[NJFAC] Fed Chair Jerome Powell says US may be drastically overstating jobs numbers

Fed Chair Jerome Powell says US may be drastically overstating jobs numbers,  Matt Grossman, Harriet Torry

Fed Chair Jerome Powell pointed on Wednesday to a job-market risk that economists have been worried about for months: Official statistics could be drastically overstating recent hiring.

Powell said that Fed staffers believe that federal data could be overestimating job creation by up to 60,000 jobs a month. Given that figures published so far show that the economy has added about 40,000 jobs a month since April, the real number could be something more like a loss of 20,000 jobs a month, Powell said.

"We think there's an overstatement in these numbers," Powell said.

Published data already show the labor market has slowed significantly this year, down from rapid hiring after the Covid-19 pandemic. This slower pace means big data revisions can more easily reveal the economy is shedding jobs, not adding them.

"It's a complicated, unusual, and difficult situation, where the labor market is also under pressure, where job creation may actually be negative," Powell said.

That concern provided some of the backing for the Fed's decision to cut interest rates at a third straight meeting, Powell said—despite a labor market that still looks healthy on the surface, with unemployment at a relatively modest 4.4% in September and a net gain of 119,000 jobs that month. Next week, the Labor Department will report fresh jobs numbers for October and November, as well as possible revisions for previous months.

Powell's concern involves a quandary that the Labor Department faces when measuring hiring: how to judge the number of jobs added or destroyed when new businesses are created or close down. Those jobs can't be surveyed directly because it's difficult for the government to reach out to brand-new companies or companies no longer in business.

Instead, Labor's data arm, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, must use a statistical model to make a guess. In the past few years, that technique, called the birth-death model—referring to the births and deaths of businesses—has overstated job creation by hundreds of thousands of jobs a year, forcing significant downward revisions later.

Last month, the BLS laid out a plan to change how it uses the birth-death model, which could make the real-time numbers more accurate starting in February. But for now, Powell suggested, the Fed is concerned that monthly employment stats have been too good to be true—part of the rationale for continuing to cut interest rates even though inflation remains above target.

The difficulty with the birth-death model is just one among a handful of problems the BLS has faced in delivering accurate economic statistics on time, and is complicating the Fed's job as it tries to steer an economy facing dual challenges of elevated inflation and rising unemployment.

A falling number of timely responses to the labor surveys has increased the scale of a different set of monthly job-stats revisions, required after some companies hand in their payroll numbers late. A yearslong budget crunch and staffing shortages have also weighed on the agency's capabilities. And, most recently, the extended government shutdown that ended in November set the agency's work back by more than a month.

The Labor Department's struggles have spilled into politics, prompting President Trump to blame data problems on what he called efforts to manipulate figures for political ends. He fired the BLS's commissioner, Erika McEntarfer, after sharp revisions in August ate into springtime jobs growth, leaving the agency in the hands of a nonpartisan career official who is serving as its acting leader.

--

June Zaccone
National Jobs for All Network
http://www.njfac.org

--
This list is only for announcements, so you may not post. To contact the list manager, write to junez [at] njfac.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "goodjobs" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to goodjobsforall+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/goodjobsforall/CAPV%3DhmBwMjGzMc_KTEcbdYu7Y8VJ62PNKyV85wwt-PcqrxfaDQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[NJFAC] aims of ecosocialist transformation, including job guarantee, get majority support US, UK: poll

How popular is ecosocialist transformation? New study shows strong majority support. Jason Hickel Dec 04, 2025

How popular is ecosocialist transformation? We explored this question in a new study, just published in The Lancet Planetary Health together with colleagues at the London School of Economics.

We surveyed more than 5,000 people in the UK and US, using representative samples and two separate study designs. We presented people with a full proposal for eco-socialist transformation, which included the following:

• scaling down damaging and unnecessary production and consumption

• cutting the purchasing power of the rich, and reducing inequality

• establishing universal public services and a public job guarantee to reorganise production around needs

• democratising control over finance and the means of production

• ending imperialist appropriation from the global South through unequal exchange

We found that this vision enjoys strong majority support in both countries. In the US, 72% of people supported it, and in the UK support was even higher at 82%. These are striking results, and confirm other studies showing popular support for many of the principles and policies associated with ecosocialism.

