Two months into the second administration of Donald Trump, the United States is experiencing considerable turmoil. The labor force is subject to abrupt changes, with tens of thousands of workers being dismissed and then rehired shortly after. Tariff fluctuations are influenced by the president’s personal discontent rather than strategic considerations. This has led to deportations that defy judicial orders, pushing the nation toward a potential constitutional crisis. The sole constant in this environment is its unpredictability.
Despite this chaos, it might appear unexpected on the surface. Trump is renowned for positioning himself as a top-tier businessman, with Elon Musk often viewed similarly. Their combined expertise was purportedly meant to save America from financial despair. However, few case studies from esteemed institutions like Harvard Business School advocate for achieving success through maximal instability.
An analysis employing Occam’s razor suggests the country’s instability is due, in part, to the president and his de facto CEO acting in ways that are both self-serving and lacking competence. Amidst the confusion, there seems to be an underlying challenge, as each controversial action appears to test new limits.
This uncertainty also has global implications. Tourism has significantly declined, as foreigners reconsider their visits to a nation perceived as increasingly hostile to non-citizens. In response to potential conflict and shifting alliances, European nations are rearming themselves, with Ukraine becoming a pivotal point in the longstanding US-European solidarity. Additionally, there’s consideration among allies about reducing intelligence sharing with the US, given the Trump administration’s warming ties with Russia under Vladimir Putin.
The situation resembles the dramatic twists of a professional wrestling storyline, yet the US traditionally plays a role not in spectacle but reliability. Currently, the nation functions in an erratic and unpredictable manner. International diplomacy relies heavily on maintaining strong relationships, which Trump appears to be dismantling consistently, except in relations with Moscow.
The administration’s fiscal approach resembles a scorched-earth tactic, seemingly attempting to create a minimally functioning government. A genuine turnaround relies on having a coherent plan, and rapidly firing employees without evaluating their qualifications does not constitute such a plan, leading instead to further instability.
On a positive note, many of these employees are being reinstated as judicial processes advance, although these rehirings might be provisional pending higher court rulings. Even with reinstatement, it’s uncertain how committed these employees will be, knowing how they are valued by their employer.
The broader question is who would want to work for the current government. Despite modest compensation, civil service typically offers the fulfillment of serving a greater purpose alongside job security—both of which seem compromised in the current climate. The ongoing pursuits of Trump’s political agenda and Musk’s ventures inevitably may exhaust available human resources, such as SpaceX interns.
