through. On the 27th, Trump again urges Senate Republicans to scrap the filibuster, calling it “an obstacle that holds back the American government,” and claims removal would stop shutdowns and enable “excellent healthcare.” But multiple Republicans—including Senate Majority Leader John Thune—push back, arguing the filibuster is a key institutional safeguard, and the government still faces another shutdown risk in January next year.
In the end, Trump’s toughest job isn’t citing statistics—it’s changing what people feel at the checkout line. Building a bridge between “official data” and live experience, and persuading voters that prices are truly under control, becomes the administration’s biggest midterm test. And it will help decide, directly, whether Republicans keep their grip on Congress.
Deep Throat
** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **
UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer departs for China on January 28 in what amounts to a diplomatic rejection of Washington's either-or foreign policy. Speaking to Bloomberg on January 26, Starmer made his position clear: Britain will stop “sticking your head in the sand and ignoring China” and pursue economic ties with the world's second-largest economy.
Starmer gave Bloomberg his clearest signal yet that Britain won't subordinate economic interests to US demands.
This marks the first visit by a British Prime Minister to China in nearly eight years—a gap Starmer himself calls a "dereliction of duty."
The Bloomberg interview, conducted at 10 Downing Street, lays bare the economic rationale driving this reset. Starmer's four-day trip fulfills a Labour campaign promise to repair UK-China relations, which deteriorated over Hong Kong issues, the COVID-19 pandemic, and espionage allegations. Recent months have seen deliberate moves to ease tensions—most notably, last week's approval for China to build a new embassy in London: widely seen as strategic groundwork for this visit.
Rejecting the Binary Trap
When pressed on whether strengthening China ties would come "at the expense" of Britain's closest allies, Starmer pushed back hard. He cited the US-UK trade talks as precedent: "I remember when I was doing the US trade deal, and everybody put to me that I'd have to make a choice between the US and Europe, and I said, 'I'm not making that choice.'" The message to Washington is unmistakable—Britain will chart its own course, and Trump's tariff threats won't dictate British foreign policy.
Starmer explicitly rejected the approach taken by Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, who recently called for smaller nations to band together against what he termed a "new era of great power rivalry." His calculation is simple: developing UK-China relations won't anger Trump or damage transatlantic ties.
Starmer insists that strengthening UK-China ties won't damage relations with Washington.
Timing Is Everything
The context matters. Carney's Davos Forum remarks urging smaller countries to unite in the face of great power competition put a spotlight on Starmer's China visit.
Starmer maintained that UK-US relations remain "very close" and will continue across business, security, and defense sectors. More importantly, he insisted that "Britain can have the best of both worlds" between China and the US—a tightrope walk that few Western leaders have managed successfully in recent years.
Follow the Money
Keir Starmer is finally saying the quiet part out loud to Bloomberg: the UK needs China. While he pays lip service to maintaining "very close" ties with Washington on security and defense, the real headline is his admission that Britain can—and must—pursue the "best of both worlds." The reality is that London is realizing it can no longer afford to blindly follow US foreign policy cliffs.
Make no mistake: the era of delusional decoupling is over. Starmer was blunt, stating that if you "bury your head in the sand and ignore China"—the world's second-largest economy teeming with opportunity—it would not be "sensible". He made it clear that this trip is unapologetically about economic reality, while national security is not compromised. "Quite the opposite," indeed—engagement is the only path to security.
The scale of this mission speaks for itself. Starmer’s hitting Beijing and Shanghai with a delegation of approximately 60 leaders from business, universities, and cultural institutions.
Washington's Chaos Forces London's Hand
The backdrop to this pivot is undeniable. The US-Europe transatlantic partnership is currently in shambles over the Greenland dispute, with Trump threatening tariffs against eight European nations. Add to that his inflammatory remarks about NATO “staying a little back, a little off the frontlines" and it’s no wonder London is looking for stability elsewhere.
Yet, Starmer insists on maintaining a "mature" facade with Trump. He claims the UK approaches these headaches with "British pragmatism, common sense, and adherence to our own principles." But the real issue is evident in his admission that the UK must forge tighter military bonds with Europe. He’s already signaling a capitulation to demands for higher defense spending, noting, "I do think that Europe needs to be stronger in its own defense and security, I think we need to step up to that challenge."
Starmer mentioned a weekend call with Trump regarding Ukraine, warning that both Kyiv and Europe are desperate for American backing. He framed it as, "Ukraine is a very good example of why we need to maintain a very close UK-US relationship".
The roster confirms the priority here is hard cash, not ideology. Reuters reported on the 23rd that heavyweights like Chancellor Rachel Reeves and Business Secretary Peter Kyle are towing a massive group of executives to the Chinese Mainland. The Financial Times adds that this commercial armada spans critical sectors including life sciences, aerospace, and financial services.
Sources close to the PM are cutting through the noise, labeling the refusal of previous Prime Ministers to visit China a sheer "dereliction of duty." The logic is inescapable: they hope to finally strengthen cooperation with the economic superpower. As one source put it, turning a blind eye and pretending China doesn't matter is reckless and will only make Britain poorer and less secure.
Starmer himself emphasized that it is time to reject the "overly simplistic binary choices" of the past—refusing to be boxed into either the so-called "Golden Era" or the disastrous "Ice Age."
When pressed on Starmer’s visit at a January 26 press conference, Foreign Ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun highlighted the turbulent international landscape. He noted that as permanent members of the UN Security Council, China and the UK serve global interests by strengthening cooperation. Beijing, as always, remains open to pragmatic engagement and will release further details in due course.
