Most active commenters
  • timr(5)
  • yubblegum(5)
  • tharmas(5)
  • the_gastropod(4)
  • macintux(3)
  • YZF(3)
  • mattmaroon(3)
  • RhysU(3)
  • jibal(3)
  • esseph(3)

←back to thread

462 points JumpCrisscross | 132 comments | | HN request time: 0.611s | source | bottom
1. lazarus01 ◴[] No.45078568[source]
In NYC, for the first 6 months of 2025, 994 new private sector jobs were created [1]. During the same period last year, there were 66,000 new jobs created.

Higher cost of doing business from tariffs has frozen hiring. With a frozen job market, there’s less revenue coming in.

NYC is a leading indicator for the rest of the country.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/13/nyregion/nyc-jobs.html

replies(13): >>45078595 #>>45078679 #>>45078740 #>>45078958 #>>45079382 #>>45080115 #>>45080271 #>>45080965 #>>45081316 #>>45082066 #>>45083020 #>>45083528 #>>45083540 #
2. macintux ◴[] No.45078595[source]
I’m curious whether it’s more the tariffs, or the uncertainty. No one knows what will happen on a day-to-day basis: the chaotic (and illegal) decision-making leaves everyone wondering what’s next.
replies(4): >>45078705 #>>45081223 #>>45082312 #>>45091612 #
3. timr ◴[] No.45078679[source]
Even assuming that there were no other federal, state or local YoY differences [1] that could explain this change (and that the numbers are right as presented in the first place), New York City private sector employment is nothing like most other parts of the US: it's the largest city in the US by a large margin, it has a concentration of employment in a few major industries (finance, fashion, publishing, software) that aren't represented elsewhere, and...it hasn't been a manufacturing center since the victorian era.

You can't wave this away with "NYC is a leading indicator for the US economy". To the extent that it's true at all, you could say it about any large city in the US.

[1] Like, say: interest rates, the business cycle, AI, the slowdown in software hiring, or the minimum wage increase that NYC implemented on January 1, 2025.

replies(3): >>45078736 #>>45078886 #>>45079076 #
4. YZF ◴[] No.45078705[source]
The hiring slowdown predates tariffs. For various reasons CEOs either believe they can do more with less people, or that they can hire cheaper people in other geographies, or both. Businesses (tech or financials) don't seem to be telegraphing uncertainty, S&P 500 revenue is at all times high and trending up, earnings/profit all time highs and trending up, valuations all times high and trending up.
replies(6): >>45079312 #>>45079399 #>>45079547 #>>45081230 #>>45082541 #>>45084035 #
5. fn-mote ◴[] No.45078736[source]
This dismissal of a massive drop in hiring (literally 1.5% of the previous half year’s reported hiring) is wishful thinking.

“Ignore this data point, NYC is special.” Color me skeptical.

replies(1): >>45078746 #
6. bitshiftfaced ◴[] No.45078740[source]
Looking at total private jobs over time, growth slowed after the post covid bump, but 2025 doesn't look all that different from 2024: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/SMU36935610500000001SA#
replies(1): >>45078942 #
7. timr ◴[] No.45078746{3}[source]
I'm not ignoring it, but I’m not falling into a post hoc fallacy, either.

I'll put it this way: if I were ignoring it, I'd be ignoring one more data point than you are in cherry-picking a single example.

replies(1): >>45078803 #
8. lovemenot ◴[] No.45078803{4}[source]
I'd be ignoring one more data point
replies(1): >>45078809 #
9. timr ◴[] No.45078809{5}[source]
whoops. fixed.
10. apical_dendrite ◴[] No.45078886[source]
It's true that NYC private sector employment is different from the US labor market as a whole, but NYC private sector employment is better representative of what readers of this site care about than overall US employment. Readers are much more likely to be affected by changes in the professional services and information sectors than, say, agriculture.
replies(3): >>45079313 #>>45079534 #>>45081432 #
11. JumpCrisscross ◴[] No.45078942[source]
Both the NYC Employment Data the New York Times cites [1] and these Fed data [2] are seasonally adjusted. Would take them with a shaker of salt given the assumptions in those adjustment models are likely currently under assault. (Hehe.)

[1] https://www.nyc.gov/assets/omb/downloads/pdf/sa-methodology-...

[2] https://www.census.gov/data/software/x13as.html

12. JumpCrisscross ◴[] No.45078958[source]
Would note that the data the New York Times cited are seasonally adjusted [1]. The assumptions of those adjustment models may not currently apply.

It’s going to be difficult to suss out a signal from employment data until October or November, by when we should have about half a year of post-tariff data [2] to compare with ‘24. (We may not know anything surely for a year.)

[1] https://www.nyc.gov/assets/omb/downloads/pdf/sa-methodology-...

[2] https://www.piie.com/research/piie-charts/2025/trumps-tariff...

replies(1): >>45079542 #
13. atoav ◴[] No.45079076[source]
Yes, a tariff can be a good measure. But for that the tariffed goods need to be selected carefully and rationally und not whatever the heck the Trump administration is doing.

For example you can tariff bananas all you like, that won't spark widespread banana production in a climate that can't grow them.

replies(3): >>45081050 #>>45082186 #>>45084399 #
14. vkou ◴[] No.45079312{3}[source]
> The hiring slowdown predates tariffs.

