Landing Still Cancelled: Labor Market Cruises through Updrafts and Air Pockets

But all the breathless layoff-hype in the media scared workers and tamped down on wage growth.

By Wolf Richter for WOLF STREET.

Job markets don’t turn around on a dime, unless some kind of meteor hits the economy. So we’re going to look beyond the artificial drama of the month-to-month changes, and we’re going to look at the trends, and by those trends, the labor market is cruising along, flying right through occasional updrafts and air pockets.

For over a year now, we’ve been waiting for the labor market to land. But that just hasn’t happened, though the Fed has jacked up its policy rates to 5.25% and is getting ready to push them higher, in order to bring the labor market to land. What has happened is that the labor market has come down from the stratosphere and is cruising along at a still fairly high altitude.

Employers added 209,000 payroll-type jobs in June, based on surveys of establishments by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Over the past three months, employers added 732,000 jobs, for an average of 244,000 per month, which is still higher than during the Good Times before the pandemic. So far this year, 1.67 million jobs were created. This chart shows the three-month moving average, which irons out some of the noisy ups-and-downs:

These additions raised the total number of payroll-type jobs to 156.6 million:

The total number of workers, including those with gig work, rose by 273,000 in June, after the decline in May, and after the jumps in the prior months. This data is based on surveys of households and tracks work of any kind including by the self-employed that are not included in the above establishment data.

The household data is very volatile, with big monthly ups and downs, so we’ll look at the six-month average: Over the past six months, the number of people who are working grew by 1.75 million, for an average of 291,700 per month, which is also largely above the Good Times before the pandemic:

This total number of workers, from employees at companies to the self-employed, rose to 161.0 million in June:

The number of unemployed people who are actively looking for a job dipped again in June to 5.96 million, after ticking up in May. The three-month average has been inching up from historic lows early this year but remains historically low:

The labor force gained 133,000 people in June, to a total labor force of 167.0 million. These are people who are either working or actively looking for work. Over the past three months, the labor force ticked up only by 220,000 people, held down by a decline in April. Over the past six months, it rose by 1.98 million. This chart shows the three-month moving average:

The prime-age labor participation rate – people aged 24 through 54 either working or actively looking for work – rose to 83.5% in June, the highest since 2002 when the labor market came out of the Dotcom-Bubble period. The three-month average rose to 83.3%.

People in their prime working age are now participating in the labor market at a rate not seen in 20 years. The prime-age data dodges the issues of the bulging ranks of older people who are either retired or on the verge of retirement:

But all the breathless layoff hype in the media tamped down on wage growth, which is why companies that get a lot of media attention make such a big to-do out of their global layoff announcements. And the media jump all over it. It just scares workers, and they’re less likely to ask for a raise, and they’re less likely to push for higher compensation when they get hired. And we’re starting to see that in other data too.

Average hourly earnings of “production and non-supervisory employees” rose by 0.38% in June from May, same as in the prior month. The three-month average was 0.36%, same as in the prior month, and has been in the 0.36% to 0.38% for the past five months. This translates into an annualized increase of around 4.7%. And that seems where wage increases are now stabilizing.

Year-over-year, average hourly earnings of “production and non-supervisory employees” rose by 4.7%, in line with the annualized rates in recent months, but the smallest year-over-year increase since June 2021.

By comparison, the Consumer Price Index for all items increased by 4.1% year-over-year. And for now, workers are out-earning CPI inflation.

These “production and non-supervisory employees” are engineers, teachers, bartenders, technicians, drivers, retail workers, wait staff, office workers, construction workers, nurses, etc. in non-supervisory roles. They make up the bulk of total employment.

The unemployment rate dipped to 3.6%, as per the narrowest unemployment measure, from 3.7% in May, but up from 3.4% in April, which had been a historic low. The rate dipped due to the mix of an only slightly larger labor force but fewer unemployed people. The rate has hovered in the range between 3.4% and 3.8% since February 2022.

The employment-to-population ratio remained at 60.3%, same as in May, but down from 60.4% in March and April. All of them are the highest since before the pandemic. Since there is no upper age limit in this metric of “working age,” it includes retirees and points at the bulge of people who retired recently.

Other labor market data: No landing either.

The private-sector ADP National Employment Report yesterday raised eyebrows yesterday when it reported that 497,000 jobs were created in June. Wages rose 6.4% year-over-year, but that was down from prior months.

Initial claims for unemployment insurance, four-week moving average dipped a tad yesterday to 253,250. The metric has been inching up from historic lows and is now just a tad above the Good Time right before the pandemic (between 200,000 and 235,000). Somewhere near 350,000 might be the beginning of a recessionary labor market.

Continued claims for unemployment insurance: the four-week moving average, after rising earlier in the year, has been declining over the past three months, an indication that laid-off workers that filed for unemployment insurance are getting new jobs faster than newly unemployed are added to the list, which confirms the theory that people caught up in mass-layoffs can get hired fairly quickly. This is a sign of an updraft in the labor market.

To shed some additional light on the jobs report, read: The Long View of Job Growth by Industry: Some Gained Jobs; at Others, Jobs Got Crushed

Enjoy reading WOLF STREET and want to support it? You can donate. I appreciate it immensely. Click on the beer and iced-tea mug to find out how:

Would you like to be notified via email when WOLF STREET publishes a new article? Sign up here.

  131 comments for “Landing Still Cancelled: Labor Market Cruises through Updrafts and Air Pockets

  1. HR01 says:


    Yes your final paragraph nails it. Continuing claims for unemployment insurance remain glued to all-time lows (relative to the size of the labor force).

    Recession? Nope.

    • John Apostolatos says:

      “Continuing claims for unemployment insurance remain glued to all-time lows (relative to the size of the labor force).

      Recession? Nope.”

      What about those who have exhausted their claims? This may be anecdotal, but I do know of a few who got laid off in high tech last Fall and are not collecting any more unemployment and have not found jobs either. I wonder how widespread that is.

      • Einhal says:

        I suspect that they could have found jobs, just not at the ridiculous inflated salaries they were getting before.

        • mol says:

          I am curious as to how you might define the ‘ridiculous inflated salary’ line. If someone spends most of a decade in college and graduate school, giving up wages during that time, at what salary do they deserve derision?

        • JD says:

          Most people in tech do not have a decade of schooling. 😂

        • Digger Dave says:


          If someone spends years honing a much-needed trade and will end up wearing their body out by their mid 50s, where are their inflated earnings for the sacrifice.

          I’m going to say spare me the whining. Anyone making $150,000 or more in some unnecessary but lucrative tech job has it easy and if that never comes back society will not be worse off for it.