Next, we wanted to understand how people respond to various labels that may be used to describe this transformation, so we presented people with standalone words including "degrowth", "ecosocialism", and "well-being economy", without any description. Here I will report results for the UK, but the US results are similar.

We found that "degrowth" was supported by 20-26%, depending on the study, but also attracted a lot of opposition (16-34%).

"Ecosocialism" had higher support, at 36-58%, and much lower opposition (11-16%).

"Well-being economy" had even higher support (51-81%) and very minimal opposition (more on this later).

In our final step, we gave people the full proposal but this time together with the various different labels. This enabled us to understand whether and how the use of different labels affects people's support. We found that support was high regardless of the label, with strong majorities: 67-72% in the US, and 74-84% in the UK.

So what can we make of all this? For me, here are the main takeaways:

First, the transformative vision and policies advanced by ecosocialism are popular and can form the basis of a winning political campaign. The common notion that these ideas are too "radical" and cannot gain support, is clearly wrong. People want these things, and are likely to support political leaders who can credibly promise to deliver them. The main obstacle to transformation is not popular will, but the capitalist class that currently holds predominant power over production and within political institutions.

Second, some reflections on the word "degrowth", which was the main focus of this study. Our results show that much of the opposition to (or neutrality toward) degrowth is due to misunderstanding of the word rather than rejection of the underlying principles and policies.

Degrowth is a crucial analytical and scientific term and we need it for these purposes. Advocates also note that it is a "missile word" useful for provoking people to rethink long-held assumptions. This can be powerful. But the word may be less useful as a public-facing political slogan, as — depending on the context — it is often misunderstood and can inspire negative reactions. Unless, that is, you have the capacity to educate people about what the term means and what such a transformation would entail.

Third, the term ecosocialism is substantially more popular and can create broader political support. We were surprised to find that up to 58% of people in both the UK and US were willing to support ecosocialism even when just presented with the word alone. We didn't test people's reactions to related terms, like "socialism" or "democratic socialism" or "communism", but this would be interesting to do.

What about "well-being economy"? It is popular and obviously useful in certain contexts, but it is also apolitical and can easily be co-opted and neutralised. To me it's important to be clear about the political antagonism that is at stake: the transformation requires removing the capitalist class from control over finance and the means of production. This is a class war. Ecosocialism captures this element, but other terms may work just as well or better toward this end.

Ultimately, what this study shows is that we don't necessarily need to identify and unite behind a single term. What matters is the broader vision, the political substance, and the concrete policies we advance.....

--

June Zaccone
National Jobs for All Network
http://www.njfac.org

--
This list is only for announcements, so you may not post. To contact the list manager, write to junez [at] njfac.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "goodjobs" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to goodjobsforall+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/goodjobsforall/CAPV%3DhmCFT-kay8zPdW2GHZaiT6gtm93S9yPHd4X%3D24Jedjd_%2Bw%40mail.gmail.com.

[NJFAC] How Wage Increases Became the Fed’s Red Line; food and housing costs outpace wages

How Wage Increases Became the Fed's Red Line John Ruehl, Posted on December 4, 2025 by Yves Smith

Yves here. This John Ruehl article usefully describes how the Fed has made wage increases a, if not the, primary indicator for when inflationary pressures have gotten serious enough to warrant central bank action. But it moved to that practice in the Volcker Fed, when labor had considerable bargaining power and many labor contracts contained cost of living adjustments. Not only have things changed a lot since then, but Ruehl points out how some measures the Fed uses overstate the pace of pay increases among lower wage workers and thus contributes to rising inequality.....

By John P. Ruehl, an Australian-American journalist living in Washington, D.C., and a world affairs correspondent for the Independent Media Institute.