That's true, but it didn't predate the election of a man who has made his understanding of tariffs and economics crystal clear in the months and years leading up to January 2025.

replies(1): >>45079407 #
15. timr ◴[] No.45079313{3}[source]
And again, even if you assume that all of that is true, you're still making a leap of logic that these changes are because of the tariffs.
replies(1): >>45079691 #
16. mupuff1234 ◴[] No.45079382[source]
And yet the rent in NYC just seems to go up and up.
replies(1): >>45080997 #
17. mattmaroon ◴[] No.45079399{3}[source]
There are other options, it’s not that simple. They may foresee an economic slowdown (they certainly say they do at every opportunity), they feel they are currently overstaffed, the ETF and hedge fund managers who own most of their stock are pressuring them to save money because they don’t like what they’re reading in the tea leaves, etc.
18. mattmaroon ◴[] No.45079407{4}[source]
The tariffs this time are far in excess of anything he did previously or promised to do while running for office again and took nearly everyone by surprise though.
replies(2): >>45079501 #>>45080487 #
19. denismi ◴[] No.45079501{5}[source]
This pre-election BBC summary - https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwy343z53l1o - pretty clearly spells out what has eventuated, describing it as a "central campaign pledge":

> Trump has made tariffs a central campaign pledge in order to protect US industry. He has proposed new 10-20% tariffs on most imported foreign goods, and much higher ones on those from China.

replies(2): >>45079573 #>>45081304 #
20. epistasis ◴[] No.45079534{3}[source]
The agricultural section indicators are that there's about to be a big, expensive bailout for ag:

> “Right now, we have zero bushels of soybeans on the books with China for this fall harvest that has begun in the Deep South,” Ragland said. “Normally by this time, close to 40% of our sales for the marketing year are on the books. And with zero on the books right now, it is alarming for American soybean farmers.”

https://www.farmprogress.com/soybean/us-soybean-exports-to-c...

The first time that Trump screwed over with tariffs, they got tons of bailout money that we all paid for.

Not all sectors of the economy are so lucky. The big man at the top must be paid with either bribes or allegiance or both.

replies(1): >>45083489 #
21. epistasis ◴[] No.45079547{3}[source]
That was the entire point of hiking interest rates, to slow down the economy and stop inflation. Tariffs are universally acknowledged to cause inflation, and we would be in a recovery path if it weren't for the delays that tariffs are causing right now.

It is rather interesting to see the difference in standards of accountability for different presidents. Some are responsible for the economy even if its behavior is not sure to their actions. Others are not responsible for poor economic performance even when taking actions universally agreed to harm the economy.

replies(2): >>45080473 #>>45080633 #
22. trebligdivad ◴[] No.45079573{6}[source]
I don't think there's that much surprise at the tariffs on China; it's the tariffs on the rest of the world, especially friendly countries like Canada that are the big surprises. Also, who believes politicians campaign pledges?
replies(4): >>45080256 #>>45080562 #>>45081115 #>>45083931 #
23. immibis ◴[] No.45079691{4}[source]
What else changed?
replies(1): >>45080567 #
24. jameshart ◴[] No.45080045{3}[source]
Whatever mayor they're 'under threat of' can't be much worse than the one who's currently in place who is under threat of indictment from the federal government over bribery, fraud, and illegal foreign finance contributions, who has has eight of his staff resign in the last year under federal investigations, and lost multiple other staff resigning on principle.

People are already acting like Mamdani is responsible for everything that happens in NYC; they should pay more attention to the guy who's been in charge the past 3 years.

replies(1): >>45080405 #
25. andy_ppp ◴[] No.45080115[source]
Don’t worry, Trump can just keep firing the people who make the statistics until he’s proven right :-/
replies(1): >>45080591 #
26. righthand ◴[] No.45080200{3}[source]
Mamdani advocating that the state gov tax millionaires 2% more is not the same as having the power to tax millionaires. You should look up what a mayor actually does (hint: balance budgets with city council and strike new initiatives and work with the police department).

2% is hardly worth fleeing.

And Mamdani hasn’t even been elected yet.

27. RhysU ◴[] No.45080271[source]
I do not trust NY job numbers. Their unemployment system remains a disaster from the Covid years.

Source: Me trying to use it and encountering prior fraud. Light reading suggests many have experienced it.

replies(3): >>45080289 #>>45080299 #>>45086546 #
28. margalabargala ◴[] No.45080289[source]
Shouldn't that be roughly constant across the year though? We don't need to trust the numbers to be exact, to observe a precipitous drop.
replies(1): >>45082710 #
29. anecdatas ◴[] No.45080299[source]
Normally I'd be quippy about the plural of anecdote not being "data", but this isn't even plural. This is a single anecdote. The claim you have made is "I have encountered fraud, personally, so the system is a disaster."

Well run systems experience fraud. It's something you generally want to minimize, but like, it's not necessarily an indicator that the system is broken. Like... AWS has tons of fraud. AWS is still very much not a disaster. (Well, it kind of is a disaster, but mostly because it's a machine that chews up humans via oncall, which is unrelated to their fraud.)

replies(1): >>45082670 #
30. tombert ◴[] No.45080405{4}[source]
Weren't the charges against Eric Adams dismissed with prejudice? [1] They shouldn't have been dismissed at all, but the judge didn't want the president to be able to directly control the major of NYC.

