Why the kids are not all right — and Boomers still pretend nothing’s wrong



Here’s a message Baby Boomers need to hear: The America you were born into no longer exists.

A rising tide of young Americans are embracing socialism at a pace this country has never seen. Boomers often assume that it's about handouts. It isn't. Beneath the surface is a decades-long campaign so destructive to middle-class mobility that it threatens to push the nation toward civil conflict. The more you study it, the more coordinated it looks.

A people dependent upon ‘gimme gimme’ socialism is an easily managed population. A demoralized middle class keeps the ruling class secure.

In a way, it was.

Short-term profit-maximizing globalists on Wall Street teamed up with the K Street lobbying blob to drown Americans in cheap Chinese goods while saddling them with student debt, consumer debt, and medical debt.

Young people are being priced out of the American dream.

My urgent message to Boomers — especially those who want to keep influence: The kids are not all right.

The America your kids and grandkids know is not the America you knew. Most Boomers were born in the 1950s, when the country was booming — united by postwar optimism, American industrial strength, shared national institutions, Walter Cronkite on one television in every home, full-fat milkshakes, and Elvis shaking up the culture.

Today, we live in a golden age of technological revolution. We are making remarkable advances in space travel, tech, and medicine — increasingly led by the private sector and unapologetic capitalists. But on the basics — housing, health, education — we’re failing the next generation.

In 1955, the median homebuyer was in his late 20s. In 2025, it’s 56. A minimum-wage worker in the 1950s needed roughly seven years of pay to buy a modest home without a mortgage. Today, it’s around 27.

In 1955, a student could pay college tuition by working a few hours a day at minimum wage. Today, that same student would need to work about six hours a day. If a kid wants Yale or any Ivy League school, he would have to work 26.4 hours a day — an impossible figure that illustrates how detached elite education has become from reality.

Here’s a frightening divide: 93% of Boomers say political violence is never justified; 44% of Gen Z say it “sometimes” is.

Ninety-nine percent of kids are not out for blood, but 100% of them face a massive relative disadvantage. The upward mobility Boomers took for granted has been hollowed out by globalist and left-wing policies sold as progress but experienced as decline.

We spent trillions of American dollars on foreign wars, foreign infrastructure, and foreign elections. We borrowed recklessly. Now the dollar is frail. We allowed millions of illegal migrants to enter the country, fueling crime and pushing Americans out of jobs. Young households are buried in debt — not mortgage debt that builds equity, but consumer debt used to numb the anxiety left by a collapse in community and faith.

Here’s the truth: The populist right and the socialist left agree on the diagnosis. Listen to the first half of Bernie Sanders’ interview with Joe Rogan in June. For an hour, Bernie describes America’s economic troubles. Most people, right or left, would nod along.

Then comes the pivot: Socialism is the cure.

This is the left’s great deceit. Progressives' proposed “solutions” hurt the very people they claim to help.

RELATED: We built abundance and lost the thing that matters

Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images

Take restrictive zoning and rent regulations — blue-state staples designed to “create” affordable housing. In reality, they choke supply and drive rents higher. Or look at no-cash bail. The neighborhoods hit hardest by serially released offenders are the same minority communities progressives claim to champion. The examples pile up.

So why do left-wing billionaires back these ideas? Simple: Socialism, communism, and their logical end point — fascism — are excellent for entrenched oligarchs. A people dependent upon “gimme gimme” socialism is an easily managed population. A demoralized middle class keeps the ruling class secure.

There is another path.

We must reverse the policies that got us here. Strengthen education outcomes, lower health care costs, rebuild domestic supply chains, expand American energy generation, and restore competence to the workforce.

Boomers, if you don’t lead this shift, your influence will vanish before your next Social Security check arrives. Moderate Democrats already know the socialist tide is rising. They’re afraid to say it out loud.

The Gen Z and Millennial voting bloc will dominate the 2028 election. They are demanding change. Moderates — in both parties — are being replaced by extremists.

