How Donald Trump Invented His Record Economy – An Investigative Report on a Grand Lie

We researched the total return of stocks in leading industrial nations. Germany is comparatively more stable - not a bad picture, but that of an aging yet resilient economy that, despite energy crises, slow bureaucracy reform, labor shortages, and global uncertainties, appears battered but far more robust than its reputation suggests and has not thrown itself off balance. There are mistakes, yes, but not such systemic self-sabotage as under Trump.

Berlin should only be careful not to fall into the right-wing populist pattern of the United States. Such a political aberration would inevitably lead to a decline in investment, growing uncertainty, and a noticeable deterioration in economic stability. In the end, it would not affect “the elites,” but the population itself - with a declining quality of life, less social cohesion, and a society that step by step moves away from reason and responsibility. While Washington scares off investors and allows entire industries to bleed out, Berlin at least holds on to reliability, social partnership, and the rule of law in planning. Anyone in Germany who wants to demand or copy a policy modeled on the AfD should take a close look at where it has led in the United States: into waves of layoffs, isolation, and economic chaos. That would not be a course of renewal but a direct path into the same catastrophe - without ifs or buts.

The growth of the US market since Trump took office on January 19, 2025, was only +13 percent. Yet it was one of the president’s favorite arguments: the supposedly “strongest stock market in the world.” Donald Trump referred in almost every public appearance to rising prices, spoke of an “unprecedented boom,” and declared Wall Street a symbol of his economic genius. But the numbers, viewed soberly, tell a different story, just not Donald Trump’s.

hat is not a crash, but it shows how Trump’s policy has failed - especially when put into perspective: In Spain, stock prices rose by 61 percent over the same period, in Austria by 58 percent, in Finland by 45 percent, in Ireland by 42 percent, and in Hong Kong by 41 percent. Even countries with political instability or limited domestic markets, such as Italy (+39 percent) or Portugal (+35 percent), developed more dynamically than the United States. This puts the US market only in 20th place out of 22 developed economies. Only New Zealand (0 percent) and Denmark (-17 percent) performed worse. Even classic stability markets such as Germany (+24 percent), Japan (+29 percent), or Canada (+24 percent) clearly outperformed the US. The claim of a “unique success story” does not stand up to this reality.

For comparison: as of November 7, 2024, the S&P 500 had risen by more than 25 percent in that year - a momentum that a year later under Trump slowed significantly.

Economists attribute the weaker US performance to several factors. First, to the ongoing uncertainty caused by Trump’s tariff policy, which burdened exporters and importers alike. The punitive tariffs introduced in 2025 on EU cars, solar modules, and steel products triggered counter-reactions that hit American manufacturers hard. Second, the high volatility of the dollar, resulting from alternating monetary threats toward the Federal Reserve, caused international investors to hold back. Added to this were repeated budget crises, the temporary government shutdown since October 2025, and the blockade of investment programs in infrastructure - all brake blocks for long-term capital inflows.

The dream of large tariff revenues has long since evaporated. Only one man refuses to see it: Tariff Emperor Donald Trump

There was also the climate policy reversal: the withdrawal of funding programs for renewable energy and electromobility caused projects worth tens of billions to collapse within months. The energy transition became a target of ideological rhetoric in Washington - and the market responded immediately. Investors pulled out of US sectors that had become riskier, while Europe, Canada, and parts of Asia benefited from clear frameworks and green growth impulses.

The renaissance of coal power under Trump represents a particularly cynical aspect of this environmental destruction. New coal power plants are not only approved but actively promoted - at a time when even conservative economists recognize the economic unprofitability of this technology. The health consequences are catastrophic: each new coal power plant statistically means hundreds of additional premature deaths annually from particulate pollution, increased asthma rates among children, and measurable loss of intelligence from mercury exposure. The external costs of this policy - health damage, environmental destruction, climate impacts - are shifted to society, while profits are privatized.

Trump’s migration policy proved especially fatal, bringing agriculture in large parts of the country to the brink of collapse. Millions of seasonal workers, whose hands the harvest depended on, suddenly disappeared from the fields. The result was production declines, price increases, and the loss of export shares in a sector that for decades had been the backbone of the rural economy. The shortage of labor penetrated deep into supply chains, food prices, and consumer sentiment - and contributed to the general uncertainty that stifled investment.

While Trump on November 9, 2025, covered up the weak stock market performance with new promises, he stylized his tariff policy as the central engine of an alleged investment boom. In speeches, he spoke of around 20 trillion dollars that he had supposedly brought into the US through tariffs, tax cuts, and personal pressure on heads of state and companies. But his own government’s data tell a different story: on the official White House website, only 8.9 trillion dollars (as of November 10, 2025) in investment pledges are listed - and even this sum includes commitments made under Joe Biden or already financed through other programs.