I personally think he should at least be impeached because I have the woke liberal opinion that people in power taking bribes is bad.

[1] https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/mayor-eric-adams-case-dismis...

31. jibal ◴[] No.45080473{4}[source]
Let's be clear on who has these different standards: primarily Republicans, members of the party whose lifeblood is hypocrisy.
replies(2): >>45083618 #>>45084063 #
32. jibal ◴[] No.45080487{5}[source]
It didn't take informed people by surprise. We still see people denying that Trump had anything to do with Project 2025, whereas honest informed people knew that he very much did.
replies(1): >>45081844 #
33. burnerthrow008 ◴[] No.45080562{7}[source]
> Also, who believes politicians campaign pledges?

Only all the people who voted for them and all the people who voted against them?

replies(2): >>45081897 #>>45082756 #
34. timr ◴[] No.45080567{5}[source]
I named several in my original comment.

The big, blinking, obvious YoY change for anyone here is tech employment.

replies(1): >>45083841 #
35. phkahler ◴[] No.45080591[source]
That has me shaking my head. He fired the BLS person claiming they were reporting inaccurate stats to make him look bad. A claim of partisan bias - could maybe be some truth to that. But to fire them and replace them? Then it will certainly be biased reporting. I suppose that makes sense if all you care about is image and not actually making things better.
replies(2): >>45083107 #>>45083391 #
36. YZF ◴[] No.45080633{4}[source]
GDP is still growing and inflation has come down. I agree tariffs contribute to inflation: https://www.frbsf.org/research-and-insights/publications/eco...

Before tariffs, in the post-pandemic recovery, we also didn't see hiring go back to pre-pandemic levels. There are other forces like AI adoption.

I don't have good intuition around the connection between tariffs and jobs. Yes, higher inflation may require cooling down the economy. But right now it looks like rates will be going down and anyways rates haven't really slowed down the economy that much. Inflation did come down. Inflation can have some benefits too for employers, it erodes the employee's salaries (and potentially other costs). If companies can raise prices and not pass that on to employees or to their suppliers (as they've seemingly done during this last inflation cycle) then it can be a win for them. A weaker dollar can also help US companies compete globally.

If companies are doing well and growing, and they seem to be, why aren't they hiring more? The largest US tech companies are sitting on piles of cash and making huge profits, for some time now. Is it just that they've become more productive and need less people? Maybe they don't have anywhere to put more people towards? Maybe they're hiring outside the US (this one is not a maybe- they are). Is the uncertainty related to progress in AI? to other macro factors?

replies(2): >>45081302 #>>45082027 #
37. neuroelectron ◴[] No.45080965[source]
Real jobs or government jobs?
38. hunglee2 ◴[] No.45080997[source]
rental prices are driven by P/E redirecting funds to the purchase of housing stock, which they then use to jack up the rent. Fuedalism is returning by stealth.
replies(1): >>45081523 #
39. californical ◴[] No.45081050{3}[source]
No but it could shift consumer demand a bit to favor apples, for example, which largely come from domestic sources.

Not arguing one way or another, but your reduction isn’t quite accurate with the affects tariffs can have

40. verzali ◴[] No.45081115{7}[source]
Why on Earth not? Didn't people pay attention during his first term? This was 100% predictable.
replies(1): >>45082684 #
41. PeterStuer ◴[] No.45081223[source]
It is more the volatility for sure. Tarrifs have existed forever and business has always coped with them.
replies(4): >>45081332 #>>45082280 #>>45082339 #>>45085110 #
42. NooneAtAll3 ◴[] No.45081230{3}[source]
S&P 500 or S&P 10, tho?
43. esseph ◴[] No.45081302{5}[source]
Because they're terrified of the uncertainty of the long tail of the tariffs. It takes months and months to see the products of those.
replies(2): >>45085568 #>>45086964 #
44. esseph ◴[] No.45081304{6}[source]
That is not the 40-60-200% tariffs he has placed on things, depending on the day of the week.

That uncertainty makes it very hard to manufacture goods or buy raw materials.

replies(1): >>45081749 #
45. PeterStuer ◴[] No.45081316[source]
If you are looking at tarrifs to explain NY small business market collapse, you clearly have not followed Louis Rossmann's struggles to keep his business in NY over the years.

https://youtube.com/@rossmanngroup

46. pstuart ◴[] No.45081332{3}[source]
This is different -- the tariffs are being applied and changed chaotically, with no direction on actually serving the point of protecting native industry. The goal of the tariffs is to replace income tax, everything else is a smokescreen.

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/04/22/trump-tariffs-replace-income...

47. enaaem ◴[] No.45081432{3}[source]
ICE raids are freeing up a lot of spots in the agri sector.
48. hdgvhicv ◴[] No.45081523{3}[source]
If there’s demand for 5 million units and supply of 6 million prices will go down as 1 million units will be empty

If there’s demand for 5 million units and supply of 4 million, prices will go up and 1 million will move out of the city

replies(3): >>45082190 #>>45082880 #>>45084156 #
49. donalhunt ◴[] No.45081749{7}[source]
It also disrupts JIT supply chains. Companies make decisions with certain variables not being volatile.

You now have a situation where one week the cost of a commodity is X and the following week it could be 2X. The butterfly effect across industries also cannot be predicted.

