Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘propaganda’

Another Attempt at the Triumph of the Woke Will.

The 2024 Olympics began with an opening ceremony which blasphemed God and His Messiah, Jesus Christ. That alone should tell you all you need to know about the kind of people you’re dealing with. Of course, they weren’t done there. Besides, in effect, dedicating the Olympic Games to Satan, they also engaged in various displays of sadism. There were the cardboard beds that were supposed to reduce carbon footprints. A human life isn’t allowed to make an impact on the world around him/her — unless, of course, that person is elite. The athletes in the Olympic Village were also not provided enough non-vegan alternatives for their diets. You do have to, in the very least, transition to a vegan diet. It would have seemed to me a simple thing to give the athletes a menu survey if the dieticians really couldn’t figure out what the demand would be for non-vegan food rather than punishing the non-vegan athletes.

And then there’s the fact the athletes weren’t supplied air conditioning during a heat wave. You’d think that for seventeen days these woke elites could make an exception. After all, how many exceptions do they make for themselves every day? But for the most exceptional athletes in the general population, no exception is permitted to be made. The elite have to take a hard line on us peons. And what better way than to make an example of the most accomplished of our representatives?

Why not humiliate and shame them publically? Why not get them to swim in a river of excrement in order to earn the shiny trinkets and accolades of the elite class who now have a monopoly on all the attention and shiny trinkets. How much amusement these woke elites, these sadists must have gained having these prize non-elites debase themselves for their approval. They even have had one of their elected stooges show how it’s perfectly fine to dive into a river of human filth in order to compel the athletes to do the same. Of course, it’s okay for her. She’s just a peon like the rest of us — another non-elite who they can laugh at — so desperate to serve her woke masters that she’s willing to throw her health away to do so.

So then came the boxing match between a biological woman and a person who identifies as a woman despite previously failing to meet the International Boxing Association eligibility rules.

“The International Boxing Association (IBA) and the International Olympic Committee (IOC) are at odds over whether Khelif should be able to compete in women’s competitions. IBA president Umar Kremlev told Russian news agency TASS that Khelif and another boxer had ‘XY chromosomes,’ the typical genetic makeup of males, and that is why they were disqualified from the World Champion­ships in 2023, Reuters reported. However, the IBA, which is Russian-led, is itself controversial, having been ousted from Olympic competition oversight over ‘governance, finance, and ethical issues,’ Reuters reported.” (McBride, 2024)

Still, it’s clear that the Olympic Committee in their great woke wisdom has decided to use gender identity rather than biological sex to determine eligibility. “Also fueling controversy is the fact that the Olympics stopped testing for gender in 1999. ‘The decision to abandon compulsory gender verification in Olympic competition was taken in 1999, following many years of debate,’ according to a 2008 Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine article, ‘Intersex and the Olympic Games.’ ‘As with previous Olympic boxing competitions, the gender and age of the athletes are based on their passport,’ the IOC says.” (McBride, 2024)

The only rational criteria to determine eligibility should be biological sex. If they allow anyone who identifies as a woman to participate in women’s sports, eventually no woman will make the cut, and it will all be biological males in sports. Is that the point?

I personally think they mostly just enjoy watching a woman get shamed and beaten myself. I think the woke are moving us toward a sadistic society where non-elite people are conditioned to be masochists. I think if they have their way they will have us giving our will over to them and to Satan for a couple of pats on the back and a few golden trinkets. Then, if that doesn’t work they will try to force us to submit our will to them for food and water, for energy, for medicine, for shelter, for survival. Yes, this Olympics is a preview for the world the woke want us all to be living and dying in — a world straight out of Dante’s Inferno. A world where they not only challenge our right to free will, but they challenge God’s will as well. And it all started with the blaspheming of God and His Messiah, Jesus Christ. One cannot underestimate or condone the significance of that.