          The people doing these jobs deserve derision when they refuse to take any job because it doesn’t pay as much as some other job they once held, especially if that job paid several times over the median salary in the country.

          Our society deserves derision for structuring itself so that many not needed jobs are specialized and overpaid versus things we actually need, like affordable clean food, vehicles kept on the road and homes maintained.

          No sympathy here.

        • John Apostolatos says:


          You may be surprised about the brutality of what is happening to those who got laid off in tech. Jobs yes, but mostly posted by offshore Indian staffing firms demanding 8-10 years of experience for 40-50 dollars per hour with no benefits.

          By the way, $60k a year is the poverty line for a family of 4 in Seattle, so offering 80k to a tech worker is no that far off.

        • Einhal says:

          I’m not talking about people being offered $80k in Seattle necessarily.

          But the fact is, there were people working for Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc. making obscene salaries for their ages and experience, and only due to the ZIRP induced tech bubble was that possible. For example, the median (not mean, meaning that a few execs aren’t dragging the average up) salary at Facebook was $240,000 in 2017. God knows what it was in 2021 and early 2022.

          So, in some cases, you had 28 year old marketing people and engineers making $300k a year. Forgive me for not being overly sympathetic that their gravy train has ended and they now have to earn normal (not low) salaries.

        • Bitterroots west says:

          Where did you get the data to support this comment:

          “the median (not mean, meaning that a few execs aren’t dragging the average up) salary at Facebook was $240,000 in 2017.”

          Sounds pretty high… I know that is your point but is there solid data to support this 240k figure ?

        • Wolf Richter says:

          Bitterroots west,

          I don’t know if the amounts are correct for 2017. But these companies disclose their median wages in their filings with the SEC. And you can just google it or look it up. Meta’s median wage in 2022 was $296,320. In 2021, it was $292,785.

        • WaterDog says:


          Find your wages or average wages from the 30-40 years ago.

          Next, apply inflation.

          Next, add pension benefits that are non non-existent.

          Next, view housing price growth over 40 years or affordability charts.

          Screwing over young people and then complaining they’re entitled.

          My step-grandpa got a decent pension as a SHOE SALESMAN.

          I can’t even imagine.

          CEOs earn 30 million for being mediocre while “entitled” younger generation earn peanuts.

        • WaterDog says:

          I forgot Social Security too.

          Einhal, you probably enjoy Social Security?

          What do you think about the increased retirement age? (1983 overhaul of SS). WENT FROM 65 -> 67 A benefit cut of ~13% for younger people.

          What about the facts that younger workers could potentially get 75%-80% of (already reduced) benefits.

          Sounds like young people aren’t that “entitled” to me.

        • Einhal says:

          WaterDog, I’m 37, so I’m not sure the relevance of this rant about Social Security.

          The fact is, inflation and cost of living aside, there were many people in BigTech paid far above what they could earn in any other company. That is now over. That was my only point.

        • Justin says:

          Why do you say the salaries are overly inflated? Tech companies have pretty crazy profit margins. If anything, there’s still significant upside potential.

          It honestly doesn’t appear that you have a rational argument over why the pay is overly much other than that it is high. It’s high for a reason. A very good, very profitable set of reasons.

          There are a few reasons that finding a new job in tech is difficult:

          1: there’s a lot of competition for the same jobs. Even entry level, new grad sorts of jobs are getting flooded with industry veterans. I’ve heard of and seen major title downgrades as people get jobs below their skill level. It’s always sad seeing people lose so many years of progress in their careers.

          2: Skill mismatch is a big thing since tech is highly specialized and differentiated even within specialties.

          3: the companies that did the layoffs rehired many employees as significantly lesser paid consultants. This is me. I took a 2/3 paycut and have no benefits, meaning that the paycut is actually higher. While I am technically no longer unemployed, my financial planning did not account for a 70% decrease in income. I imagine many others in a similar position are less able to weather such a loss.

          Your lack of sympathy for my plight is noted. I will keep in mind that I should also not care if others have to go through the same thing.

          Have a mortgage you need to pay? Don’t care. Kids? Sorry. Student loans? Not my problem. Losing your home? Thanks for solving the housing crisis.

          Have a heart, man.

        • Depth Charge says:

          “I am curious as to how you might define the ‘ridiculous inflated salary’ line.”

          As Wolf has posted, FB has a median salary of almost $300k. As Wolf has also posted, a lot of these WFH people were off skiing, hiking and biking while pretending to work. “Ridiculous” doesn’t even begin to describe what has transpired in the job sector over the course of the past 3 1/2 years.

          The FED and .gov destroyed pricing everywhere, which includes the job market. None of this would have existed without their money-printing. These tech companies came upon obscene amounts of cash flow due to artificially low interest rates, the biggest stock bubble in the history of the world, and FED and .gov monetary and fiscal stimulus.

          We have all heard the news about these tech companies hoarding employees – hiring them so that their competition couldn’t. They didn’t even have jobs for them, they just thought they would need them in the future. Money suddenly meant nothing to anybody, like it was just free. In turn, you get people “earning” $300k per year to ski and bike, doing almost nothing else.

          The people who show up to defend all of this are likely part of the group I just described and scared they’re going to lose their free sh!t.

        • rojogrande says:


          The age when full social security benefits can be claimed needs to be understood in its historical context. When social security was enacted in 1935 and the age to receive full benefits was set at 65, life expectancy for white males and females was 61 and 65, respectively. For minorities it was much lower at 51.3 and 55.2 respectively. Those ages are from the SSA website. I suspect life expectancy was pulled down by high infant mortality rates and people who survived on average lived longer than those averages. However, setting the full benefit age at 65 meant most people either never collected or collected for a very short period of time.

          Of course, life expectancy skyrocketed after 1935, so it made sense in 1983 to adjust full retirement age up to 67. Arguably, 67 is now too low and it should be raised again. Life expectancy plays a key role in the solvency of the program and the benefits people receive on average have increased far more than 2 years since 1935.

          For the record, I’m 52 and will likely to be impacted if the full retirement age is raised again. That’s OK as long as the program continues to fulfill its function as a key part of retirement income for many people. I also agree with you that the world has changed when it comes to pensions (I won’t have one, but my father does as a career cement truck driver) and other opportunities for young people even since I was starting out in the late 1980s.

        • Einhal says:

          Depth Charge, well said.

          Justin, I’ll respond to some of your points individually:

          “Why do you say the salaries are overly inflated? Tech companies have pretty crazy profit margins. If anything, there’s still significant upside potential.”