Many industries also seem to be still recovering from the pandemic period with supply of spare parts still being de-prioritised over making parts available for new units. :/

50. mattmaroon ◴[] No.45081844{6}[source]
Nobody informed saw massive tariffs on India, Brazil, etc. If you were right the stock market wouldn’t have tanked because the smart money would have priced it in.
replies(2): >>45082907 #>>45086982 #
51. rusk ◴[] No.45081897{8}[source]
US elections have a shockingly low turnout compared to other countries so not the affirmative you were hoping for
52. heisenbit ◴[] No.45082027{5}[source]
Looking at the 30 year chart YTD there is no indication that rates come down. The short side may be under control of Trump - who's bullying of the Fed raises the prospect of them coming down but the long end of the curve is under the control of market forces and it does not look like going down at all. Real estate market effectively frozen with sales down and for sale up in the realm of decade highs.

Nobody mentioned yet the drop of the dollar making every single import 10% more expensive since the start of the year. That is on top of every tariff and is inflationary.

Government spending went up by a surprising amount while tariff revenue rolls in. I suspect one reason there is no detailed budget is to create the space to move things around without much notice. If a large swath of the tariffs would be ruled illegal (already happened twice, one step to final) the situation could become interesting.

replies(1): >>45086735 #
53. yubblegum ◴[] No.45082066[source]
New York is teeming with what appear to be newly arrived "immigrants" who do no speak a word of English (and frankly are rather aggressive about their refusal to do so) yet are employed in various crafts. We had fairly substantial renovation recently in our building. Every single worker was clearly a recent arrival. How do we know how many jobs were actually created if so many of them are not "officially recorded"?

(I am an immigrant myself (via the legal means) lest you take my observation as a xenophobic expression.)

replies(4): >>45082163 #>>45082866 #>>45083372 #>>45084092 #
54. ◴[] No.45082163[source]
55. m348e912 ◴[] No.45082186{3}[source]
Hawaii produces 6.3 million lbs per year of bananas which is a tiny fraction of the 8 million metric tons per year Ecuador produces. Labor and land cost is the primary reason Hawaii can't compete with Latin America, but long-standing tariffs could change that.
replies(2): >>45082452 #>>45082620 #
56. georgemcbay ◴[] No.45082190{4}[source]
You conveniently left out the part where many large corporate landlords collude by using software like RealPage to enable widescale price fixing.
replies(1): >>45082524 #
57. whatevaa ◴[] No.45082280{3}[source]
They didn't change monthly.
58. nnurmanov ◴[] No.45082312[source]
I live in such country, local currency volatile, laws are changing. There is no long term planning, projects should span 1-2 years and if they bring income, then you are lucky. In long term the situation is no good
59. ldoughty ◴[] No.45082339{3}[source]
You can't write a business plans/proposals and get loans/management approval on these kinds of tariffs.

Imagine trying to get a loan from a bank to make a USA manufacturing plant, pointing to the 150% Chinese tariff. A week later the tariff is 25%. Does your math still work? Probably not. Will that bank continue the loan? Nope. Will the bank even entertain a similar proposal from someone else right now? Nope.

If you want to grow USA manufacturing you need to subsidize it, or give private industry confidence it's not going to lose them money. If you can't do that, your relying on charity / non-profit / philanthropy... And I don't see many of those in manufacturing.

60. simonh ◴[] No.45082452{4}[source]
About 2m people are employed directly or indirectly in the Ecuadorean banana industry. The total population of Hawaii is only 1.5m. Also you could fit Hawaii in a corner of Ecuador.

Unless you turned over all the islands exclusively to bananas, and forget about tourism, pineapples or anything else, you’re not even going to get close.

61. hdgvhicv ◴[] No.45082524{5}[source]
As do small landlords. they can only do this because supply is so constrained.
62. jaynate ◴[] No.45082541{3}[source]
Nearly 10% of the s&p 500 value is one company- nvidia. The mag 7 make up a significant portion. Prosperity isn’t distributed, it’s concentrated and the stock market is not even close to the only measure of the health of the American economy.
63. toast0 ◴[] No.45082620{4}[source]
Hawaii is already heavily agricultural. Most of the non-agricultural land is reserved for conservation. Banana production would likely replace other production, and then we've got less of that stuff.

Also, shipping to continental US is limited by the Jones Act and the lack of capacity in US built, owned, and crewed shipping lines. Assuming a desire to produce things in the US, I don't think it's sensible to tarrif bananas to grow them in Hawaii, and then relax the Jones act so they can be shipped to the continental US on foreign carriers.

64. RhysU ◴[] No.45082670{3}[source]
As claimed, light reading confirms this observation to be data not anecdata.

"NY's COVID unemployment fraud topped $11B, partly due to system failures..."

https://www.yahoo.com/news/nys-covid-unemployment-fraud-topp...

replies(1): >>45086334 #
65. macintux ◴[] No.45082684{8}[source]
The key difference seems to be that this time:

* Groups like Project 2025 spent years preparing an assault on our legal system

* This time Trump populated his administration with sycophants from day 1, instead of starting out with establishment figures

* The GOP has spent the last 8 years reconfiguring themselves into supplication

This time, Trump is fully unhinged and unfettered, and he knows the legal peril he faces if the White House isn’t GOP-held for the rest of his life.

replies(2): >>45083363 #>>45089110 #
66. RhysU ◴[] No.45082710{3}[source]
Should fraud rates in public taxpayer-funded systems stay constant or go down over time, assuming no new fraud type is invented?
replies(1): >>45087204 #
67. dgfitz ◴[] No.45082756{8}[source]
Maybe if Harris had made a few she would have won…
replies(2): >>45084068 #>>45086795 #
68. the_gastropod ◴[] No.45082866[source]
The U.S. has no official language, and no one who moves here is required to learn English. Especially in NYC, where so many neighborhoods predominantly speak a language that is not English (Brighton Beach, Sunset Park, Flushing, Chinatown, etc.)