You have a choice: Allow yourselves to be absorbed into the socialist machine, or correct the mistakes of the last two decades, return power to citizens, and rebuild access to the American dream.

The Middle Class Can’t Keep Up With Persistent Inflation Forever

Conservatives should focus like a laser beam on making life better for the middle class.

Democrats Aren’t ‘Insane’ Or ‘Unhinged.’ They’re Deliberately And Methodically Anti-American

One thing right-wingers have got to stop doing is brushing off the deliberate intentions of Democrats as “insane,” “crazy,” or “unhinged.” They’re not, and to do so is to give them an excuse for their sick behavior, the way a proven murderer hopes to get off with a “temporary insanity” defense. The temptation is admittedly […]

Woke CEOs mocked conservatives. Now the joke’s on them.



Corporate America is bending to conservatives’ market influence. Not out of sudden ideological sympathy, but because conservatives have more economic power than the left — and they’ve stopped pretending not to notice.

For years, corporations ignored conservative concerns. Worse, they often went out of their way to antagonize them, stripping away team mascots like the Redskins and Indians, embracing diversity quotas, and saturating entertainment with left-wing tropes. The squeaky wheel got the grease, and the left made all the noise.

Free markets punish bad bets more effectively than Washington ever could. Let them.

Conservatives, meanwhile, were taken for granted. Corporate leaders assumed they would keep buying no matter how many insults were thrown their way. For a long time, they were right.

That ended when conservatives started fighting back. Bud Light’s Dylan Mulvaney stunt turned into a disaster. Victoria’s Secret collapsed under its “new image” campaign. Cracker Barrel’s woke makeover backfired so badly its chairs stopped rocking. And when employees mocked Charlie Kirk’s assassination, corporations finally began to realize that “the customer is always right” still applies.

Numbers don’t lie

Corporations aren’t embracing conservatives because they’ve had a change of heart. They’re doing it because they need to survive.

The 2024 election was a wake-up call: Conservative voters outnumbered liberals 35% to 23%. Add moderates, and non-liberals outnumbered liberals more than three to one.

Conservatives overwhelmingly vote Republican. Ninety percent cast ballots for Trump. Pew data shows a majority of middle- and upper-middle-income Americans lean Republican — and 51% of Americans identify as middle class. That’s a lot of disposable income.

Family size makes the math even stronger. The Institute for Family Studies reports that counties where Trump won big also have higher birth rates: 1.76 compared to the national average of 1.63. Harris counties, by contrast, averaged just 1.37. Republicans also want bigger families: half want three or more kids, compared to only 31% of Democrats.

Bigger families and higher incomes mean bigger market clout. And the left’s most extreme advocates — the loudest drivers of corporate wokeness — are a small minority inside an already shrinking ideological bloc.

Why the shift happened

So why did corporations bow to the left for so long? Two reasons.

First, executives themselves lean left. Pew Research found upper-income Americans tilt Democrat, and CEOs have marched steadily leftward over the last two decades. Second, conservatives tolerated it. They didn’t punish woke messaging, making it appear costless for companies to indulge their leadership’s politics.

That illusion is gone. Conservative consumers are awake. And companies are finally capitulating to reality.

RELATED: The right message: Justice. The wrong messenger: Pam Bondi.

Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

Don’t let government ruin it

This is why Republicans should resist the urge to meddle. FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr made a mistake threatening ABC over Jimmy Kimmel. “We can do this the easy way or the hard way”? Let’s not.

That kind of government action obscures the real shift — a market correction, not a political one.

Markets speak louder than regulators. If conservatives let economics do the work, corporations will continue adjusting out of necessity. But if government steps in, companies will chalk the change up to political coercion, not consumer demand, and drift back toward the left as soon as administrations change.

Already the left is trying to spin it that way, casting Jimmy Kimmel as a martyr for “free expression” instead of what he is: a bad business decision. The left wants companies to believe government, not consumers, forced the pivot.

Conservatives know better. Free markets punish bad bets more effectively than Washington. Let them.