....

At first glance, the average weekly wage for the last two decades appears strong, often outpacing general inflation. Data from the Center for American Progress indicate that workers, especially lower-income workers, have seen real gains between the COVID-19 pandemic and late 2024.

Yet these figures can be misleading. Recessions often skew the numbers because lower-paid workers are more likely to be laid off while higher earners remain, and new hires during recoveries can temporarily boost averages through starting pay or signing bonuses. Meanwhile, common inflation metrics like the consumer price index for all urban consumers can often understate the cost of livingfor lower-income households, and most wages remain below pre-pandemic levels. In fact, real hourly wages for most workers have barely moved since the 1970s and have typically been slow to recover once they fall behind.

While the Fed has long viewed suppressing wage inflation as central to stabilizing the economy and preventing runaway inflation, this was not always its primary mission. The Federal Reserve was founded in 1913 to prevent banking panics by providing liquidity to struggling banks, with its authority expanding dramatically during the Great Depression as it took on a central role in monetary policy, bank supervision, and financial system oversight.

....

The Fed's strategy became orthodox, but its success has been mixed. It certainly helped tame inflation and return the economy to growth, but real wages have stagnated for most workers since. Meanwhile, the financial sector expanded dramatically, benefiting from higher margins, speculation, and rising asset prices as the Fed focused on wage inflation instead.

By the mid-to-late 1990s, however, the Fed demonstrated that wage growth and price stability could coexist. Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan allowed the economy to run hotter than some economists recommended, betting that productivity gains from technology would keep inflation in check. Unemployment fell to historic lows, and lower-income workers in particular saw modest wage gains. In the 2000s and 2010s, inflation remained moderate, and wages remained largely stagnant.

After nearly three decades of low inflation, the inflation surge of the early 2020s was driven largely by corporate markups, supply chain shocks, and energy prices, and not wage growth. From the early 1990s through the 2010s, wages were also not a significant source of the limited inflation. Instead, asset bubbles (most notably the 2000s housing bubble), along with food and energy price shocks, were responsible for price increases.

....

https://x.com/KobeissiLetter/status/1996389739293819272

--

June Zaccone
National Jobs for All Network
http://www.njfac.org

--
This list is only for announcements, so you may not post. To contact the list manager, write to junez [at] njfac.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "goodjobs" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to goodjobsforall+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/goodjobsforall/CAPV%3DhmDdTB8OuRZAqDwFqGX_3E9uWYdd70gGOCP8BY%2BM_xk_rw%40mail.gmail.com.

[NJFAC] Forbes: 30% Of Job Postings Are Fake

You're Not Bad At Job Hunting—30% Of Job Postings Are Fake

By Caroline Castrillon, Senior Contributor. Nov 18, 2025

You're not imagining it. Job hunting feels impossible right now because it actually is. You've polished your resume, customized cover letters and applied for hundreds of roles only to hear nothing back. One in three job postings never results in a hire, according to a MyPerfectResume analysis of Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data. In June 2025, employers reported 7.4 million openings but made only 5.2 million hires. That's more than 2.2 million ghost jobs that wasted countless hours of your time.

The emotional drain of job hunting is real because ghost jobs make it exponentially worse. These phantom job postings aren't just wasting your time. They're stalling your career while destroying your confidence.

Here's what's actually making job hunting so brutal right now and how to stop wasting time on ghost jobs.

Ghost Jobs Are a Permanent Fixture

For more than a decade after the Great Recession, job postings and actual hires stayed closely aligned. Then in 2021, job openings spiked above 11 million while hires hovered at 6 to 7 million. The "phantom gap" rose sharply to 38% as employers advertised nearly 4 million more positions than they were actually filling. Although hiring has cooled since then, the gap has never normalized. The ghost job rate has remained between 28% and 32% for years. This isn't a temporary distortion. It has become a structural feature of the job market.