(McBride, 2024)

McBride, J. (2024, August 5). “Olympic Committee Issues Correction on Statement About Imane Khelif’s Gender.” heavy. https://heavy.com/sports/olympics/imane-khelif-dsd/

Read Full Post »

The Unthinkable

I have to wonder where this push that is being promoted by the WHO, the WEF, and the UN to sexualize children originally came from. Apparently, the idea that children are sexual beings stems from the writings of pedophiles from many years ago. But back then people had the sense not to talk about it publicly. What possible purpose does it serve to have children engage in sex acts before they can distinguish fantasy from reality on their own? When they are basically at the mercy of adults to tell them what reality is? And if the adults are lying to them, delusional, or invested in creating a reality they wish existed but doesn’t? What then? What happens to the children? I can’t even remember my life before the age of three. Now children are being groomed as babies for sexual exploitation. Plus, they are also now pushing for permanent physical and/or psychological changes to be made to these children.

In any event, I don’t believe the rush to sexualize children is for anyone’s benefit but the benefit of adult pedophiles. I don’t believe children are sexual beings, and I don’t see where children are benefited by forcing sexualization on them at an early age. Adults have enough trouble dealing with their sexuality. Linking the desperate need for love that a child has with the sexual exploitation tendency of a sexual predator is just a nauseating prospect to consider.

So, I think it’s important to consider the possibility that this whole movement of turning young boys into girls (which can’t be authentically done since human beings are not frogs) is really just a manipulation tool by a niche of pedophiles to create victims for themselves. There are a group of pedophiles whose preferred victims are boys who are made to pass as females then sexually exploited. So, it is very possible that the root of this phenomenon is merely an attempt by those perverts to gain access to America’s sons and use them as fodder for their perversions. And after these victims are exploited and emotionally destroyed, they will then throw these victims away when they age out of being attractive to them. To parents tempted to serve their children up to this horror show, at least consider the possibility that the narrative being pushed that the children want this is in fact a lie. And that these pedophiles are now merely sourcing the victims of their twisted predilections with our sons and daughter as they have been doing with children all over the world.

Read Full Post »

The Perpetual Attack on the Sensitive Side

Most people are born with a sensitive side. Society increasingly appears to have a pathological hatred of it. It’s possibly because you need God if you have a sensitive side in order to keep your sensitive side alive. Whereas those who don’t have a sensitive side are convinced that they don’t need Him. And perhaps they don’t want to need Him, and they don’t want others to need Him either. Regardless, there is an open antagonism toward sensitivity in our society. Society has encouraged people to have no sensitive side and forgo attachments.

Our socialization process in the school system seems to be geared toward giving children a “thicker skin.” Having a thicker skin is considered a good thing, feelings are not. But without a sensitive side and attachments people become disposable.

And the attack on sensitivity has never been worse than it is now. Now they are going after children sexually. And sex is a very effective way to destroy a person’s sensitive side. But the UN, the WHO, and the WEF are all pushing for the sexualization of children. There are no good reasons to do this — only bad. Reducing sex to an act of mere physical stimulation reduces the odds of incorporating emotional, mental, and spiritual components to the act. People, especially sensitive people, want more than just physical stimulation. But how can you achieve that experience — sex as a part of love — if it’s been made into only a physical reality?

Physical sex alone also suffers from the law of diminishing returns. Like a drug addiction, over time the high diminishes and you require something additional such as drugs or violence (such as sadomasochism) to keep things interesting. This flies in the face of the argument that training children to engage in sex as a mere physical act is a good thing. In reality, the sooner you start, the sooner you will lose interest. Which brings us to the real reason why there is a push to sexualize children: pedophilia. For some adults traditional sex no longer holds any interest. Only debauching the innocent and the sensitive seems to turn them on. So, they are seeking access to a victim pool. They are looking to normalize it into society. They are trying to convince people that reducing sex to a mere physical act at a younger age is a good thing for children — when clearly it is not. It’s all about insensitive people trying to find stimulation because they are cold and jaded. Because you can’t be satisfied with anything without a sensitive side. And unless you have an irrational aversion to sensitivity and a hatred of God, why would you want to destroy that element in any human being — let alone a child? In the end, by introducing children to sex as an act of mere physical stimulation you are preventing them from experiencing it as an act of love. Children need to spend their formative years learning who they are as a total person, which includes mental, emotional, and spiritual development. Sex at an early age could also potentially kill a child’s sensitive side. We need to stop catering to adults looking for more and more sexual stimulation. It’s gone too far already. But for those who have convinced themselves that sex among children is no big deal, I will submit that this need for stimulation in the adults who advocate for it could still progress even further. What’s to stop torture and murder from coming next?

