Austerity

Flights grounded, public transport disrupted as 80,000 people take to the streets of the Belgian capital.

A general strike against proposed austerity measures in Belgium has grounded flights and halted public transport networks.

Approximately 80,000 people took to the streets in Brussels’s city centre on Tuesday, police said, denouncing potential cuts to social welfare programmes.

Some of the protests devolved into scuffles, as police used tear gas and protesters set off flares and smoke bombs, according to The Associated Press news agency. Several dozen protesters were detained, AP reported.

Some demonstrators carried red prohibition signs with the number 67 on them, in reference to a planned increase in the retirement age. “Right to a pension at 65,” the signs read.

Others sported a picture of conservative Prime Minister Bart De Wever with the caption “wanted for pension theft”.

“We are heading towards a future that doesn’t look good,” one protester, 59-year-old Chantal Desmet, told the AFP news agency. “The government has to take notice.”

Flights cancelled at Brussels International

Walkouts from airport security staff caused all departing flights to be cancelled at the country’s main airport – Brussels International Airport – the facility said, while protests forced cuts on most of Brussels’s underground train, bus and tram lines, according to public transport operator STIB.

The protest is the latest this year against a push by De Wever’s coalition government – which faces a budget deficit that violates EU rules and is trying to find some $12bn in savings – to introduce cuts to pensions and healthcare systems.

But the prime minister’s plans have infuriated the country’s powerful trade unions, which are leading the protest and nationwide strikes.

“What really mobilises people are pensions,” Thierry Bodson, leader of the 1.5 million-member-strong FGTB union, said on the French-language state radio station RTBF.

“This government promised more sustainable jobs and increased purchasing power. Hot air! And once again, everyone is paying, except the rich,” said trade union CSC, as it urged people to join Tuesday’s protest.

The action is ramping up pressure on De Wever, who has pledged to cut deficits without raising taxes but is struggling to finalise next year’s budget.

On Monday, De Wever’s coalition failed to agree on a budget, forcing the prime minister to postpone a key speech to parliament that had been scheduled for Tuesday.

The war on Christmas came early this year — and from an unexpected source: Donald Trump. It’s only May, but he’s already laying the groundwork for empty shelves, wallets and stockings, all thanks to a tariff policy that could hit American consumers hard.

“Maybe the children will have two dolls instead of 30 dolls,” Trump shrugged recently at the end of a Cabinet meeting, “and maybe the two dolls will cost a couple of bucks more.”

Lest you think this Scrooge act was just another off-the-cuff remark, Trump doubled down, reiterating to “Meet the Press” host Kristin Welker: “I don’t think a beautiful baby girl — that’s 11 years old — needs to have 30 dolls. I think they can have three dolls or four dolls. They don’t need to have 250 pencils. They can have five.”

Look, I’m no fan of big-box consumerism. I’m closer to being a minimalist — the kind of person who twitches when a drawer won’t close. So I’m sympathetic to the notion that we’ve all got too much stuff.

But that’s my business; it’s not the president’s job to ration crayons and Barbies like we’re in wartime Britain.

So why is he saying this?

Trump’s rhetoric seems all about selling scarcity as a virtue — while pretending it’s some kind of noble character test for the American family. In short, we should be thanking him for this opportunity to sacrifice.

Again, there’s nothing wrong with parents setting limits or being frugal. But Trump isn’t your daddy. He’s the president. And the last time I checked, he got that job by promising to bring down prices “starting on Day 1.”

And let’s be honest, he’s not exactly the perfect messenger for austerity, anyway.

Think of the irony: A guy with a gold toilet is telling you to Marie Kondo your daughter’s wish list? That takes a lot of chutzpah. Sort of like Ozzy Osbourne telling you you’ve had enough to drink after two gin and tonics.

Imagine, just for a moment, if Barack Obama had said something like this. Or Mitt Romney. Or even George W. Bush. Fox News would have detonated. Glenn Beck would’ve whipped out the chalkboard for an interpretive monologue on the dangers of collectivism. The chyrons write themselves: “Dollgate!” “Central planning!” Sean Hannity would be screaming, “He wants to tell your kids how many stickers they can have!”

Remember how the nation really did react when President Carter called out “self-indulgence and consumption,” and urged Americans to cut back? (His rival in his reelection campaign, Ronald Reagan, shrewdly tapped into Americans’ love of cheap consumer goods, asking voters: “Is it easier for you to go and buy things in the stores than it was four years ago?”)