Industries Where Ghost Jobs Hide

June 2025 BLS data reveals dramatic differences in the percentage of ghost jobs across industries:

• Government roles: 60%
• Education and health services: 50%
• Information: 48%
• Finance: 44%
• Leisure and hospitality: 2%
• Construction: -44% (more hires than openings)

A shocking six out of every 10 government job postings are ghost jobs. Agencies are required to post openings publicly even when they've already selected an internal candidate or when roles are frozen awaiting approval that may never come. The pattern extends across white-collar fields. Government, education, health services, information and finance all maintain large pools of unfilled postings that distort the hiring picture. By contrast, consumer-facing sectors like hospitality and construction show strong alignment between job postings and actual hires. If you're job hunting in government agencies, healthcare companies or financial firms, the odds that a posted role is a ghost job increase significantly.

Why Companies Post Ghost Jobs

"The U.S. labor market looks deceptively strong on paper. Millions of openings suggest opportunity, but many are illusions," says Jasmine Escalera, career expert at MyPerfectResume.

Companies keep ghost jobs active for several reasons:

• To build candidate pipelines for roles that might open later
• To signal growth during hiring freezes
• To leave approved positions stuck in limbo due to budget cuts
• To satisfy internal posting requirements or HR quotas

Some companies post jobs to test market conditions or gauge salary expectations without any immediate intention to hire. Others need to show a certain number of active job postings to satisfy internal HR metrics or convince investors that the company is growing. In some cases, managers post roles they hope to fill someday but lack current budget approval. The posting stays live indefinitely, collecting resumes that may never be reviewed.

How To Stop Wasting Time On Ghost Jobs....

 --

June Zaccone
National Jobs for All Network
http://www.njfac.org

--
This list is only for announcements, so you may not post. To contact the list manager, write to junez [at] njfac.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "goodjobs" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to goodjobsforall+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/goodjobsforall/CAPV%3DhmDMTLSdAH%3Ds_BDTGqbjFQqJUeCPXhPvsO8%2BnqXENMAbAg%40mail.gmail.com.

[NJFAC] Americans More Supportive of Higher Taxes Once Informed of ‘Universal Benefits of Public Goods’

Americans More Supportive of Higher Taxes Once Informed of 'Universal Benefits of Public Goods': Study Researchers found that informing people of the benefits of taxpayer-funded goods and services significantly boosted public opinion of larger government, spending, and taxation. Jake Johnson Nov 18, 2025

A new study challenges the common assumption that Americans are preternaturally averse to higher taxation, showing that public attitudes become more favorable once people are made aware of the "universal benefits of public goods" funded by their tax dollars.

The study, conducted by Japanese researchers and published last month in the Japanese Economic Review, separated the US-based participants into a treatment group and a control group.

People in both groups were asked questions about their views on government size, spending, and taxation, but those in the treatment group were provided passages explaining the universal benefits of tax-funded transportation systems, public roads, trash disposal, and sewage infrastructure.

Researchers intentionally crafted the passages to highlight the benefits of universal goods, not means-tested programs targeted at low-income Americans.

Before and after reading the above passages, participants in the treatment group were asked: "How much of your taxes do you think are used for public goods and services that benefit all of you?"

They were also asked whether they agree with the following statement: "Regardless of income, everyone in the US more or less benefits from public spending."

The researchers found that the treatment passages substantially increased support for public spending, larger government, and higher taxes among study participants.

After consuming the provided information on the benefits of public goods, nearly 64% of those in the treatment group said they would support an across-the-board tax increase of 1%. In the control group, support was significantly lower at 52.5%.

"If people become aware that more public goods are provided than they previously thought, the government might politically achieve more redistribution through expanding its size without reducing policy progressivity," the study authors wrote. "Although we focused on transportation and trash disposal systems, governments provide other public goods. Exploring how our results may or may not generalize to other public goods would be interesting."

The study was published amid a growing national debate over the for-profit US healthcare system, with Democrats pushing for an extension of tax credits that help millions of Americans afford private insurance plans while Republicans float vague and unworkable alternatives.