Deporting Illegal Immigrants Is Not Enough

Importing culturally foreign, economically dependent people is destroying the American way of life.

Mass immigration means dependence, and dependence means control



Power always seeks to expand. It never halts for principles or words on paper, but only for rival powers strong enough to resist it. Those rivals must have deep roots, independent resilience, and the ability to demand loyalty. They must project sovereignty in ways the state cannot easily replicate, establishing spheres of influence that can resist government overreach without ever firing a shot.

Historically, strong communities provided this check. Their religions and folkways became the rhythms of life, passed down through generations. These beliefs drew authority from transcendent sources no earthly power could reproduce. Families built churches, schools, libraries, civic organizations, unions, and fraternities to preserve culture, transmit values, and care for members.

Communities with shared traditions can limit state commands. But diversity dissolves those limits.

Such communities formed spheres of sovereignty. They made competing demands on their members and provided services the state could not: spiritual grounding, mutual aid, a sense of identity. Membership required specific behaviors to remain in good standing, norms the state could not easily reshape. Because traditions were deeply ingrained, the state had to respect them or risk serious resistance.

Over time, these communities often accumulated wealth. Virtue and stability generated surplus capital, which supported robust institutions and provided safety nets. Their members no longer relied on government in times of need. They relied on each other. These were the kulaks — the middle class — people whose independence created natural barriers to state expansion. Not atomized “self-reliance,” but communal reliance: stability rooted in culture and habit. That is precisely why governments sought to break them.

High and low vs. the middle

The political theorist Bertrand de Jouvenel, in "On Power," described the classic formula: high and low versus the middle. The ruling class always wants more power, but the middle class resists. The poor, being dependent and disorganized, cannot mount opposition. Only the middle class, with property, institutions, and traditions, can stand in the way. To expand power, rulers must dissolve these spheres of sovereignty.

Their method is alliance with the dependent lower classes. Sometimes this means the domestic underclass. But that group still shares culture and traditions with the middle, making it less reliable as a tool. Importing a foreign underclass works better. Immigrants lack roots in the land or its traditions. They can be counted on to side with rulers against the entrenched middle.

Mass immigration delivers cheap labor to the wealthy while creating a new political client base. The upper class benefits from gardeners and nannies. Politicians gain millions of new voters to whom they can promise state benefits.

Dependence as a weapon

Immigrant groups rarely possess cohesive culture or resilient institutions. They lack roots, leisure, or unity to resist. They depend on the ruling class for entry, employment, rights, and welfare. Many don’t speak the language. They need the state to survive — and they reward the state with loyalty. This isn’t passive dependence. To succeed, they actively require the state to expand.

To serve this new underclass, rulers pillage the middle. Kulaks are blamed for inequality. They are guilted, taxed, or coerced into surrendering what they built. That wealth is transferred to immigrants, cementing the state’s power over both. The middle grows poorer, loses property, closes institutions, and becomes more unstable. Families that once resisted government control now depend on it.

RELATED: ‘Paperwork Americans’ are not your countrymen

Blaze Media illustration

Mass immigration also erodes culture, another obstacle to power. Communities with shared traditions can limit state commands. But diversity dissolves those limits. Forced to mingle with newcomers, the shared identity frays. Cultural separation becomes taboo. Institutions that once passed on values and provided aid collapse. Charities are drained. Public spaces decay. And those who maintained them see no reason to sacrifice for strangers.

The state ensures that escape is impossible. First taboo, then law, forbids communities to separate and reform. Those who try are smeared as bigots, then prosecuted. The middle is barred from reconstituting its way of life. Virtue fades. The spheres of sovereignty are gone. Everyone becomes a rootless dependent, giving the state a blank check to expand its power.

Why immigration became policy

This is why mass immigration became a priority across Western liberal democracies. It doesn’t just dismantle barriers to state power; it builds a machine to demand more of it. Rulers gain cheap labor, grateful voters, and excuses to raid the middle. The cost is cultural dissolution, but to elites that is a feature, not a bug.