Economists describe Trump’s number as greatly inflated, speculative, and politically motivated. In fact, many of the listed projects - such as in the chip industry or energy companies - stem from earlier support programs and are already counted twice. Even the major investments Trump highlighted from Japan, Qatar, or the European Union are so far neither contractually fixed nor fully verifiable. Particularly striking is the supposed contribution from Qatar of 1.2 trillion dollars, which would be several times the country’s annual economic output. Our research revealed that this is purely a declaration of intent and that the amount far exceeds Qatar’s annual GDP.

Further research revealed that there is no trace of this amount in the US budget, SEC filings, or investment databases. Neither the Foreign Direct Investment Flows of the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) nor the Treasury International Capital (TIC) reports nor the Securities and Exchange Commission filings contain entries in 2025 that would indicate such a large capital movement from Qatar to the US.

The announcement served functionally the same purpose as a market-moving corporate disclosure, only without evidence or prospectus obligations. In the US, such an unfounded claim by a publicly listed company is a clear violation of SEC Rule 10b-5, which prohibits false or misleading statements that influence securities prices. For government communications, this rule does not apply, but the effect was still felt: after the publication of the White House fact sheet of May 14, 2025, the NYSE infrastructure ETF rose by 1.8 percent according to Bloomberg and MarketWatch, the US dollar appreciated against the euro and yen, and analysts reacted temporarily optimistically to the supposed foreign investments. A few days later, when the figure remained unsubstantiated, markets reversed - a classic example of politically induced temporary market movements.

Despite the lack of evidence, Trump clings to the narrative of a historic investment surge, however he may have come up with it. His spokespeople refer to the “disciplining effect” of tariffs and claim that the threat of further import taxes forces companies and governments to invest their capital in the United States. But so far, the economic data show no effect: the share of corporate investment in GDP has been stagnating for months at around 14 percent, exactly as before the pandemic.

While Europe and parts of Asia benefited from a raw-material and technology accelerator - for example, through new supply chains in Finland, Ireland, or South Korea - the US government focused on symbolic gestures: withdrawal from trade agreements, cuts in environmental standards, and attempts to generate growth through tax breaks for large corporations. But this policy remained superficial. The big tech companies posted profits, but the broader market - industry, transport, energy, and agriculture - stagnated or lost ground.

The US transport sector is today - as of November 2025 - the largest emitter of greenhouse gases in the country. The course set under Trump has undone many of the previous years’ advances, and even under Biden they could only partially be reversed, because new regulations often fail in Republican-dominated courts.

The five leading countries in the ranking, on the other hand, reflect stability, reform capacity, and targeted support policy. Spain owed its rise to the combination of interest income, infrastructure programs, and a robust banking sector that benefited from the European upswing. Austria’s price gains bore the hallmark of high dividend yields and an energy industry that profited from the substitution of fossil imports. Finland was driven by technology and energy exports, Ireland by pharmaceuticals and financial services, Hong Kong by inflows from mainland China and the boom of Asian technology stocks. The differences are structural, not coincidental.

The data are clear. Worldwide, stock indices have risen on average by nearly 32 percent since January 2025. The United States is thus well below the global average. In real purchasing power, that is, adjusted for inflation, the gain on Wall Street is only about 4.8 percent - as low as in the late 1970s. Trump’s repeated claim that his presidency triggered the “greatest stock market boom of all time” appears in this light like a mirage - an illusion shimmering in the heat of political self-staging but dissolving upon closer inspection. The true dynamism of this era did not unfold in New York, but in Madrid, Vienna, Helsinki, and Dublin - where political stability, European support policy, and a clear course in energy and technology issues gave investors confidence.

The United States is slipping into a self-inflicted economic decline, driven also by Trump’s aggressive migration policy. What was sold as nationalist labor market protection turned out to be an economic explosive. Factories, farms, hospitals, daycare centers, and construction companies are losing workers en masse because the government is expelling the very people who kept the economy running. In agriculture, crops rot, in healthcare, hands are missing, in the service sector, entire structures collapse. The result is a wave of layoffs that has long since reached those who thought they would benefit from Trump’s policies. His isolationism not only destroys jobs - it eats away at the foundation of the American economy.

In October 2025, US companies recorded the highest number of job cuts for that month in more than two decades. According to the consulting firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas, 153,074 layoffs were announced - more than twice as many as in September and about 175 percent more than in October 2024. The labor market is experiencing an abrupt turnaround: after months of subdued hiring, an unprecedented wave of layoffs has arrived. Large corporations such as Amazon are particularly affected, cutting 14,000 office jobs because artificial intelligence is replacing many tasks. Experts warn that the layoffs are a warning sign for the economy - once again driven by Trump’s tariff policy, cuts in public service, the crackdown on migrants, and a slowing AI automation trend.

It remains the contradiction of a presidency that promised wealth and delivered uncertainty. The American stock market, once a symbol of national strength, now reflects the weaknesses of a system guided by short-term symbolic politics. While Trump in speeches still speaks of the “greatest boom in human history,” the balance sheet soberly shows what is: the world moved on - and America was left behind.