Congressional progressives, for their part, have used the healthcare fight to elevate their case for Medicare for All, the only plan on offer that would secure universal healthcare—and at a lower overall cost than the status quo.

Opponents of Medicare for All—which would eliminate premiums, copays, and deductibles—have balked at the taxes Americans would have to pay to fund comprehensive health coverage for everyone in the United States.

But the Japanese Economic Review study suggests that US public opinion on taxes is malleable, particularly when people are informed of the benefits of universal programs.

--

June Zaccone
National Jobs for All Network
http://www.njfac.org

--
This list is only for announcements, so you may not post. To contact the list manager, write to junez [at] njfac.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "goodjobs" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to goodjobsforall+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/goodjobsforall/CAPV%3DhmA1KVXr3tT%2BugxRKumiJcU7X%3DUFQ92_9Wcs65N4HmtSwA%40mail.gmail.com.

[NJFAC] One economist on AI and jobs [with link!]

Policy Uncertainty, Not "AI"-Automation, Is Almost Surely Behind the Bulk of Recent Graduates' Job Discontent Why are new college graduates finding it harder than usual to get a foot in the door, even as unemployment rates stay low? Do not (yet) focus on "AI"…Brad DeLong Jul 23, 2025

Whatever is making new college graduates these days think that their life is unusually difficult for their labor market segment, it is almost surely not "AI". Amanda Mull:

Amanda Mull: What the Tough Job Market for New College Grads Says About the Economy <https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-07-17/tough-job-market-for-new-college-grads-is-worrying-for-us-economy>: 'Ernie Tedeschi… [says] hiring rates for new grads are… in line with the latter half of the 2010s…. "We still see low unemployment, and we do see pretty solid job gains," says Allison Shrivastava, an economist at… Indeed…. But it… isn't as lush as it was in the recent past…. [And] graduates in computer science, computer engineering and graphic design all have unemployment rates at 7% or greater…. Nathan Goldschlag… [says] the new-grad unemployment rate… "is low for things like accounting and business analytics, which… when you're coming from the AI space… are ripe for automation"….

Stochastic uncertainty…. Companies are waiting as long as they can… in hopes of catching a glimpse of what tariffs and AI and inflation and anti-immigration policies will do to their business, which means many are delaying hiring. "Everything is just kind of stalled out and frozen," Shrivastava says…

jz However, see one cited graph:

--

June Zaccone
National Jobs for All Network
http://www.njfac.org

--
This list is only for announcements, so you may not post. To contact the list manager, write to junez [at] njfac.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "goodjobs" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to goodjobsforall+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/goodjobsforall/CAPV%3DhmADGAtRyTADntzfXBY08rsDNqBkZLH3qTjau1MOd%3D%2BE%2BA%40mail.gmail.com.

[NJFAC] One economist on AI and jobs

Policy Uncertainty, Not "AI"-Automation, Is Almost Surely Behind the Bulk of Recent Graduates' Job Discontent Why are new college graduates finding it harder than usual to get a foot in the door, even as unemployment rates stay low? Do not (yet) focus on "AI"…Brad DeLong Jul 23, 2025

Whatever is making new college graduates these days think that their life is unusually difficult for their labor market segment, it is almost surely not "AI". Amanda Mull:

Amanda Mull: What the Tough Job Market for New College Grads Says About the Economy <https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-07-17/tough-job-market-for-new-college-grads-is-worrying-for-us-economy>: 'Ernie Tedeschi… [says] hiring rates for new grads are… in line with the latter half of the 2010s…. "We still see low unemployment, and we do see pretty solid job gains," says Allison Shrivastava, an economist at… Indeed…. But it… isn't as lush as it was in the recent past…. [And] graduates in computer science, computer engineering and graphic design all have unemployment rates at 7% or greater…. Nathan Goldschlag… [says] the new-grad unemployment rate… "is low for things like accounting and business analytics, which… when you're coming from the AI space… are ripe for automation"….