          They’re overly inflated because they were paying far more than an equivalent position in another industry. Ultimately, salaries aren’t based on the profitability of the business, but by the market’s valuation of that type of labor. To use an extreme example, a janitor’s time is not more valuable because he’s working at a Gucci store than if he’s working at a McDonald’s.

          “It honestly doesn’t appear that you have a rational argument over why the pay is overly much other than that it is high. It’s high for a reason. A very good, very profitable set of reasons.”

          The fact that there have been many layoffs in BigTech proves this wrong. The salaries were not sustainable without the bubble/ZIRP led boom in tech profits.

          “3: the companies that did the layoffs rehired many employees as significantly lesser paid consultants. This is me. I took a 2/3 paycut and have no benefits, meaning that the paycut is actually higher. While I am technically no longer unemployed, my financial planning did not account for a 70% decrease in income. I imagine many others in a similar position are less able to weather such a loss.”

          I’m sorry for your predicament. There have been times in my career when I have made money in a manner that I knew was unsustainable. I didn’t do financial planning based on that income stream lasting, because I knew it couldn’t and wouldn’t. This isn’t addressed to you personally, as I have no idea what position you were in and what you were earning.

          That said, corporate recruiters who were making $300k at Facebook at age 28 when their peers at other companies were making $90k at best should have known that something was amiss. Everything reverts to the mean in the end. These people should have known that they wouldn’t be able to replace their income stream easily at another employer, and should have planned for it. In many ways, Depth Charge is right.

        • WaterDog says:


          In your last comment you say:

          “The fact that there have been many layoffs in BigTech proves this wrong. The salaries were not sustainable without the bubble/ZIRP led boom in tech profits.”

          Sundar Pichi got $226 million total comp
          Tim Cook $99.4 million
          Satya Nadella $54.9 million
          David Baszucki $232.8 million

          Tell me again how they can’t afford to pay $300k to the people who build their products?

          Sundar Pichi has arguably done nothing but make employees hate him. Every town hall meeting makes the news for his inept handling. He’s making what $72,000 PER HOUR? Maybe he’s a genius behind the scenes… but still almost 1/4 BILLION a year?

          Rojo grande,

          Great point. It looks like life expectancy since the 50s is up ~8 years to 76.1 (lower due to COVID).

        • Bitterroots west says:

          Per responses above and/or below.
          Some good comments. But…

          So to my surprise there is good data to back up the claim FB Meta employees have been making 270 to 290 thousand a year… median salary ! Well if this is 100 employees that is one thing. If its a 1000 or (!) 4000 that’s another of course.

          Assuming its more than 100 (?) their revenue and profit margins must be impressive. So… great capitalists… where the heck is all the competition ?
          Isn’t capitalism supposed to ensure success breeds competition ?

          I dont use FB or Twitter… just wondering. Do Google and Microsoft and IBM and etc… executives have some very good reasons to not to want to compete with FB ?

          Yes I’m perplexed… some FB fans can inform me of my ignorance and perhaps why, now, it would be so hard to compete with FB. I probably wouldn’t totally believe them although if its mostly free to users I can see how thats a bit of a hurdle right there.

          Any thoughts… unfortunately this post is too late to get much viewership.

        • WaterDog says:

          Bitterroots West,

          Tech wants to be a monopoly. It’s huge and powerful. Europe regulates it more than the US.

          The problem with a FB competitor is “switching costs.”

          It’s “sticky” just like banking.

          In other words it’s a PITA to switch. Further, why would you switch to a social network with nobody on it?

          Google tried with its Google+ or whatever years ago. They forced an account on everyone. Didn’t work.

      • 91B20 1stCav (AUS) says:

        JohnA. – aye, ’twas, and is, always the rub…

        may we all find a better day.

    • Arnold says:

      Its day 412 here at the Wolfstreet Recession watch.

      Still bad news as the number of people working keeps increasing.

      • shangtr0n says:

        That’s good news, actually. And I’m sure Wolf would agree.

      • Depth Charge says:

        And Weimar Boy Powell will “continue to monitor” the situation while doing absolutely nothing.

        • Kernburn says:

          And now we’ve got “everything-is-awesome” Fed cheerleader Goolsbee on TV spinning PR left and right

  2. Kevin says:

    great news

  3. SoCalBeachDude says:

    MW: 2-year U.S. yield sees fifth straight week of advances after June nonfarm payrolls data

  4. SoCalBeachDude says:

    Recessions (or depressions) ALWAYS follow deep inversions in the US Treasuries markets such as we have now with the 2/10.

    • Arnold says:

      You can’t drive your car by looking in the rearview mirror.

      • DougP says:

        You can if you are driving backwards……

        Will that happen soon?

      • bulfinch says:

        But you can write off any analysis with a single epigram.

        • 91B20 1stCav (AUS) says:

          dammit, bul! Sprayed me afternoon cafe…

          may we all find a better day.

      • SoCalBeachDude says:

        Those who fail to comprehend history are doomed to repeat the very obvious mistakes of the past.

    • mol says:

      SoCalBeachDude: Is it possible that this inversion is not a normal indicator, because the Fed is manipulating rates, causing the inversion?

      • NARmageddon says:

        Yield curve inversion is not caused by some law of nature, but rather that wall street is buying up long-dated treasuries (bidding up the price, forcing the rate down) in anticipation of the Fed stepping in and buying such debt at an even higher price later. It is just wall street front-running the Fed in anticipation of soon-to-come Fed action. So it is Wall St betting on a downturn, and at the same time betting on what the Fed response will be.

        For 40 years, front-running the Fed was highly profitable, but now it is over. The Fed has signaled “higher for longer”. Why? Because of inflation, AND because the USD is under attack and is becoming less popular as the world’s debt and payment currency. The Fed is caught between a rock and hard place. Finally.

    • Not very novel says:

      Not to be a wise guy but rain always follows cloudy skies.
      Its a cloudy day… will it rain ?

      Perhaps you meant (or didn’t ?):
      a deep inversion…markets
      implies a recession ?

      As you stated: a recession implies
      a deep inversion…markets.

      Just asking for clarification.

  5. William Leake says:

    The average Fed Funds Rate 1971-2022 was 4.86%. I don’t see how the Fed expects to move the economy with a rate barely above average.

    • BENW says:

      You really need to remove the last 10 years from that equation. The FFR has been held artificially low by the FED.

      • William Leake says:

        It’s a long term average. It has lots of fluctuations. If I exclude the near zero interest rate years, the average will be higher. Fed Funds Rate 1971-2008 was 6.43%, which strengthens my point. Higher, longer.