Assuming someone speaking another language is both a “recent arrival” and working illegally is… something. Apparently it’s not xenophobic, but it’s not a good look.

replies(3): >>45083115 #>>45083159 #>>45087546 #
69. beowulfey ◴[] No.45082880{4}[source]
that is also assuming the demand is atomic when that isn't necessarily the case. A lot of that pooled demand can come from singular sources. in other words, not all demand is created equal
70. r2_pilot ◴[] No.45082907{7}[source]
Maybe the smart money shorted on the tank. After all, if you know there's going to be a downturn in a known time period that's a smart move. I believe it's worth analyzing who sold what and when, if not for insider trading, then at least for historical knowledge.
71. msgodel ◴[] No.45083020[source]
It looks to me like we hit the end of the debt cycle. The market was predicting this by the end of the fall last year before Trump was even elected.

I don't think not doing tariffs would have had much of an effect.

72. fundad ◴[] No.45083107{3}[source]
I question the president’s cognitive state if he openly stated there would be some “pain” and then when the statistics show he was correct, he attacks the BLA director and claims the economy is booming.

The president and his defenders are playing us when they appear to want a growing economy. They don’t.

replies(1): >>45084717 #
73. dboreham ◴[] No.45083115{3}[source]
There are communities of non-English speaking people here in Montana. They speak a form of German. Hutterites (kind of like Amish).
replies(1): >>45091741 #
74. luckys ◴[] No.45083159{3}[source]
That seems to have changed in March 2025 via executive order, with English now being the official language of the US

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_the_United_Stat...

https://www.usa.gov/official-language-of-us

75. halfmatthalfcat ◴[] No.45083372[source]
You can be an immigrant and xenophobic, they aren’t mutually exclusive.
replies(1): >>45084077 #
76. mathiaspoint ◴[] No.45083391{3}[source]
She had been doing crap job going back to Biden. I don't think she was fired for optics.
replies(2): >>45084115 #>>45094990 #
77. jrs235 ◴[] No.45083489{4}[source]
It's part of the plan. Small farms will be the ones to go bankrupt. The large corporate, black rock et al owned, "farms" (read businesses) will be bailed out and allowed to scoop up the little ones for pennies onto the dollar.
78. gcanyon ◴[] No.45083528[source]
I know that this is the result of summing a much larger gain + a slightly smaller loss, but it's weird reading this number in isolation and knowing that my company is responsible for roughly 5% of this gain.
79. gcanyon ◴[] No.45083540[source]
This is, in some sense, exactly what Trump wants -- to hurt the cities/liberal regions that oppose him. It's going to be a bumpy ride.
replies(1): >>45084083 #
80. macawfish ◴[] No.45083618{5}[source]
They sold us out in the name of holy apocalyptic chaos and destruction
replies(1): >>45092577 #
81. immibis ◴[] No.45083841{6}[source]
As a result of tariffs
replies(1): >>45087225 #
82. dml2135 ◴[] No.45083931{7}[source]
> Also, who believes politicians campaign pledges?

People who actually understand politics and who realize that the extent to which politicians keep their campaign pledges is usually related to how their parties end up performing in the legislature, rather than just being dishonest.

83. cyanydeez ◴[] No.45084035{3}[source]
Market bubbles combined with parallel political bubbles are probably the real black swan event coming down the pike
replies(1): >>45087893 #
84. Der_Einzige ◴[] No.45084063{5}[source]
Remember what straws they had to grasp at to critique obama?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_tan_suit_controve...

replies(1): >>45084363 #
85. const_cast ◴[] No.45084068{9}[source]
She did, everyone just sort of... pretended she didn't. So they could have plausible deniability for voting for Trump.

See also: Harris is an elite! (Trump is more elite), Trump knows business (he's a pretty bad business man), Harris did nothing in office! (She was VP), Trump is the underdog! (He's literally already been president)

replies(1): >>45086125 #
86. ipaddr ◴[] No.45084077{3}[source]
Immigrants are more likely to be xenophobic as they move to a less xenophobic place.
87. const_cast ◴[] No.45084083[source]
The problem is those liberal cities and regions pretty much prop up the entire US economy.

When you look at GDP, it's coming from California, NYC, etc. Even in red states, like Texas, it's Dallas and Austin carrying everyone else.

88. Der_Einzige ◴[] No.45084092[source]
The people who are most xenophobic/against immigrant communities are recent immigrants who pull the latter up for their compatriots right after they ascend.

Latino voters swung 20 points towards trump from 2020-2024 after being told that Trump would deport all of their illegal family members. A majority of latino men straight up voted for Trump and Latino women was like 47-53.

Legal immigrants hate illegal immigrants. Most legal immigrants are wealthy and well connected and have never had to do the shit jobs that their illegal brothers do. It's pretty hard to legally immigrate without lots of money/skills or at minimum beauty (i.e. for green card marriage). Illegals are usually dirt poor and will do anything for a better life.