Stochastic uncertainty…. Companies are waiting as long as they can… in hopes of catching a glimpse of what tariffs and AI and inflation and anti-immigration policies will do to their business, which means many are delaying hiring. "Everything is just kind of stalled out and frozen," Shrivastava says…

jz However, see one cited graph:

--

June Zaccone
National Jobs for All Network
http://www.njfac.org

--
This list is only for announcements, so you may not post. To contact the list manager, write to junez [at] njfac.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "goodjobs" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to goodjobsforall+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/goodjobsforall/CAPV%3DhmB6t9%3Dif9TuV4wpVbZ3L8HYt3254N64-POtU%3D%3D-kCYjBQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[NJFAC] "Flexible labor" is a euphemism for "derisking capital"

"Flexible labor" is a euphemism for "derisking capital" Corey Doctorow

....Both workers and corporations seek to "de-risk" their position. Workers can vote for politicians who will set minimum wages, punish unsafe working conditions and on-the-job harassment, and require health and disability insurance. They can also unionize and get some or all of these measures through collective bargaining (they might even get more protections, such as workplace tribunals to protect them from jobsite harassment). These are all examples of measures that shift risk from workers to capital. If a boss hires or promotes an abusive manager or cuts corners on shop-floor safety, the company – not the workers – will ultimately have to pay the price for its managers' poor judgment.

Bosses also strive to de-risk their position, by shifting the risk onto workers. For example, bosses love noncompete clauses in contracts, which let them harness the power of the government to punish their workers for changing jobs, and other bosses for hiring them. Given a tight noncompete, a boss can impose such high costs on workers who quit that they will elect to stay, even in the face of degraded working conditions, inadequate pay, and abusive management:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/02/02/its-the-economy-stupid/#neofeudal

If you have $250,000 worth of student debt and your boss has coerced you into signing a contract with a noncompete, that means that quitting your job will see you excluded for three years (or longer) from the field you paid all that money to get a degree in, but you will still be expected to pay your loans over that period. Missing the loan payments means sky-high penalties, which is how you get situations where you borrow $79k, pay back $190k, and still owe $236k:....https://pluralistic.net/2020/12/04/kawaski-trawick/#strike-debt ....

That's what bosses mean by a "flexible workforce": a workforce that can coerced into assuming risk that properly belongs to its employers.....

--

June Zaccone
National Jobs for All Network
http://www.njfac.org

--
This list is only for announcements, so you may not post. To contact the list manager, write to junez [at] njfac.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "goodjobs" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to goodjobsforall+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/goodjobsforall/CAPV%3DhmBBXJA9TT-j9VJoivOt%2BkaCtbjjF-USb-QfTj%3DrBDzXCA%40mail.gmail.com.

[NJFAC] Why the US Cannot Reverse Its Manufacturing Decline

Mission Impossible: Why the US Cannot Reverse Its Manufacturing Decline Posted on November 3, 2025 by Yves Smith

Steve Keen highlighted a YouTube video on why the US manufacturing goose is cooked and will stay cooked. The points it makes are broader than the observation we have repeatedly made, that for the US to have any hope of resoring its industrial capacity, it will require way more than just tariffs but sustained industrial policy. But as we will explains, it also is romantically anchored in a past of manufacturing as a generator of many and good middle class jobs, when production is now highly automated and requires few if any workers.....

--

June Zaccone
National Jobs for All Network
http://www.njfac.org

--
This list is only for announcements, so you may not post. To contact the list manager, write to junez [at] njfac.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "goodjobs" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to goodjobsforall+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/goodjobsforall/CAPV%3DhmAhYC%2BGofzwhsXo6-E8quNTZ3rMGEnrfBdxQ-yFd6%2B7bQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[NJFAC] Economic Populism Has Broad Appeal in the Rust Belt

Report: Economic Populism Has Broad Appeal in the Rust Belt By Editors [of Jacobin]

....

An exhaustive new survey from the Center for Working-Class Politics and its partners finds that strong economic populism resonates across Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania — and that independent candidates outperform Democrats delivering the same message.....

