The world is still reeling from the unexpected results of the US elections, in which Donald Trump was elected as the 45th President of the United States of America, despite losing the popular vote.

Protests against the results still continue and hate crimes against Muslims are on the rise, as Trump’s character adds a layer of uncertainty. As President Barack Obama argued, to no avail, it is worrying when someone who will now have control of the nuclear codes cannot be trusted with their own Twitter account.

The President Elect, whose inexperience, character, temperament and knowledge appear to make him unsuited for this high office and as Commander-In-Chief of the strongest nation in the world, has chosen a team of conservative hardliners who are also controversial.

According to media reports, Trump’s transition team is in absolute chaos, awash with conflicts of interest. The people they’ve floated as cabinet members are extremists, torture supporters and generally awful people who should be nowhere near the levers of power.

His transition team is filled with lobbyists, while special interest representatives are heading up the transition for federal departments they probably wish didn’t exist in the first place.

On the cabinet positions front, the Trump team floats even more horrible names for one position or another. For instance, Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions, a man with a long-documented <http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/17/us/politics/specter-of-race-shadows-jeff-sessions-potential-trump-nominee-for-cabinet.html> history of racism, is being considered for attorney general or secretary of defence.

Rudy Giuliani, the former mayor of New York, is angling for secretary of state. Giuliani, who has spent the last six months race-baiting for Trump on various television networks, claimed that “anything’s legal” during war.

Ted Cruz, a man who advocated for <http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/21/us/politics/as-supreme-court-clerk-ted-cruz-made-death-penalty-his-cause.html?_r=0> the death penalty while a Supreme Court clerk years ago, is <http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-11-16/ted-cruz-said-to-be-considered-by-trump-for-attorney-general> now being floated as attorney general. The other name coming up for the nation’s top law enforcement position is <http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article1149504 23.html> Kris Kobach, an anti-immigration hardliner.

Reuters <http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-immigration-idUSKBN13B05C?feedT ype=RSS&feedName=politicsNews&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=Social> reported that Kobach said “the new administration could push ahead rapidly on construction of a US-Mexico border wall without seeking immediate congressional approval” and that Trump was considering a patently unconstitutional “registry” for Muslim immigrants.

According to experts, this uncertainty will itself damage securities prices and shake confidence. However, only once Trump is in office, will a clear direction be set. What horrors are in store when Trump finally takes office won’t be known for a couple months. But one thing is clear: it’s hard to imagine a more dangerous team than the one being put together right now.

Experts are of the opinion that the consequences of a Trump presidency will be many and varied, but the economic ones will not be the least important.

The first item on the agenda is the <https://www.ft.com/topics/organisations/Federal_Reserve> Federal Reserve and according to experts, his administration might even reverse globalisation, cancel trade accords, withdraw from the Climate Change agreement, destabilise the financial system, weaken US public finances and threaten trust in the dollar.

An aggressive fiscal expansion, such as slashing corporate tax, would presumably pass the <https://www.ft.com/content/55920ca2-a630-11e6-8b69-02899e8bd9d1> Republican House. That could raise inflation, but might well cheer asset markets. Hopes for such a positive outcome helped limit the initial damage once Wall Street opened on Wednesday, after overnight futures markets had signalled a sweeping sell-off.

The range of possibilities goes back to early Reagan years, when a great bull market took root, to the disastrous Smoot-Hawley tariffs that followed the 1929 crash. In any case, extreme volatility is certain.

<https://www.ft.com/content/4efcd174-99d3-11e6-b8c6-568a43813464> US-led globalization is already fragile and Mr Trump is likely to push it into its coffin and after his victory, the <http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/trump-trade-tpp-2016-presidential-ele ction-231112> Trans-Pacific Partnership looks dead. The President Elect has also suggested that his administration might repeal or renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Above all, he has suggested imposition of <http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/11/09/501464785/three-ways-president-elect-trump-may-shake-up-trade-policy> high tariffs, especially on imports from China and Mexico, to discourage companies from laying off their workers in order to relocate in other countries and ship their products back to the US tax-free.

This would almost certainly be contrary to World Trade Organization rules and would also create a risk of retaliation, especially from China. The, <https://piie.com/publications/piie-briefings/assessing-trade-agendas-us-presidential-campaign> costs to the US, world trade and the credibility of the trading system might prove very high.

A second area of concern is financial regulation. Mr Trump has supported repeal of the 2010 <https://www.ft.com/content/2edad6a2-a6a3-11e6-8898-79a99e2a4de6> Dodd-Frank Act, the regulatory response to the financial crisis. Many financial businesses hate it. Yet the question is whether it would be replaced by a more effective alternative or by a return to the pre-crisis free-for-all situation.

In that case, the chances of another crisis would surely be enhanced. The President Elect also wants a big surge of spending on <http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/10/us/politics/trump-speech-transcript.html?_r=0> infrastructure and <http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publication-pdf s/2000924-an-analysis-of-donald-trumps-revised-tax-plan.pdf> tax cuts. The <https://www.ft.com/content/bd061060-a732-11e6-8898-79a99e2a4de6> former would be desirable, particularly if the projects were sensible.

The tax proposals would shower huge benefits on already rich Americans such as Mr Trump. According to the <http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publication-pdf s/2000924-an-analysis-of-donald-trumps-revised-tax-plan.pdf> Tax Policy Centre, his latest plan would raise the after-tax income of those in the middle fifth of the income distribution by $1,010 or 1.8 per cent.

Together, Mr Trump’s populism and the Republicans’ tax-cutting mania might open up large and permanent increases in fiscal deficits. This would then pose a big challenge for the <https://www.ft.com/content/81ccb764-a698-11e6-8b69-02899e8bd9d1> US Federal Reserve.

The obvious response would be to tighten monetary policy. Mr Trump has indicated he favours this, but he has also suggested the economy should grow at close to <http://www.npr.org/2016/09/15/494112503/trump-sets-audacious-goal-of-4-percent-economic-growth> 4 per cent a year. That seems impossible, given the slow growth of the labour force.

What actually happens depends on whether Mr Trump does as president and what he had stated as candidate and on his interaction with Congress. <https://www.ft.com/content/2707720e-a6a4-11e6-8b69-02899e8bd9d1> Some suggest that wiser heads will prevail and contain his excesses.

However, little in his past behaviour suggests that this is plausible, but make no mistake, Trump’s triumph might destabilise the <https://www.ft.com/content/b51c47bc-a66e-11e6-8b69-02899e8bd9d1> US and world economies.

 (trust@helplinetrust.org.pk).