If we want an elite that serves its people rather than undermines them, we must choke off this supply of outside populations. Stop importing clients. Stop dissolving communities. Restore the middle class and the spheres of sovereignty that protect liberty. Only then can the leviathan be caged.

Medicaid for millions, misery for the middle class



For months, Republicans and Democrats alike have insisted on keeping the Medicaid subsidy scam alive — even as it drives inflation and enriches the health care cartel. With the Biden-era expansion of Obamacare “marketplace” subsidies set to expire in December, both parties want to renew them. But this moment offers Republicans a rare opportunity: Finally lower health care costs for Americans not living on government handouts.

Obamacare buried the middle class

The ill-named Affordable Care Act helped Republicans win more elections than any issue in recent memory. But since 2016, the party has run from the fight. The result: Individual plans became unaffordable for anyone not getting subsidies, and employer-based coverage got gutted. Workers earn less in take-home pay and pay more for thinner plans.

The signature feature of Obamacare was turning catastrophic coverage into a luxury item.

Rather than continually shielding consumers from Obamacare’s price hikes with subsidies, why not repeal the mandates that caused the pain in the first place?

The numbers speak for themselves. In 2013, just before Obamacare took full effect, the average unsubsidized premium for individual coverage was $197 per month. By 2017, it had nearly doubled to $393. Family plans saw a 140% jump in that same period, from $426 to $1,021. Today, a typical family policy without subsidies costs $2,000 to $2,500 per month.

According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, average family premiums climbed from $13,770 in 2010 to $25,572 in 2024 — an 85% increase. And that “Cadillac plan” price tag now buys you higher deductibles and fewer benefits than a cheap pre-Obamacare policy.

Younger workers don’t even know what hit them. They’ve inherited a system designed to fleece them and can’t afford to opt out.

Even employer-based insurance has suffered. Since 2014, family premiums have risen 52%, while workers’ share has jumped 31%. Deductibles for individual plans have increased 53%, reaching $1,787 in 2024. Americans now pay more out of pocket for less protection.

This wasn’t an accident. It was baked into the law. Obamacare banned insurers from pricing plans based on risk, age, or gender. That shifted costs from older, sicker Americans to younger, healthier ones. Those who don’t qualify for subsidies pay top dollar for a bloated, mandatory benefits package they didn’t ask for.

Meanwhile, over 70 million lower-income Americans got dumped onto Medicaid — and Republicans went along with it. If Medicaid expansion is the new baseline, then at least fix the rest of the system for the middle class.

Caught in the middle

The political class loves to talk about the millions who gained “coverage” through Medicaid expansion and premium tax credits. They ignore the millions who earn too much to qualify for substantial assistance but too little to afford the staggering premiums.

These Americans are Obamacare’s silent victims — and they’re forced to choose between health coverage and other basic needs.

Subsidies don’t solve the problem. They mask it. The real crisis is the cost of health care itself.

Republicans already get hammered for supposedly “cutting Medicaid,” even when they’re only targeting fraud. They pay the political price for Obamacare without reaping any of the reform benefits. So why not go on offense and start dismantling the cartel?

Demand real reform

Instead of rubber-stamping another round of subsidies, Republicans should demand one simple trade-off: Let states offer unregulated, cheaper health care plans.

Don’t extend subsidies for the wealthy or the idle. And if temporary subsidies are unavoidable, they should be tied to an overhaul next year.

The signature feature of Obamacare was turning catastrophic coverage into a luxury item. Letting states revive affordable catastrophic plans would free up cash for direct primary care — and crack the cartel’s grip on pricing.

RELATED: Pushing back against the big Medicaid lie

Yurii Karvatskyi via iStock/Getty Images

And that’s just the beginning. Congress should allow health savings accounts, self-employment deductions, and employer exclusions to apply to alternative options like health-sharing ministries and concierge care. Workers should be able to use HSA funds to pay their own premiums or direct care memberships.