        • mol says:

          Thanks for crunching the numbers. Could you figure the median value for this time?

        • JD says:

          I’ve always been a mode guy personally.

        • William Leake says:

          The median Fed Funds Rate 1971-2022 was 4.97%.

          The median Fed Funds Rate 1971-2008 was 5.62%.

        • paul.w says:

          What are we going to do if the FED raises the rate to 10%? I’m reading some sites saying the increase in FED rate is fueling inflation. Why is the cost of lending considered to be the only way to attach inflation?

        • rojogrande says:


          Wage and price controls have also been tried to slow inflation, but they tend to create shortages and other distortions. It’s a simplification, but higher interest rates work by reducing demand in the economy and increasing the cost of capital which means fewer marginal projects will get funded. The people behind sites touting that higher interest rates are fueling inflation either don’t understand how the interest rate mechanism works, or have a financial interest in keeping interest rates low and asset values elevated. I suspect it’s the latter.

        • BENW says:

          Until 2008, the Fed wasn’t going out of its way to suppress interest rates, since the MMT-based QE hadn’t come into being yet.

          Your ’71 to ’08 FFR of 6.43% is a much better indicator of where interest rates need to be. In fact, Bullard’s Dec ’22 prediction of 7% sounds about right.

          And everyone knows the BLS’ current method of calculating CPI is notably different from 1983 when actual home resale prices were used to calculate housing inflation.

          I think we’re saying the same thing from two different perspectives.

          My general point is that the FFR needs to climb up to the point that it causes a national 20% decline in housing. Anything less doesn’t fix the structural pricing issue with housing that’s at the very root of inflation nowadays.

          Still very good FFR information on your part.

      • SoCalBeachDude says:

        No, it has merely reflected the yields in the US Treasuries markets with the most important being the 10-year duration rate.

  6. BENW says:

    Glad to see more analyst suggesting an additional 100 basis points rise to the FFR “may” be required. 50 seems almost a given at this point.

    Again, $1.5T in Uncle Sam deficit spending and the local government spending from overpriced houses stuffing their property tax coffers will continue to create inflation

    Now all that’s needed is for oil to return to $80 and stay there and rise throughout 2023.

    And remember, like Wolf has stated, YoY inflation will start to rise once July is reported, since last June was the peak.

  7. Micheal Engel says:

    The prime age participation rate reached the 1995 backbone. Next year
    the BB will disappear.

  8. random guy 62 says:

    No landing here for at least 6 months. The 2023 backlog is sold out and we are trying to hire more to bring our lead time back within reason.

    I just spent the whole day researching and adjusting pay bands. We did a 4% general increase for the company in April. Going to raise entry level weld and assembly by around 10%, and raise the whole shop another 3% on average. Considering some signing and retention bonuses too.

    Guys working 55-60 hour weeks throwing sparks are pulling around $80k/year here. Not bad for flyover country.

    It is easy to see how this wage-price thing feeds on itself!

    • Micheal Engel says:

      Random guy, 60 hours/w x 52 weeks = 3,100 hr/y. // 80,000 : 3100 = $25/hr with overtime.
      Your workers might save 25%/33% of their net income.

      • Random guy 62 says:

        Not sure what you’re saying. There are bonuses for hitting goals too.

        Starting base rate for someone off the street with no education who can hold a proper arc is $23/hr. A job at the most sought-after shop down the road is paying $26-34. The hellhole of a factory down the street is still paying in the teens and their turnover is outrageous. Different products and competitive landscape. We are somewhere in the middle of the two on pricing power to our customers, and our ability to pay is somewhere in the middle accordingly.

        More experienced guys that can work off of blueprints here are making $29/hr base. This is in an area where a decent 3 bed 2 bath home is $100-150k.

        Around 20 years ago our whole shop was making $7/hr. Just trying to add some perspective. There is still strong upward pressure on wages. I think it’ll persist as long as we employers stay busy.

        • Blam 35 says:

          Great to hear and those guys spend the money. Rising tide of middle class is the only one that lifts all boats. History shows the trickle up economy is the healthiest, most sustainable growth.

        • SoCalBeachDude says:

          No wonder at all why so many US businesses are now simply laying off all staff and shutting their doors permanently.

        • Flea says:

          I would start a welding school ,then hire the best right out of school. Very successful women in hair styling business did this and was very successful

        • paul.w says:

          Northeast area. Aircraft mechanic just graduated school is starting $30 hr where I work. Pratt & Whitney is higher. I find it hard to believe how much wages have gone up in last 2 years. A shop opened 50 miles away and poached a lot of employees by offering $10 more an hour.
          A 3 bedroom 2 bath house is $250-300K here.

        • Cookdoggie says:

          Our foundation has only done salary action every 3-5 yrs since I started 15 years ago, just comparing to prevailing comps. For the first time this year the execs want to also increase outside of that cycle for all cumulative inflation since the last salary action. By year end we calculate that will be a 25% increase. None of us need it but keeping up with the Hamptons is what it’s all about. Wage/price spiral indeed.

        • Doityourself says:

          Thank you for the information. It is great to hear from the real world!

    • Ed C says:

      Yeah, rub it in. Retired guy here with stingy pension that doesn’t adjust with inflation. I’d rather be poor than return to the work grind and besides my 73 year old brain isn’t up to engineering work anymore and I doubt anyone would have me. I think I’ve got enough to make it to the finish line.

    • Thomas Curtis says:

      Thanks Random Guy 62

      Good data and opinion: “There is still strong upward pressure on wages. I think it’ll persist as long as we employers stay busy.”

      Yes! Very hard to predict when the slowdown begins, how it runs, and where it ends.

      As a trader I am in

  9. Micheal Engel says:

    This data might send the EFFR to 6%. The 6% might send the 10Y to 3%.
    The QQQ might breach Oct low.

    • Thetenyear says:

      Agree, 6% would kill the rally. A lower ten year has been the hallmark of sustainable recoveries. But needs to go much lower than 3% at these stock market levels.

    • MM says:

      The 10 year is already> 4%. This data is more ammo for a July hike.

  10. ru82 says:

    interesting post from Zoltan Pissarro.

    Zoltan Pozsar : Two percent inflation and going back to the old world, I don’t think it stands a snowball’s chance in hell. Low inflation is over and we’re not going back. There are a number of reasons for that:

    Basically he said a tight labor market and the current Government spending on the energy transition (Inflation Reduction Act is going to require a lot of jobs).

    Labor will be tight for a couple of years.