I'm getting far more willing to defend making English the official language of the USA for this reason. You want to pretend like you're a WASP legal immigrants? Act like one then!

BTW - Americans don't see the distinction between "european latino" and "Mestizo". You're all Latinos and are treated the same way by WASPs.

89. ipaddr ◴[] No.45084115{4}[source]
She is presenting numbers. A bad job might be using black font on a black background not the numbers are not what I want or businesses are not answering surveys quick enough.
90. ipaddr ◴[] No.45084156{4}[source]
In your first case they increase rent as a group and have 80+% occupancy.

In your second case they increase rent and people are forced into having roommates.

91. spauldo ◴[] No.45084363{6}[source]
Remember the "terrorist fist jab?"
92. xnx ◴[] No.45084399{3}[source]
Isolationists would say we should be eating corn instead
93. yifanl ◴[] No.45084717{4}[source]
Thankfully, the president doesn't need to be fully cognitive to be president, they just need to win an election every 4 years.
replies(1): >>45098157 #
94. infecto ◴[] No.45085110{3}[source]
I would say more about general uncertainty than volatility but similar thought. Disagree on the reason though, tariffs like we are experiencing have not been in our existence for a couple generations. And especially not in the modern connected global market.

I don’t believe most if not all of us have experienced such an immature and erratic administration. We are taxing trade partners, flip flopping on rules and nobody knows what to make of it.

95. YZF ◴[] No.45085568{6}[source]
But the change in hiring trends goes back to the beginning of the pandemic. This can't all be explained by tariffs. There is always uncertainty about the future but it seems there's been a shift in behavior across the board (CEOs copying each other is also a problem) that has been lasting many years. I guess you could blame it on Trump's first presidency if you really want to make this political.
96. dgfitz ◴[] No.45086125{10}[source]
She did? What was her platform? I never did figure it out.
replies(1): >>45088350 #
97. anecdatas ◴[] No.45086334{4}[source]
Look at more recent data. https://www.osc.ny.gov/files/state-agencies/audits/pdf/sga-2...

It looks like fraud rate was typically 5-10%, which might be high, might be "fine". In 2020-21 and 21-22 fraud rate jumped way up to 20%, which is obviously way too high.

But in 2023-24 fraud rate is back down below 10%. We don't have 24-25 data yet, but it looks to me like we had a couple of unusual years during the pandemic, but audit controls seem to have reigned a lot of that back in.

I'd say, evaluate this year's data and then decide if this was a blip or not, then revise your mental model with data.

98. nitwit005 ◴[] No.45086546[source]
Unemployment numbers will never work for counting the number of people actually unemployed. They do work for seeing unemployment trends. A ton of people suddenly applying for unemployment is a pretty clear signal.

Edit: typo

99. tharmas ◴[] No.45086735{6}[source]
The goal of this administration is a low $US.

I imagine to make American exports cheaper.

It will take years to make America an exporting nation. In the meantime many many businesses will go bankrupt. This administration doesn't care as they just see it as a cost of fulfilling their longer term plan to make America an exporting nation.

100. tharmas ◴[] No.45086795{9}[source]
Harris was a terrible candidate. And not chosen by the delegates. The Democrats have to take some of the blame for Trump 2.0, surely?

Trump was a terrible candidate and could've been beaten if a good candidate running against him.

replies(1): >>45088408 #
101. mensetmanusman ◴[] No.45086964{6}[source]
Terrified billionaires, lol
replies(1): >>45087600 #
102. cmurf ◴[] No.45086982{7}[source]
Trump’s style of governing is patrimonialism. Mafia. It’s how he ran his businesses, and Trump 1.0. It’s entirely predictable that he’d go much further this time around as he claimed DOJ should act as his personal law firm.

Modi pissed Trump off by refusing to support a nomination for him to get the Nobel. And Trump hit India with tariffs. Unsurprising to anyone paying attention.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/30/us/politics/trump-modi-in...

No one is so stupid they can’t follow this, and predict the aggregate consequence well in advance.

It’s only by willfully suspending rationality, that people convinced themselves the obvious wouldn’t happen. And one of those is an insistence that the only valid form of prediction is at an absurd level of prediction granularity, rather than the inevitable storyline as a consequence of Trump’s intrinsic corruption and ability to corrupt everyone around him (or else they discarded and flung far away).

Trump is famously a racist, a rapist, a felon, and a vile insurrectionist. Nothing good could possibly have followed his election. Indeed, we’re really lucky so far. It’s going to get much worse.

tl;dr Elect an abuser, get abused.

replies(1): >>45092878 #
103. margalabargala ◴[] No.45087204{4}[source]
Depends what if anything is being done to combat it.

One of the following is true:

- The numbers somewhat-accurately reflect the trend of employment

- Fraud levels were reduced 66x in one year

If it was the second one, that's a sufficiently massive reduction that news stories would be written about it. There would be stories about this great victory over fraud.

A quick search showed no particular anti-fraud measures or claims of effectiveness unique to that time period.

104. mensetmanusman ◴[] No.45087225{7}[source]
No, that was R&D deduction changes.
105. yubblegum ◴[] No.45087546{3}[source]
There are and have been pockets in immigrant communities where e.g. older members would live their entire lives in US and never speak a word of English. But conversely, no one expected the rest of us to know Chinese, German, French, Italian, Japanese, Russian, ..., etc. But somehow now we are supposed to accept a sizeable subset of our nation to only speak Spanish.