Employers should receive the same tax benefits for contributing to an employee’s HSA as they would for funding a traditional insurance plan. That gives workers real purchasing power and puts pressure on the cartel to compete.

Break the cartel. Rebuild the market.

Even if Republicans won’t fully repeal Obamacare, they must scrap the ban on physician-owned hospitals. That carve-out handed a monopoly to corporate health systems and helped bankrupt rural hospitals — a crisis both parties now pretend to solve with more subsidies.

You can’t subsidize your way out of a bottomless pit of inflationary grift. The only real solution is to let Americans escape the sinkhole that turned affordable health care into unaffordable sick care.

This is the GOP’s last chance to fix what it failed to kill. Make it count.

Welcome to Rent Nation, where no one owns and no one is free



For generations, homeownership has been a cornerstone of the American dream. It meant stability, responsibility, and the chance to pass wealth to the next generation. It gave people a stake in their communities.

But that dream is slipping away. And it’s not by accident.

If we want Americans to remain free and self-governing, they must be able to own their homes and their futures.

We are drifting into a rental society. Fewer families can afford to buy a home, while massive investment firms and corporate landlords are buying up the housing supply and turning America into a nation of tenants.

This is hardly the natural evolution of the market. Rather, it’s the result of decades of bad policy, turbocharged by emerging technology and justified by global elites who’ve decided that private property is both outdated and unsustainable.

The corporate land grab

The “renters’ revolution” emerged from bad policy. For years, local, state, and federal governments have made it more difficult and expensive to build homes. Zoning restrictions choke supply.

Environmental rules delay development. Add in the unintended consequences of government-backed mortgage schemes in the Bill Clinton era, which played a major role in the 2008 housing market crash, and you’ve got a system that makes homes less attainable, despite the stated intentions of the enacted policies.

Into that broken system stepped Wall Street. After the crash, investment giants like Blackstone began buying up foreclosed homes in bulk, turning millions of single-family homes into rental properties. Much of this trend is made possible by emerging technology.

Today, institutional investors use artificial intelligence and algorithmic tools to scan markets and make instant cash offers, often outbidding families looking to buy their first homes. Companies such as Invitation Homes own tens of thousands of properties, all of which are managed through centralized apps, automated lease terms, and data-driven pricing tools.

We are experiencing a market shift — from millions of individual owners to a few corporate landlords.

Ideological push against ownership

This shift is also being encouraged, explicitly and implicitly, by international organizations pushing a post-ownership future. The World Economic Forum’s “you’ll own nothing and be happy” slogan was presented as a prediction, not a policy.

But look closer, and you’ll see that many World Economic Forum and United Nations initiatives actively promote this shift. The U.N.’s Sustainable Development Goals call for denser high-rise cities, a move away from single-family zoning, and new restrictions on suburban development, all in the name of “sustainability” and “equity.”

It’s a coordinated ideological push to replace ownership with access, property with subscriptions, and permanence with flexibility. And the consequences are already showing.

The price of being a permanent renter

When you don’t own your home, you don’t control it. You follow the rules set by someone else. That might mean no pets, no subleasing, and often no firearms on the premises.

As environmental, social, and governance scores, smart devices, and digital IDs creep into the rental landscape, we are fast approaching a future where landlords, driven by corporate and political incentives, can enforce ideological compliance under the guise of lease terms.

Renting means you’re always paying, never building. Homes have long been the foundation of middle-class wealth in America. When families are locked out of ownership, they’re locked out of that opportunity. The result is a cycle where equity flows upward to institutional investors while working families remain stuck on the hamster wheel.

RELATED: Property taxes are killing middle-class ownership nationwide

Photo by: Jim West/UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

The “renters’ revolution” isn’t without psychological and cultural costs too. People who own their homes are more likely to put down roots, raise families, get involved in their communities, and feel a stake in the future of the country. Renters, especially when forced into that role, often feel transient and disempowered. That rootlessness is breeding disconnection and resentment.