    • Ed C says:

      “Basically he said a tight labor market and the current Government spending on the energy transition (Inflation Reduction Act is going to require a lot of jobs).”
      Really? EV’s are simpler to build and require less labor. Ford has been firing ICE labor jobs. What other new energy transition jobs are there coming that don’t mean a loss in employment elsewhere? I just don’t see it. The ‘inflation reduction act’ is a joke. It certainly doesn’t reduce inflation.

      • Danno says:

        Ed have to build the infrastructure.

        Look at the picture.

      • ru82 says:

        Look at Wolfs previous construction spending articles. Construction spending is just getting started and will keep increasing for a couple of more years. Just hog ask anyone in that field

      • NARmageddon says:

        Ed C , I think engineers good at Internal Combustion Engines will be hired out of retirement like a Cobol programmer in 1999 (y2k craze).

        Once it becomes clear to the idiots in Washington (and Sacramento, CA) that hybrid engines will cut oil consumption by 40%, and you can get 25-50 of them for the lithium needed to build one EV, eventually they will have to do the right thing.

        • Wolf Richter says:

          this nonsense gets old.

          “hybrid engines will cut oil consumption by 40%,”

          Yes, but EVs cut oil consumption by 100%.

          Hybrids are complex and expensive to build, because they’re an ICE vehicle and an EV combined. We have a hybrid. It has little power compared to even a cheap EV, very little torque, and is hugely complex. Our next vehicle will be an EV because they’re far simpler, perform a gazillion times better, and are cheaper to operate. And now they’re even cheaper to buy, after all the price cuts.

          Real-wheel drive sports sedan comparison: BMW 3-series base version $44k. Direct competitor Tesla Model 3 base version $39k. And the Tesla will run circles around the BMW.

        • NARmageddon says:

          Okay, I should have said hybrids cut CO2 by 40% relative to an EV.
          Both oil and CO2 are less.

          It is not nonsense. Coal plants keep running because EV are the marginal demand for electricity. EV runs on coal. No, there isn’t enough renewable to warrant EV yet. And we could have gotten incredible CO2 and oil savings for 15 years already with all hybrid, but people insist on doing the wrong thing because it is more profitable that way. Just look at the incredible waste of capital that is Tesla. Ugh.

          (I realize Wolf cannot be convinced no matter what facts I bring. What can I say).

        • Wolf Richter says:

          You’re spreading more nonsense. You’re just piling it up. I’m getting so tired of this dumb uninformed nonsense over and over again for a decade.

          For example, “Coal plants keep running because…” that whole sentence is just ignorant BS.

          1. Much of EV charging occurs at night when electricity is cheaper and where there is huge idle capacity. They’re NOT burning coal at night to charge EVs because coal is the most expensive way to generate electricity. Your assertion is just idiotic. You need to understand the concept of idle capacity at night in the grid.

          2. No new coal plants have been built in years in the US. They’re running the old ones, and they’re retiring them in large numbers every year. You can look this up at the EIA (for example here). Coal plants are inefficient, with over 60% of the energy becoming waste heat, and can no longer compete with natural gas (35% goes to waste heat in a modern combined-cycle plant) and renewables (no fuel turns into waste heat, and the “fuel” is free). Coal doesn’t have a chance economically. Why is this so hard to grasp? Powerplant operators know what they’re doing — they’re going for the lowest cost energy, and coal isn’t it.

          3. There are ZERO coal plants left in California, New Jersey, Hawaii, Vermont, Rhode Island, and maybe others. Washington state, Alaska, South Dakota, and maybe others are down to just 1 plant.

          4. Texas, Iowa, Oklahoma, Kansas, and Illinois are the largest wind power producers (by electricity sales) in the US.

          Here is a chart of the US power generation mix. This is the actual amount of electricity generated and sold (not capacity). Note the relentless decline of coal and the growth of renewables and natural gas. Even renewables blew past coal:

  11. Thetenyear says:

    No landing = No cuts.

    Why would the FED cut if the stock market is strong (it is) and the labor market is strong (it is). However…

    the stock market is strong because it expects cuts. No cuts will pull the rug from underneath the stock market which will weaken the labor market. The FED is in a no win situation.

    Careful what you wish for!

    • William Leake says:

      The stock market has been called the casino of the rich. It is not interesting to me. I am interested in labor, inflation, and the bond market.

  12. John Apostolatos says:

    What about the effects of higher interest rates finally creeping into prices?

    Talking to some small business owners the higher interest rates are starting to bite, and new purchase orders are reflecting the higher costs for them as well and they are planning to raise prices.

  13. M2 says:

    Wolf, I read recently that M2 has been contracting over the past few months. Does it matter? What will be the impact?

  14. Harvey Mushman says:

    My buddy is a mechanical engineer. He was all set to retire in February 2020. I received an invite to his retirement party. His party then was cancelled due to the Covid lockdowns. I talked with him last week. He is still working part time, for the company that he was supposed to retire from (L3Harris). They want him to work full time but he doesn’t want to. He likes working part time. He is 70 years old this month. He has worked for the same company since 1983, so has a ton of experience. I am thinking there are a lot of similar situations out there, where companies are having a hard time replacing aging Boomers. I’m thinking the labor market is going to remain tight for quite some time. I’m thinking inflation will remain high for quite some time as well. Stocks? who knows.

    • Dataman says:

      Harvey, I am in a similar situation as your buddy. I am 70, my college degree is civil engineering, worked in oil and gas industry then moved over to IT data management (30 years). I left a IT position that I did not like back in Feb of this year thinking I should retire as full Social Security and decent investments. I just took a permanent position as enterprise data architect and they are paying me north of $140K/year. Even though those tech companies had layoffs, if you have good technical skills in the data management space, companies want to hire you either as contractor ($75/hr +) or permanent ($120K/year +). I don’t see any slow down in demand for labor for a while especially for skilled labor of any kind.

  15. America Strong says:

    Shock and Awe fear mongers walking tight rope as US labor market continue to outperform. Folks need to put on their shoes a take a look around before stoking the fire with pessimism. Who walks around with a $1500 iPhone, $1500 car note, and refuses to buy that $15 hotdog at Disney World. Anyone who is in business small or large should be passing along inflation cost to the American consumer. We are overweight, well paid, home equity rich, PPP loans subsidized, credit card wealthy, and Buy Now Pay Later utopia driven.

    • bulfinch says:

      Sure — when the going gets tough, Muricans go shopping.

      • 91B20 1stCav (AUS) says:

        stoppit, bul! just stoppit! (…I know Wolf has illuminated this for awhile, now, but you’ve run me outta coffee…).

        may we all find a better day.

