Unemployment ticks up, manufacturing slumping, and participation rates and down. It's not break glass yet, but it's remind yourself where you put the hammer.
The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals was very hostile to Trump's tariff policy at yesterday's hearing, but from the market reaction and experience it seems everyone believes the Supreme Court will uphold the policy, or at least block any ruling against the policy for a very long time, despite the overwhelming weight of law and precedent.
We've seen the Court 'game' its schedule before, to cripple Jack Smith's prosecution, and we may again. That is, the Court may delay ruling until it judges popular anger at his 'policy' is high enough that he can't effectively defy or threaten it, and then rule against him.
This will shift power from him to the Court, of course, which I believe it very much wants.
Excellent review of events. Here’s an anecdotal datapoint: today I bought coffee capsules for my Nespresso machine. The ones I usually buy cost 70 or 80 cents each ($7 or $8 for a sleeve of ten). Today they were 95 cents to a dollar ($9.50 or $10.00 per sleeve). Only one anecdote, but as anecdotes add up, they become a trend.
I get that this is a nuanced explanation of the current trade policy of the US, but it does remind me of arguing over the gluten content of a meal on the Titanic.
WSJ: Trump Orders Firing of Statistics Chief After Weak Jobs Data
President Trump directed his team to fire the top Bureau of Labor Statistics official as a soft jobs report weighed on markets along with Trump’s revamped tariff plan.
Corrections in the employment figures for the past two months are really quite large. If July is corrected by this much, US is in negative territory in terms of net job growth, no?
Trump’s team is already hovering: how do we replace the data gathers? You could fire them all - no data is better than bad data! With the Epstein saga dominating the news maybe no one will notice. 🥴
The US economy doesn't want to be in a stagflationary economic state but the rising unemployment combined with the rising inflation rates lead it to that.
It's still pretty low though was in the mid-3s two years ago (and inflation was falling)! Not sure what "nairu" is right now, but it's clear to me that inflation is rising due to tariffs, not econ activity (ie, stagflation).
Ah! A chance to bitch to an actual economist (which I am not) about the loose use of the word "inflation". A price rise due to a tax is indeed not inflation per se, as it involves no money creation. It can be "inflationary" if an economy adjusts to it by creating money, and thereby "inflating it away", which I well remember the US economy attempting in the 1970s (OPEC was not fooled). Thus, "stagflation".
I see much muddled thinking, and rhetorical sleight of hand, enabled by the failure to consistently make this distinction.
Nor is our discourse at all clear about how money is created.
The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals was very hostile to Trump's tariff policy at yesterday's hearing, but from the market reaction and experience it seems everyone believes the Supreme Court will uphold the policy, or at least block any ruling against the policy for a very long time, despite the overwhelming weight of law and precedent.
The Supreme Court is truly proving itself to be the herd of toadies we all knew they were.
We've seen the Court 'game' its schedule before, to cripple Jack Smith's prosecution, and we may again. That is, the Court may delay ruling until it judges popular anger at his 'policy' is high enough that he can't effectively defy or threaten it, and then rule against him.
This will shift power from him to the Court, of course, which I believe it very much wants.
Excellent review of events. Here’s an anecdotal datapoint: today I bought coffee capsules for my Nespresso machine. The ones I usually buy cost 70 or 80 cents each ($7 or $8 for a sleeve of ten). Today they were 95 cents to a dollar ($9.50 or $10.00 per sleeve). Only one anecdote, but as anecdotes add up, they become a trend.
I get that this is a nuanced explanation of the current trade policy of the US, but it does remind me of arguing over the gluten content of a meal on the Titanic.
Trump
Only
Fucks
Up
WSJ: Trump Orders Firing of Statistics Chief After Weak Jobs Data
President Trump directed his team to fire the top Bureau of Labor Statistics official as a soft jobs report weighed on markets along with Trump’s revamped tariff plan.
Also, after staff reductions, over one-third of CPI data is now estimates. https://www.apolloacademy.com/the-quality-of-the-cpi-data-continues-to-deteriorate/
Not good.
Corrections in the employment figures for the past two months are really quite large. If July is corrected by this much, US is in negative territory in terms of net job growth, no?
Trump’s team is already hovering: how do we replace the data gathers? You could fire them all - no data is better than bad data! With the Epstein saga dominating the news maybe no one will notice. 🥴
Shit
Thanks.
https://www.alternet.org/up-in-flames/
He Dont like the numbers
https://www.cnn.com/2025/08/01/business/trump-job-report-number-fire
Extremely worrisome. This way lies awful, awful outcomes.
fafo
The US economy doesn't want to be in a stagflationary economic state but the rising unemployment combined with the rising inflation rates lead it to that.
But isn’t the jobless rate currently surprisingly low? Below nairu?
It's still pretty low though was in the mid-3s two years ago (and inflation was falling)! Not sure what "nairu" is right now, but it's clear to me that inflation is rising due to tariffs, not econ activity (ie, stagflation).
Ah! A chance to bitch to an actual economist (which I am not) about the loose use of the word "inflation". A price rise due to a tax is indeed not inflation per se, as it involves no money creation. It can be "inflationary" if an economy adjusts to it by creating money, and thereby "inflating it away", which I well remember the US economy attempting in the 1970s (OPEC was not fooled). Thus, "stagflation".
I see much muddled thinking, and rhetorical sleight of hand, enabled by the failure to consistently make this distinction.
Nor is our discourse at all clear about how money is created.
Nothing goes without saying now, if it ever did.