Voter disillusionment with Democrats is more about failure and less about ideological extremism. Across Democrats, independents, and Republicans, many described the party as corrupt, out of touch, unwilling to fight for working people, and not a party for working people. While some of these critiques bled into broader claims that Democrats are focused on the wrong priorities, only small minorities cited "wokeness" or extremism (3% of Democrats, 11% of independents, and 19% of Republicans)....

The most popular economic policies are bold, tangible, and grounded in fairness — and can unite voters across class and partisan lines. Across twenty-five ranked proposals, policies that reduced costs, curbed corporate abuse, and held elites accountable (capping drug prices, taxing the wealthy, and even enacting a federal jobs guarantee) consistently performed best. Support for many of these policies cut across ideological and class divisions, highlighting the potential of economic populism to build the broad coalitions progressives need to win.....

Independent populist politics may offer a credible path forward. Across the four Rust Belt states we surveyed, 57% of respondents supported the creation of a new Independent Workers Political Association (IWPA), with especially strong enthusiasm among noncollege voters, renters, voters of color, and the economically insecure. The idea of an IWPA drew significant support from Republicans and independents as well — suggesting a realignment opportunity grounded in economic populism.....

You can read the full report here.

--

June Zaccone
National Jobs for All Network
http://www.njfac.org

--
This list is only for announcements, so you may not post. To contact the list manager, write to junez [at] njfac.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "goodjobs" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to goodjobsforall+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/goodjobsforall/CAPV%3DhmARqGTH9zR-So1ee0GHCu7UYEFWzhJvFkqbSo9dLWQ47Q%40mail.gmail.com.

[NJFAC] on market effects; Friedman on helping those in need

The Milton Friedman Question  good rundown on results of market dominance. below, a comment: https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2025/09/the-milton-friedman-question.html#comment-4290669

Michael Hudson: Milton Friedman was indeed a propagandist. Toward that end, he invited my then-boss, Herman Kahn, to join the UI/Chicago faculty around 1975. Herman was himself a great ideological salesman. (I learned a lot from him.)

When Herman and his wife Jane met with Friedman, Jane asked whether there weren't some services that were appropriate for government — such as protecting widows and orphans, or sick in need of medical help. Friedman replied: "Mrs. Kahn, why do you want to subsidize the supply of widows and orphans, or the sick?"
Herman decided not to go to Chicago, despite his ideological sympathy with Friedman.

--

June Zaccone
National Jobs for All Network
http://www.njfac.org

--
This list is only for announcements, so you may not post. To contact the list manager, write to junez [at] njfac.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "goodjobs" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to goodjobsforall+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/goodjobsforall/CAPV%3DhmCv%3DDPzsTjJfy%2BMF9WWz7wq1wzUuOshFt_%3DR4nmWY89LQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[NJFAC] top 400 richest Americans now taxed less than general population

Report shows top 400 richest Americans now taxed less than general population by Edward Lempinen, University of California - Berkeley https://phys.org/news/2025-09-richest-americans-taxed-general-population.html edited by Lisa Lock, reviewed by Andrew Zinin September 8, 2025

Total effective tax rates for the 400 wealthiest Americans have declined sharply in recent years, and they now pay a smaller percentage of their true income in taxes than the average American, according to new economic research from UC Berkeley.

For that highest cadre of the economic elite—the top 0.0002%—the effective tax rate fell from 30% in 2010–2017 to 23.8% in 2018–2020, says the new research. The wealthy paid lower overall taxes because they were able to shelter more of their business income from taxes, and on the income they did report, tax rates were lower, the authors said.

"When taking a comprehensive view of taxation and income, ultra-high-net-worth individuals appear less taxed than the average American," they concluded.

The findings were reported in "How Much Tax Do U.S. Billionaires Pay? Evidence from Administrative Data," a working paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research. The research was conducted by influential faculty economists Emmanuel Saez, Danny Yagan and Gabriel Zucman, and by UC Berkeley Ph.D. student Akcan S. Balkir....