Once upon a time, Carter’s message was political suicide. But because Trump is a cult of personality, nobody on the right seems to have noticed that Trumponomics has somehow veered into lefty territory — most recently exemplified by Bernie Sanders’ insistence that “you don’t necessarily need a choice of 23 underarm spray deodorants or of 18 different pairs of sneakers.”

Carter and Sanders were rebuked for good reason. But somehow, Trump gets to keep on posing as Reagan meets Santa Claus. This takes good marketing. And my guess is that, in typical Orwellian fashion, Trump’s administration is probably 15 minutes away from rebranding Trump’s two-doll allotment as a “Freedom Rationing.”

Which is crazy. Trump’s comments aren’t just opportunistic, hypocritical and paternalistic; they’re also un-American. Not in the flag-waving, bumper-sticker sense, but in the rugged individualist sense — the part of the American psyche that recoils when anyone in power starts telling you what you need.

Because at its core, what Trump is pushing is a tacit form of defeatism — he’s channeling Carter, just with less Sunday school and way more mistresses. “Don’t touch the thermostat. Put on a cardigan, kid. And make it last through college.”

On top of it all, “Dollgate” conflicts with the aspirational image that has served Trump well over the years.

But here’s the real problem: Trump isn’t just spinning some quirky yarn about kids and their overstuffed toy bins. He’s normalizing the consequences of his own bad policies.

His message isn’t about building character or the simple life; it’s about damage control. He’s trying to recast inflation as virtue, economic strain as moral clarity and consumer scarcity as character building.

Call me crazy, but I don’t think anyone is going to buy it. Americans will tolerate a lot of things, but less stuff isn’t one of them. And no amount of spin is likely to change that.

Because in the end, Trump’s problem isn’t that he’s talking like a thrift-store philosopher; it’s that he’s pushing economic policies that require rationalizing rationing.

Instead of lowering our expectations to fit his policies, he should simply change plans.

You want to spark joy, Mr. Trump? Start by giving the American people more choices — not fewer.

Matt K. Lewis is the author of “Filthy Rich Politicians” and “Too Dumb to Fail.”

The Guardian looks ahead with trepidation to the chancellor’s Spring Statement next week, reporting that Rachel Reeves will announce the biggest spending cuts since austerity – after she ruled out tax rises to tackle the budget deficit.

According to the paper, the move could mean reductions of 7% for some departments over the next four years. It says economists have warned that key public services will be harmed, while Labour MPs are concerned the cuts will put more pressure on the poorest families.

The Daily Mail takes aim at the plans announced by the government earlier this week to fix the welfare system, warning that those who want to get off benefits and enter the workforce may be frustrated by a lack of jobs.

An image of Nicholas Prosper is featured on the front page of The Daily Express, after the teenager was told he would spend a minimum of 49 years in prison for murdering three members of his family and planning a massacre at a school. The paper says the killer was “forced to hear his fate” by what it calls a “common-sense” judge who ordered him to attend court to hear his sentence.

Gun laws will be changed in the wake of the case, the Daily Telegraph says, compelling sellers of firearms to inform police before they hand over weapons to buyers.

The Times focuses on yesterday’s phone call between Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelensky – after the US president told his Ukrainian counterpart that an American takeover of nuclear power plants controlled by Kyiv would offer the “best protection” for the country’s infrastructure.

The paper notes that the White House said Trump had “moved beyond” the minerals deal that was suspended after his explosive public row with Zelensky last month.

The Guardian suggests the first conversation between the presidents since their “Oval Office horror” has helped to turn the page on a low point in relations, with Ukrainian officials saying they are now on “sounder footing” with the Trump administration.

The Sun claims to have seen leaked government papers that suggest the drive to achieve net zero within 25 years risks wiping 10% off economic growth by the end of the decade and triggering a financial crash.

The paper describes the impact assessment forecasts as “terrifying hard evidence” of the national ruin it has long predicted, and urges Sir Keir Starmer to scrap the 2050 target “before Labour presides over our bankruptcy”. The government has told The Sun that net zero is the “economic opportunity of the 21st Century”, delivering good jobs, economic growth and energy security.

With the headline, “I’d Do It All Again”, the Daily Mirror highlights the latest appearance of the former health secretary, Matt Hancock, at the Covid Inquiry. It reports that he defended the “VIP lane” that fast-tracked PPE contracts to companies recommended by MPs or civil servants, arguing the system saved lives and should be used again during the next pandemic.

But the paper says Hancock was criticised by bereaved families who lost relatives to Covid, with one accusing the then Conservative government of “lining the pockets of their mates with public money”.