      • dishonest says:

        I knew a runway model, 5’8″, blond, 130lbs, who had a bumper sticker that read, “When to going gets tough, the tough go shopping”.

        Rather high maintenance.

    • Shiloh1 says:

      So on the Stocks & Jocks podcast show out of Chicago towards the end of the show yesterday (7/6), The Chief (host) says that the economy is doing great because he knows so many people who bought Taylor Swift concert tickets for over $2000/each.

    • Living Standards says:

      Odd comment. Some people fit your description or … part of it or … none of it.

      In my case none of it… what was the point of your post ?

      I do believe some people are overpaid (previous poster) and others underpaid… one of the most under discussed topics in the US.

    • Thomas Curtis says:

      Yes! It is much to early to call a recession and especially a big one.

      The FED today is much stronger than the fed of 30 years ago. Jerome Powell said effectively that the FED has great tools for stopping a recession and inflating an economy, ie QE… That they need to error on the side of raising rates too high.

      Now is the time to invest for long term higher inflation and (be ready to trim occasionally).

      • Wolf Richter says:

        Now the Fed has has an even better tool: 5%+ interest rates. When the Fed was at 0.25%, it couldn’t cut further (it was at its infamous “lower bound”). But if it hikes to 5.5% or 5.75% or even 6%, it can cut by 2 percentage points, and by the time it gets done with this over say four meetings, a mild recession will already have blown over — and would likely have blown over without the cuts – and inflation will resurge. And it’ll have to hike again. QE may be off the table for decades unless something big collapses.

        But something big has already collapsed, the biggest thing the Fed is in charge of: price-stability

        • Thomas Curtis says:

          Great Point Wolf!

          No need for QE if the FED cuts 2 points!

          Wolf, when the FED was so late in raising rates is it possible that getting the economy rolling was much more important to them than inflation?

          I have always wondered that. They really didn’t get serious about inflation until after the market reacted.

        • Juliab says:

          *it would probably be a blowout without the cuts*

          I think a few layoffs would go a long way to stop people leaving their jobs in search of a higher salary.

        • Wolf Richter says:

          Agree with your statement. But you accidentally misquoted what I said. I said: “… and would likely have blown over without the cuts.”

        • Juliab says:

          Yes, if I read the word *probably*, but apparently I did not understand the meaning ,of the sentense correctly.

        • Wolf Richter says:


          From your prior comments, I seem to remember that you’re not in the US and that your native language is something other than English. Maybe you used Google Translate to read, which translated my text into your language, and then you replied in your language and used Google Translate to get my phrase and your text into English, which would explain the misquote.

          “Blow over” is an idiom in American English. I means roughly, “move on” or “go away and be forgotten” like: “a storm that blows over in five minutes.”

          I don’t mind these language issues at all. I’m glad you’re here and are commenting.

        • Juliab says:

          Yes, you are right Wolf.
          In addition to being a man of alien knowledge in quite a few areas of economics, which I am very impressed by, you are also obviously quite perceptive.

          I have studied English for a long time, but the terminology used by all the commenters here, like you, is unfamiliar to me.
          I love your site and the comments of all the commenters here.
          I’m learning things I wouldn’t have learned anywhere else.

          That’s why I use google translate very often.

          Keep up the good work informing many of us deluded people.

  16. Jcohn says:

    The supply part of the Treasury market exploded in 20-21 and is projected to be very high for the next 2 years at least.
    The demand part of the Treasury equation has changed radically in the last 2 years .
    The Fed is no longer a buyer.
    Due to the threat of sanctions China and to a smaller extent India will reduce their purchases of dollar denominated debt to a minimum.
    Other countries are bypassing using the Dollar in transactions , thus reducing the amount of dollars that they accumulate and creating less need to recycle these dollars via buying US debt
    The dollar is expected to be weaker over the long term . A lower dollar means inflation on imported goods and a loss for buyers of US debt.
    Given the strong labor economy , no need for the Fed “PUT”to bail out the stock market , and poor supply / demand dynamics in the Treasury markets, translates to Fed continuing to keep rates”higher for longer “. The idea of rates exceeding %6 is no longer a low probability event.

    • Escierto says:

      The dollar is expected to be weaker over the long term. People have been saying this for a long time and it never seems to happen. Other than a few currencies like the Mexican peso (Thanks, Wolf!), the USD has destroyed its fiat competitors in the Third World and even some in the First World (CAD, AUD). Maybe your comment will come true in 20 or 30 years. For the foreseeable future, it’s not happening.

  17. Rico says:

    “….labor market has come down from the stratosphere and is cruising along at a still fairly high altitude.

    Understatement of the year. Good one Wolf.

  18. Micheal Engel says:

    Robots depreciate after 5Y. Engineers are good for 50Y.

    • Candid says:

      Survivorship Bias on your part.

      I was a software engineer.

      Didn’t create a niche and spoke my mind.
      Career terminated after 15 years.
      Living frugally off of savings ever since.
      Despise recruiters, recruiting companies and HR Depts.

    • Candid 2 says:

      Had an interview once for a SW position and the interviewer said he had a compsci degree but never worked as a programmer (or related position if memory is right).

      About 10 years ago talked to a guy who worked as a librarian. He had recently gotten a CS degree but claimed he couldn’t get a job. Eastern Washington. I asked if he applied for jobs in Seattle and he said he didn’t want to work there.
      About 3 or 4 years later he apparently got a job doing sys admin work for the library.

      I read posts here and it sounds a bit Pollyanna to me w.r.t the job market.
      Since my career was terminated (I spent 3 years trying to get a job in Dallas, Seattle… have a MS in CS, C, Unix experience but definitely not a star performer) at 15 years I definitely wonder if this was unusual or
      not ?

      Oh, my career was terminated all right… certain recruiters made that clear. I remember some of their names to this day.

      • Cynical Engineer says:

        Speaking as someone who has worked in the tech industry for about 30 years now as a programmer:

        There is a LOT of age bias and age discrimination in the industry. As I moved past my 30’s, it got a LOT harder to get a job.

        Programming has changed a lot in my time in the industry. 20 years ago, “C” was the default language for virtually everything. Today it’s limited to specialized programming for resource-limited devices.

        If you’re writing code these days, it’s more likely to be C++, Java, Javascript, Python, PHP or Swift/Objective C or perhaps C#.

        And knowing regular “C” doesn’t count much toward programming in C++. The canonical book on C Programming written by Kernighan & Richie was about 300 pages. Stroustrup’s latest edition of his book on C++ is 1,200 pages and admits that his treatment of STL is superficial at best. So add in another 800 page book that just covers STL.