> Assuming someone speaking another language is both a “recent arrival” and working illegally is… something. Apparently it’s not xenophobic, but it’s not a good look.

I do not care if it is not a "good look" by some standard. What I care about is cultural and value system continuity and national cohesion.

replies(1): >>45088231 #
106. esseph ◴[] No.45087600{7}[source]
No, terrified people that do actual work.

How do you bid on a big project if you don't know what materials will cost next month, or 6 months, or a year from now? It's fucking impossible. And with inflation, labor cost is spiking. It's hard for people to get buy, so they're asking for more. It has investors and banks spooked to loan money for projects, because they could easily fail with so much volatility.

107. stirfish ◴[] No.45087893{4}[source]
What is a political bubble? I googled it, but I'm getting definitions closer to "my news feed only shows me what I want to see"
replies(2): >>45091525 #>>45097758 #
108. stirfish ◴[] No.45088231{4}[source]
>What I care about is cultural and value system continuity and national cohesion.

Good news! We share the value of "be cool about it, we're all just trying our best"

109. nobody9999 ◴[] No.45088350{11}[source]
https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2024/08/politics/kamala-harr...

https://www.deseret.com/politics/2024/09/09/harris-policy-pl...

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-harris-campaign-promises-...

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/...

All of the above were posted prior to the 2024 election.

replies(1): >>45107459 #
110. macintux ◴[] No.45088408{10}[source]
Speaking as someone who despises Ted Cruz to the bottom of my soul, I decided in 2016 that if Trump had decided to run as a Democrat, I would have voted for Cruz. At least he has some sincerely held beliefs that do not involve his own wallet and cruelty towards the entire world outside his inner circle.

My point being: at some point the American electorate has to take responsibility for picking the worst available person. The Democrats did not compel them to vote for Trump.

replies(1): >>45088685 #
111. tharmas ◴[] No.45088685{11}[source]
≥The Democrats did not compel them to vote for Trump.

Perhaps i didn't make my point clear. Indeed ur statement is true. I was referring to those who hated Trump but also hated Harris and so DIDNT VOTE. My point being that if the Democrats had fielded a compelling candidate many of those who didn't vote may have voted for them. Enough to win. The Democrats learned nothing when they fielded Hilary Clinton and lost. Joe Biden barely won. And only because they were sick of Trump and also how he handled Covid. Also don't forget the Democrats tried to run with Joe for a second term when he was clearly unfit. Huge turn off.

So yes, my argument is the Democrat Party is partly at fault for Trump 2.0. They did not field a worthy candidate.

"Vote Blue no matter who" is a failed strategy. And rightly so.

replies(2): >>45093989 #>>45095917 #
112. southernplaces7 ◴[] No.45089110{9}[source]
>and he knows the legal peril he faces if the White House isn’t GOP-held for the rest of his life.

This combined with the utter self-emasculation of the Republican Party to Trump's incoherent, or at best self-serving, garbage is the most worrisome thing of all.

113. Yizahi ◴[] No.45091525{5}[source]
If I had to guess - "political bubble (bursts)" is when an extremely incompetent and/or radical politician suddenly is elected to one of the top posts in a country. So it's like a closed off boiling pot - incompetent radical has 5% of the electoral base and nothing happens, then 10%, then 20%, 30%, 40%, still nothing, and then one day he "suddenly" crosses 50% threshold and bubble bursts, he is now in charge for real.

For example in France their own Le-Trump aka Marine Le Pen had 41% votes last election cycle, so nothing really happened and system centrists won again, politics remained moderate and predictable. But if she or her ideological successor even takes 50%... hooboy, EU will see some Orbanification just like USA does today.

114. motbus3 ◴[] No.45091612[source]
My guess is just, well, a guess, but the real impact of tariffs will take some time to hit. For now it is a turbulence of the uncertainty, but as people understand how to work on this situation we'll see numbers getting more stable. My second guess is that inflation will grow as other markets will learn to deal with the situation. It is taking some time, but other economic blocks might make strong moves altogether causing at least a bruise in the metrics.

Also we need to remember that the guy responsible for the numbers was fired for allegedly political reason and that could have been political and no one will ever be sure. So how can one trust the numbers in that situation? It has been... Weird

115. yubblegum ◴[] No.45091741{4}[source]
Does the New York Times (which is a national paper) have a section in German language? Does it have one in any other non-English language besides Spanish?

Why is Spanish singled out? Why was "bilingualism" being promoted so heavily? Meaning no offense, wtf has the Spanish speaking community contributed to American history to get this special perch? So yeah, there are all sorts of little pockets here and there, and grandpas and grandmas of various flavor speaking the old country's tongue but only one was promoted.

The phenomena is obviously political in nature and to construe is as anything else, including "prejudice" or "xenophobia", is disengenuous.

replies(1): >>45117251 #
116. gdilla ◴[] No.45092577{6}[source]
All they had to do was prey on fragile white grievances, and it worked.
replies(1): >>45102934 #
117. ◴[] No.45092878{8}[source]
118. triceratops ◴[] No.45093989{12}[source]
> Joe Biden barely won

That's slightly revisionist. He won the popular vote by almost 5 percentage points. That's a lot. He also got more electoral college votes than GWB (both times) and Trump in 2016. His victories in the battleground states were also by a higher margin than Trump's in 2016, though still close. "Barely won" is a shade of true.