The political fallout

These psychological costs have political consequences. Younger Americans, who increasingly see homeownership as unattainable, are also more likely to believe the system is rigged against them.

And who can blame them? They’re being told that capitalism failed them, when in reality, it’s crony capitalism, ESG corporatism, and global central planners who’ve rigged the game. But that distinction is often lost — or intentionally obscured. This increases the potential for them to turn to the siren song of socialism or further government action.

This is not just an economic problem. It’s a civic one. A society where most people don’t own anything is a society that’s easier to control, easier to manipulate, and easier to pacify. If we want Americans to remain free and self-governing, they must be able to own their homes and their futures.

We need lawmakers to investigate the concentration of housing in corporate hands. We need to roll back ESG-driven distortions in markets and rethink zoning rules that throttle supply. We should do more to promote first-time homeownership, rather than punishing it. And we must restore the idea that private property is not just an economic good — it’s a political necessity.

'Are you kidding me?' CNN analyst expresses disbelief over Democrats' loss of critical demographic



Democrats lost the White House and the U.S. Senate in November and were unable to make sufficient headway in the House to make their hysterical opposition to Republican initiatives insurmountable. In the months since, they have continued losing in various ways, especially in the way of public confidence.

The disapproval rating for the party as a whole was 58.3% as of May 25, according to polling by the Economist and YouGov. A new CNN survey conducted by SSRS and published June 1 revealed that only 16% of Americans figure the party's leaders as strong and only 19% of respondents indicated the party was capable of getting things done.

The Democratic Party has apparently lost a lot more than face and confidence — it no longer has a stranglehold on the middle class, a critical demographic that accounts for roughly half the electoral pie.

CNN chief data analyst Harry Enten built up to this revelation on Monday, noting first that when it comes to the economy, Americans just trust Republicans more.

When asked which political party's views were closer to their own on the economy, 38% of respondents said the Republican Party in a CNN survey. Thirty-one percent said the Democrats' views were representative.

RELATED: Scott Jennings drops reality check on CNN — Dems' support for boys in girls' sports, illegal aliens destroying their brand

Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images

"How is that possible, Democrats? How is that possible after all the recession fears? After the stock markets been doing all of this?" said an exasperated Enten, simulating market ups and downs with his hand. "After all the tariffs that Americans are against? And Republicans still hold an eight-point lead on the economy — are you kidding me?"

CNN talking head Kate Bolduan appeared keen for Enten to paint a silver lining on this bad news for Democrats, but he was unable to deliver. Instead, Enten noted that other polling data similarly suggests Americans regard the GOP as the party with the better economic plan.

'Donald Trump and the Republican Party have taken that mantle away.'

"The Republicans still hold an advantage on the all-important key issue of the day," said Enten. "And that is the reason why, even if Donald Trump's approval ratings are a little bit lower than they used to be, Republicans are not out of the ballgame because they still have a clear advantage on the economy."

Enten was not finished burdening Bolduan with bad news for Democrats.

He suggested that Democrats have for decades — since at least 1989 — held a significant, double-digit advantage over Republicans with the middle class. Enten noted, however, that the Democratic Party's advantage had slipped in recent years to a negligible lead, "well within the margin of error."

"Now, in our latest CNN poll, among registered voters, 'which is the party of the middle class?' It is tied," said Enten. "This, I think, speaks to Democratic ills more than anything else. They have traditionally been the party of the middle class. No more. Donald Trump and the Republican Party have taken that mantle away."

'A key advantage for Democrats historically has gone Adios amigos.'

According to a 2024 Gallup poll, 54% of Americans identify as part of the middle class.

There are numerous factors at play here besides former President Joe Biden's disastrous time in the White House, a few of which were highlighted by the New York Times earlier this year.

RELATED: Democrats are just noticing a long, deep-running problem

Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images

The Times noted that while Democrats rushed to pin their estrangement from the working and middle classes on the party's embrace of gender ideology and woke policies, Democratic leaders' prioritization of consumers over workers; promotion of job-killing climate and globalist initiatives; and shift away from unions hurt the relationship.