        If you are not a life-long learner who is constantly up-skilling, you will not have a long career as a programmer.

        Add in the age discrimination and the unwillingness to look at anyone with a significant gap on the resume, and it’s easy to fall out of the tech industry without a viable path back.

        That being said, I managed to get back into the industry after two years of unemployment in my late 30’s. My strategy? First, networking, networking, networking. I stayed in touch with people I knew in the industry and kept those connections alive. And when a few of them offered me short-term contract work for small money, I took it and did it well. And that led to better work. It took me two more years to rebuild back to where I had been five years previously, but I made it.

        For a return to tech strategy right now? First, cultivate the contract recruiters. Ignore the guys based in India who are trying to work the US market from afar. Find the local guys who really know the market and get to know them. Buy them lunch and pick their brains about how best to get a job. Companies are more likely to pull the trigger on a contract hire and that’ll get recent experience on your resume. It’ll be small money at first, but it’s a place to start.

        Take a hard look at your skills….if you don’t know Python, learn it. Do a deep dive into Object-oriented programming, learn Java (both server programming and Android app programming) or Swift/Objective C for iOS app programming.

        (“C” is still out there, but mostly in low-level embedded/firmware and if you don’t have significant Electrical Engineering background, it’s hard to work in that area. Probably better to learn additional languages than to dive into the hardware world.)

        If you want to do Microsoft Windows programming, learn C++ or C# and do a deep dive on .NET. Get the free version of Microsoft Visual Studio and start writing something.

        • Surreal can be real says:

          I’m 66, not going back to programming.
          Writing this in haste… brings back ugly memories…many. Sorry if this is a bit discordant.

          I knew then… 1995-1997 … what you are talking about here… but thanks anyhow. I knew some C++ and Perl (then more popular than Python).
          Couldn’t get a job in Dallas after about 2 years trying, development nor test.
          Moved to Seattle .

          I sat in on Java SeaJug (Seattle) meetings (volunteered as their secretary) and recognized most of these people probably already knew Java quite well… I self taught myself just the Java basics. I had downloaded the Java development environment at that time.
          I bought Visual Cafe (Java) but didn’t really play with it much… waste of money (I’m pretty careful with spending big oops there).
          Yes at SeaJUG got to hear all the Microsoft insider stuff not that that interested me much.
          I did like Perl quite a bit, had experience with it, but not that many opportunities there.

          Scott Meyers book “Effective C++”… read parts of it and wasn’t convinced that the complications that come with OO design/implementation were worth it necessarily. Very well written book yes… great reviews… but still there has been some push back w.r.t to parts of OO anyhow. Heck, Java didn’t even allow multiple inheritance… one departure right there.
          While in Dallas I had modified a C++ device driver… but this was fairly straight forward. Well documented and the C++ was not especially complicated.

          My interests are more AIish and related, always have been.
          Recruiting industry…no feedback so that is pretty pathetic. Less than zero respect for that entire industry.

          I had some surreal (ugly) interviews I could write a chapter or two about … hard to believe experiences both job hunting and otherwise. If there was any justice in the world I should be able to sue Snohomish and Spokane counties here in Washington state. Harassment like perhaps no one has ever faced before…well possibly.
          Exaggeration… NO !

          But yes I’ve seen resumes of star performers (tech) and they are impressive. I worked briefly at Bell Labs when Alan Glasser (heard of SCCS, makefiles?? Yea that guy) was there. Sadly my software contributions much more modest ! But evaluating performance is quite complicated in a field like software. Encourage you to read about Randal Schwartz… star at Intel (mid 1990s) but got in SERIOUS TROUBLE… too much of a good guy ? Or too willing to break the rules ? You decide.

          Nevermind my harassment in the Great Northwest (bah!)… google
          “Randal Schwartz Intel”… and see what you think. He has written a number of popular Perl books i believe. Was a system administrator at Intel (Portland i believe?).

          “May you live in interesting times ” the Chinese curse goes… been there, done that, thank you Dallas, Snohomish and Spokane Counties. I lived in 4 states prior to Texas, Washington…minimal hassles.

          But again thanks for the tips.

        • Candid says:

          Clarification to my one post hereabouts:

          1. Did not mean to imply Glasser developed SCCS (Source Code Control System) or make (automated build product, e.g. for executables).
          Some other individuals in 1970s did.
          Glasser was in charge of a successful Unix tools group at Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ 1981.

          2. Randal Schwartz’s saga is briefly covered via Wikipedia… just see their write up about him. His felony conviction was over turned… no small thing, eh. He has continued writing Perl related books, articles and perhaps (?) does development.

          I spent hours a few years back reading about the events that got him in trouble with Intel. It was as usual very interesting to see the wide variety of opinions as to his innocence or guilt.

          Some sys admin people very much came to his defense (as well as those who knew him professionally in general). Then again, somewhat to my surprise, other sys administration people showed no sympathy what so ever towards his plight… he should have known better, that is that.

          As just stated things finally worked out for him but he needed a lot of financial support along the way… court and lawyer fees NOT INSIGNIFICANT.

  19. Micheal Engel says:

    The Dow is in Apr 12/19 2021 BB, 34,256.75/33,687.01.
    If the Dow drops to a lower BB forget about the 6%

  20. longstreet says:

    The economy cruising along….with 5.25% rates..
    Why were they near zero for about a decade?

    • Wolf Richter says:

      Books will be written about this question. We may end up getting a better economy with 5%+ rates than we had with 0% rates, while assets prices decline and go back into balance.

      • Occam says:

        Starting in 1987 cutting the FFR became a Fed reflex every time the US economy wobbled or an external tremor was seen as a threat to US growth. In 2023 a financial panic and bank run started, and this time the Fed balance sheet ballooned by 400 billion courtesy of the BTFP etc. but rates didn’t get cut. Maybe now the Fed will try to use special liquidity programs and its balance sheet as its preferred method of addressing threats to growth and try to maintain stable interest rates at long term median levels. If a regime change like that occurs, the stock market should be revalued by about 20% to the downside, and savers will no longer be abused. Let’s see what happens.

      • John Apostolatos says:

        “We may end up getting a better economy with 5%+ rates than we had with 0% rates, while assets prices decline and go back into balance.”

        That was always the case before Bernanke. His PHD belongs to the bottom of a bird cage.

      • longstreet says:

        Isnt it just a matter of who spends the “benefit” of the rate level?