I honestly don't blame the guy for believing it was his responsibility to the country to run for re-election and keep Trump out of office. His heart was in the right place, even if the rest of him wasn't up to the task anymore.

replies(1): >>45120035 #
119. oenton ◴[] No.45094990{4}[source]
"She had been doing crap job" with all due respect, citation needed.
120. cowboylowrez ◴[] No.45095917{12}[source]
I love how people are blaming democrats for electing trump. Its just such a dystopian timeline lol
replies(1): >>45119953 #
121. cyanydeez ◴[] No.45097758{5}[source]
Start with the idea of political capital and end with the monumental loss of value and trust in the political system
122. fundad ◴[] No.45098157{5}[source]
What did JD Vance know about Trump’s health when he joined the campaign and why did he keep it from us?
123. jibal ◴[] No.45102934{7}[source]
"If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you." -- LBJ
124. dgfitz ◴[] No.45107459{12}[source]
The second paragraph of your first link: “ However, she has not provided many details on her plans”

Edit: did you read these links?

“ The American people lacked any concrete policy positions from the presumptive, and then official, Democratic presidential candidate for seven weeks following President Joe Biden’s withdrawal from the 2024 presidential race.

Despite the absence of clarity on key issues, Vice President Kamala Harris quickly rose in the polls compared to Biden”

replies(1): >>45133550 #
125. the_gastropod ◴[] No.45117251{5}[source]
What’s the German-speaking population of the United States? What German-speaking lands in the Americas did the United States acquire through violent or financial means?

> Meaning no offense, wtf has the Spanish speaking community contributed to American history to get this special perch?

About half of the total land area of the US was formerly colonized by the Spanish. What “history” are you referring to?! And what “special perch”?

> The phenomena is obviously political in nature and to construe is as anything else, including "prejudice" or "xenophobia", is disengenuous.

This is innuendo. Say what you want to say, and don’t couch it behind a passive “political”. Who’s driving what outcome, and for what ends. Go on!

replies(1): >>45118440 #
126. yubblegum ◴[] No.45118440{6}[source]
The historic arguemnt is lucidrous since NYTimes only recently published in a bilingual mode.

Special perch is clear: this is a nation of numerious ethnicities with an equal number of distinct 'mother tongues'. The special perch is the recent push to normalize having an entire subset of the society speak a langauge that many of us do not speak and have no desire to learn.

replies(1): >>45118709 #
127. the_gastropod ◴[] No.45118709{7}[source]
They’re not equal. There are more Spanish-speakers in the U.S. (and the world, for that matter) than there are German, Estonian, Russian, Croatian, Dutch, Portuguese, Italian, … speakers. You’re ascribing some bizarre conspiracy to basic market dynamics.

And again, this is pretty localized. Salt Lake City has less Spanish than Los Angeles. Flushing, Queens has more Mandarin than Spanish or English.

It remains unclear who is being harmed here. And what solutions are you advocating for?

replies(1): >>45121718 #
128. tharmas ◴[] No.45119953{13}[source]
Really?. I argue that if the Democrats could've fielded a candidate voters felt good about voting for, it would've been no contest.

What is wrong with my logic?

It sounds like ur logic is: if u don't want trump then u have to vote for the (shitty) democrat candidate.

My point of view is based on those who DIDN'T vote at all, not people who voted for trump because they didn't like harris.

Oh wait, its entirely their (non voters) fault trump won, is what u would argue, correct?

So the democrats have no responsibility to field a candidate worthy of a vote except their not trump or Republican?

129. tharmas ◴[] No.45120035{13}[source]
Trump in 2020 was such a shitty candidate that he should've been easily trounced.

So anything a lot kess than that looks to me like ”barely". Perhaps im too harsh?

I get why Michelle Obama wont run but i think she would've trounced trump in 2020 or 2024.

The democrats need to field a candidate that has her kind of appeal to beat trump.

130. yubblegum ◴[] No.45121718{8}[source]
What "market"? Did this "market" exist 100 years ago or not? If yes (and it did) then why haven't we been bilingual English-Spanish since day 1? There is conspiracy theory here - just pretty straightforward observation of facts.
replies(1): >>45123528 #
131. the_gastropod ◴[] No.45123528{9}[source]
The market for reading the NYTimes in Spanish… There’s also a big enough market for reading it in Chinese! (https://cn.nytimes.com)

Since these are online-only versions of the NYTimes, and immigration sources change throughout history, no. This particular market did not exist 100 years ago.

However, the portion of non-English speakers has remained about the same since the 1910 census began asking about this. ~100 years ago, German was the most prominent non-English language spoken in the U.S., and there were over 500 German-language newspapers in circulation. Yiddish newspapers were common in New York. And Spanish newspapers were widely read in Texas. In Chicago, Polish newspapers were common. San Francisco had the Chinese World (世界日報) newspaper.

Your idea that, 100 years ago, everyone spoke English, and we didn’t support non-English speaking is just flatly wrong.

132. nobody9999 ◴[] No.45133550{13}[source]
Then look at one or more of the hundreds of links that provide specificity.

Or continue on with your willful ignorance.

It's no skin off my nose either way.