When asked which was the party of the middle class, 34% of respondents in the CNN survey said the Democratic Party, 32% said the Republican Party, and 33% said neither party.

"A key advantage for Democrats historically has gone adios amigos," said Enten. "And now there is no party that is the party of the middle class. Republicans have completely closed the gap."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Trump’s trade crackdown may be US Steel’s last shot



Cleveland-Cliffs, America’s fourth-largest steel producer, stunned West Virginia earlier this month by shelving plans to reopen a shuttered steel mill as an electrical transformer plant.

The project would have restored 600 of the 1,000 jobs lost when the company idled the mill in February. Instead, the cancellation marked just one of several disappointing announcements since March, all driven by the company’s ongoing financial problems. In total, Cleveland-Cliffs plans to idle six facilities across Pennsylvania and the Midwest.

If the choice is between watching Cleveland-Cliffs and US Steel collapse or breathing new life into one through foreign direct investment, Trump won’t hesitate.

And who suffers most? Steelworkers and their families — the people left out of the headlines.

I’ve tracked the steel industry’s decline for decades, first as the lone free-market conservative senior adviser at the Alliance for American Manufacturing, and later through various economic roles in Washington, D.C. Cleveland-Cliffs’ troubles are just the latest symptoms of a chronically ailing American steel sector, burdened by nearly a dozen deeply rooted problems that won’t be solved quickly.

Steelmakers now face skyrocketing costs for raw materials, energy, and labor. At the same time, they compete against a global glut of cheap steel, particularly from Chinese companies that flood markets and drive down prices. Geopolitical tensions, supply shortages, and transportation choke points only add to the chaos. The result: an industry pushed to the brink — and workers left behind.

Some steel companies are taking creative steps to survive. In December 2023, U.S. Steel announced a proposed sale to Japanese rival Nippon Steel. CEO David Burritt had warned just three months earlier that without a strong buyer, he would likely shut down the Mon Valley Works plant near Pittsburgh — an iconic facility employing more than 3,000 workers — and move company headquarters from the “Steel City” to Arkansas.

Nippon Steel emerged as the most financially viable bidder, outpacing Cleveland-Cliffs, which remains weighed down by persistent losses. Despite this, the Biden administration blocked the deal. President Trump initially opposed the sale but has since indicated a willingness to approve it.

For years, I’ve advocated better trade policies — especially deregulation and aggressive action against China. As a former commissioner on the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, I pushed to crack down on China’s intellectual property theft and ongoing geo-economic abuses. Trump’s trade agenda gives the United States its best shot in decades to protect jobs from Chinese exploitation and reopen long-shuttered paths to profitable domestic manufacturing.

RELATED: Can Trump revive American steel?

Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

On the home front, Trump’s 10-to-1 deregulation initiative — eliminating 10 old rules for every new one — could transform the business landscape. He’s already eyeing 44 regulations that manufacturers want repealed. What critics call a “tariff war” with China is really just Washington’s overdue reckoning with decades of failure to hold Beijing accountable.

These policy reforms won’t take effect overnight. And manufacturers like U.S. Steel can’t afford to wait while neglect and decay continue. Nippon Steel’s $14.9 billion bid offers a direct infusion of capital that could revive this historic company and inject new life into a battered industry.

Look at what Nippon’s latest offer — now exceeding $20 billion — includes:

  • A $1.3 billion commitment to upgrade and modernize two U.S. Steel plants.
  • Guarantees to retain the full U.S. Steel workforce and honor existing union contracts.
  • A $5,000 bonus for every U.S. Steel employee once the deal closes.

President Trump understands business and negotiation. His priority — rightly — focuses on revitalizing American industry and creating jobs that put affordable groceries, including now-cheaper eggs, back on the tables of steelworkers.

If the choice is between watching Cleveland-Cliffs and U.S. Steel collapse or breathing new life into one through foreign direct investment, Trump won’t hesitate. He’ll choose growth — and he’ll be right to do so.