        Now, it seems the consumer is spending the “fair return” on his money.
        Before, when rates were suppressed to the abnormal, the govt spent the “benefit” of the cheap creation of debt.
        Fair return on one’s money is an economic “engine” that the Fed seems to ignore. But perhaps it is the govt whom they choose to serve. Now the Fed is getting the resilient economy from those fair returns being spent and can’t seem to make the connection. As they raise rates to deal with inflation they are loading up some consumers with new disposable income. Yet, this is still a better arrangement than providing the govt with a false cost of debt creation followed by money spilling. IMO
        Maybe the Fed is just too involved…..or WERE to involved.

      • rojogrande says:

        I really hope you’re right. About the books, continued 5%+ rates, and an economy that goes back into balance. Speculation is fine if that’s your thing, but encouraging it shouldn’t be an explicit objective of monetary policy.

        • longstreet says:

          skewing risk return considerations to FORCE behavior is not something the Fed should do.
          Now the banks who essentially shorted long term rates ( bought the debt) are in a box.
          The Fed’s micromanaging must end. And the Fed must not be allowed to ignore their mandates, mandates that essentially are the instructions snd agreements that allow their existence snd soecial powers.
          2% inflation is NOT stable prices.
          All time lows in long rates are not moderate

      • BeeKeeper says:

        No book needed, just two words “WEALTH TRANSFER”.

  21. Gary Fredrickson says:

    What are those 732,000 jobs created in the last three months doing? According to Jerome Powell the supply chains have been fine for quite a while. In the so called leisure and hospitality area there is a certain minimum number of people to run the hotels, etc even if no guests show up; are we to believe that hotels are being taken out of mothballs. Perhaps these are just “body shop” jobs where the employer takes a cut out of the Temps provided. Perhaps make a company look prosperous to get loans. Maybe when the jobs are cut looking for a Wall Street boost to stock prices. Bottom line, no one missed what these 732,000 people did, so who is making the “labor market” hot; it has to be dome em0loyer as they fabricate these jobs.

  22. Porcelain Economist says:

    What I don’t understand is how these numbers are possible. I personally know 4 people at my company (a health insurance company) who recently got laid off, and I don’t know that many people at the company, less than a dozen. A good friend of mine at a competitors company just told me they are going through layoffs. A doctors office I work closely with just laid off half of their growth/sales staff, about 5 people. Not a single person that has gotten laid off had a salary/benefits of less than 150k per year. I’m supposedly in a recession proof industry that doesn’t go through layoffs. My marketing budget has been demolished as has my friend at the competitors company. The growth staff at the doctor office went from an expense account of 20k per month down to $0. Something isn’t adding up with the data and what I’m seeing with my own lying eyes.

    • Wolf Richter says:

      I don’t know anyone who got laid off. Something isn’t adding up in your story that you saw with your “own lying eyes,” as you said, LOL.

      • Jon says:

        I work in hi tech .
        Think about good msft etc which pays quite good
        A bunch of my friends have been laid off and per the rumor mill more layoffs coming.
        My friends could not find jobs yet even after few months of looking.
        They are in their 30s.

        Lets see.

        • ru82 says:

          Question. We’re your friends who were laid off making more than 110k and are married and have kids. I worked for a tech company that laid off 50% of a team of 21. Everyone who was let go were married and had children. The 30 to 50 year old range. Everyone who was not laid off was single or was an empty nester in late 50s.

          Kids are a big health insurance cost in the bean counters eyes unfortunately.

    • Porcelain Economist says:


      I can’t speak for the people who are getting laid off at my friend’s company or the doctor’s office as I don’t know any of those people’s family situations but the of the four at the company I work for here is the demographic breakdown.

      1. Female, married, late 30’s, two children, Making 120k-130k per year but with benefits comes out to about 150k. Her husband has a full-time job where insurance for him is included. Her two children were on her policy through work (which is a major health insurance company).

      2. Female, mid 30’s, Single, Made about 170k per year between salary and benefits.

      3. Male, mid 60’s, married, no dependents, not sure if his wife is on Medicare or on his policy, probably on his. Made around 225k per year between salary and benefits

      4. Male, late 60’s, married, no dependents, also not sure about where his wife gets her insurance. Made around 300k per year between salary and benefits.

      All of them were in the sales side of the insurance company. Also, this is a major health insurance company so offering their employees health insurance doesn’t affect their bottom line in the same way that it would a normal company paying for health insurance.

      • Wolf Richter says:

        During the Good Times in 2018-2019 about 1.8 million people got laid off or where discharged EVERY MONTH. That’s part of the normal churn. People lose their jobs in the US, that’s how it goes. We’re still below that normal Good Times 1.8 million mark — and all other data we have points at the same thing:

        • Porcelain Economist says:

          Thanks for pointing that out although I certainly do realize that some churn is normal. What is odd to me it’s happening in the medical/ health insurance industry. Which are supposedly immune to the business cycle. Maybe the consensus that these industries don’t go through cycles is erroneous.

  23. NYguy says:

    Wolf, the ADP report noted that those who switched jobs saw their annual wage growth go up almost 2x versus those that didnt switch jobs. I looked at the report on the ADP site but could not find how many had switched jobs versus those that stayed. Any idea? I’m guessing its a fraction of 1% but the permabulls were using that fact to crow that housing will remain strong. They conveniently ignore the major cities like LA, SF and Seattle.

  24. dishonest says:

    For those able to increase their income above inflation, smooth sailing. For the rest, stagflation. Some politician said this was transient.

  25. valeres says:

    Anyone else get the really bad feeling that this is like being in an airplane and the airspeed instruments say you are going 550 knots, but in reality, you are just above stall speed and its dropping… FAST?

  26. Bemused Rebel says:

    Tech Sales worker in my 50’s laid off in Dec, still looking for comparable compensation to pay the nut on the 2021 inflated big metro home price. My job was reposted 6 months later for a lower title and salary. Companies only have to layoff a small percentage to scare the rest.

  27. DownFed says:

    Watching Wall Street Week yesterday, Larry Summers said that the rate of job growth is double the rate of growth in the adult population.

  28. Not Wolf says:

    With Goolsbee saying he’d like to never have another recession, and the Dems liking this idea, I guess everyone is in favour of supporting the people that already got theirs. The assets that have inflated in value never need to come down in price now. Going to be some unhappiness with the working class and new home buyers struggling to get started accumulating assets of their own

    • Wolf Richter says:

      Goolsbee is head of the Chicago Fed. They’ve always put a dove into that slot, Evans before him. He is a voting member on the FOMC this year, but will not be a voting member next year. So he gets to vote against the next two rate hikes, and then he’s out for a while.

      He really doesn’t matter much.

Comments are closed.