--

June Zaccone
National Jobs for All Network
http://www.njfac.org

--
This list is only for announcements, so you may not post. To contact the list manager, write to junez [at] njfac.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "goodjobs" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to goodjobsforall+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/goodjobsforall/CAPV%3DhmD%2BgA8w-v6Po-pncuDiQBLF56bviD3PRBAOnOEHQsLLqQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[NJFAC] Social Security is the most valuable asset most Americans have.

Americans' Most Valuable Asset Isn't Stocks or a Home. It's Social Security.

By Jeff Sommer Sept. 5, 2025

Social Security is the most valuable thing most Americans have.

I don't mean this in an abstract sense. In purely financial terms, the Social Security check that you are getting now or have a right to receive when you are older is your most valuable financial asset.

That statement is true for nearly everyone except those in the top 10 percent of the wealth distribution in the United States. And for people right in the middle, Social Security amounts to roughly one-third of their total wealth, on average, according to an eye-opening study by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

For poorer people, Social Security isn't just the most valuable asset they've got. It can be absolutely crucial — the difference in old age between destitution and a bare modicum of survival. And it helps people with disabilities and children as well as older Americans. Social Security lifts more people out of poverty than any government program, according to a separate study by an independent research institute the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

Anything this important ought to receive far more attention and respect than it has been getting. Instead, Social Security is a neglected responsibility of the political classes — a precious 90-year-old legacy that has been allowed to fall into disrepair....

--

June Zaccone
National Jobs for All Network
http://www.njfac.org

--
This list is only for announcements, so you may not post. To contact the list manager, write to junez [at] njfac.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "goodjobs" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to goodjobsforall+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/goodjobsforall/CAPV%3DhmDc2vPNs4x_SMXBa-dVdsz2%2Bq98EexG6hQvJCfiQuz4LQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[NJFAC] BLS benchmark revisions are necessary for timely and accurate data

Real Data, Real Insight  In this email we discuss the BLS preliminary benchmark revisions, the most recent jobs report.. This week's BLS preliminary benchmark revisions are necessary for timely and accurate data—not fodder for Trump's attacks This week's preliminary benchmark announcement from the Bureau of Labor Statistics reveals weaker job growth between March 2024 and March 2025 than when it was first reported based on survey data. Even though these changes mostly reflect the economy before he took office, President Trump and the White House have attacked government data revisions as political manipulation. Understand the process In addition, Elise Gould offers further insights via Bluesky on the jobs numbers released on September 5th. Read Elise's post on our blog 🦋 Read Elise's posts on Bluesky 🦋 View EPI on Bluesky 🦋 View the EPI Starter Pack on Bluesky State Policy Updates SUPPORT We need your help in order to continue our work on behalf of workers and their families. Our donors value our high-quality research, reputation for truth-telling, and practical policy solutions. Your tax-deductible gift to EPI makes you an important partner in providing this critical public service. Support EPI Trending Publications 📈 Unions raise wages. Tariffs don't.  📈 Don't be fooled—U.S.-born workers are facing a worse labor market in 2025   📈 Trump's deportation agenda will destroy millions of jobs: Both immigrants and U.S.-born workers would suffer job losses, particularly in construction and child care  📈 State unemployment by race and ethnicity (Q2 2025)  📈 Unions aren't just good for workers—they also benefit communities and democracy  Top Tools ⚙️ Family Budget Calculator ⚙️ Wage Stagnation in 9 Charts ⚙️ Minimum Wage Tracker ⚙️ The Productivity-Pay Gap ⚙️ U.S. Tax & spending explorer

--

June Zaccone
National Jobs for All Network
http://www.njfac.org

--
This list is only for announcements, so you may not post. To contact the list manager, write to junez [at] njfac.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "goodjobs" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to goodjobsforall+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/goodjobsforall/CAPV%3DhmC_WDSzNwhfhEWTJd25FM4HGjDdRNo%3Dd6hK5Oc7dXrEbg%40mail.gmail.com.