At the same time came the disciples unto Jesus, saying, Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?

And Jesus called a little child unto Him, and set him in the midst of them,

And said, “Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

“Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

“And whoso shall receive one such little child in My name receiveth Me.

“But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in Me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.

“Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!

“Wherefore it thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire.

“And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire.

“Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of My Father which is in heaven.

“For the Son of Man is come to save that which was lost.

“How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray?

“And if so be that he find it, verily I say unto you, he rejoiceth more of that sheep, than of the ninety and nine which went not astray.

“Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish.” (Matthew 18: 1-14)

Fournier, Dan. “The UN, WHO, & WEF seek to Sexualize, Exploit, & Decriminalize Sex with School-Aged Children.” Dan Fournier’s Inconvenient Truths, 19 May 2023, https://fournier.substack.com/p/the-un-who-and-wef-seek-to-sexualize?nthPub=501

Geller, Pamela. “EVIL: UN Report Calls for Legalizing Sex Between Adults and Children.” Geller Report, 18 April 2023,

Read Full Post »

Miss Kitty Syndrome

I call it Miss Kitty Syndrome. Miss Kitty is a character on Gunsmoke. On the radio show version it was strongly implied that she was a prostitute. For most of the TV series, they attempted to obscure that fact. Instead, she served drinks in scantily clad outfits and earned a lot of money from male patrons both those passing through town as well as locals. She had lots of possessions: designer clothes, carriages. Eventually, she seemed to run the place — whatever that place was. I remember her complaining that the local women didn’t like her and judged her. I mean, can she really blame them? Their husbands were spending most of their paychecks on Miss Kitty and her wares — whatever those were. Meanwhile, while they were dressed in tatters living hand to mouth, Miss Kitty was dressed to the nines floating around in her carriage. But Miss Kitty didn’t want to be judged, and if she had her way everyone would like her, and she would still have her opulent lifestyle. But is that really realistic?

If what she did wasn’t frowned upon or probably illegal, wouldn’t she have a lot more competition? The fact is most people have an external locus of control, meaning they are more driven by punishment/reward than by conscience. So, if you remove the consequences from Miss Kitty’s occupation so she can feel better about herself, then more women are liable to think that parting men from their hard-earned money is a great way to make a buck for themselves. Then suddenly, Miss Kitty’s niche is flooded with competition, and what she can earn goes drastically down. No more fancy dresses and carriages for her.

It’s the same dilemma that people are finding in this world now. They are attempting to get rid of the social sanctions and laws surrounding so-called vice crimes such as prostitution, drugs, and theft. People who purvey in such things can theoretically be seen with less of a critical eye, or at least the criticism won’t be as openly expressed. And they are less likely to see any jail time. But once again, legalizing crime tends to increase the number of people engaging in it. And in reality, in a practical sense, there are only so many johns with money to spend nowadays and people with possessions left worth stealing. And since those are the two major ways drug addicts can finance their drug habits, then the drug dealers will eventually not be getting paid either. So, while it may make the Miss Kittys of the world feel good about themselves not to be judged by the people they’ve trespassed against, the reality is society can only handle a certain proportion of the population being Miss Kitty. It simply can’t handle it if the majority turns to vice for fast money rather than earning slower money in a more constructive way.

Read Full Post »

It’s Booming! Part 3: In Defense of Dollar Tree.

A lot of flak has been aimed at dollar stores like Dollar Tree lately. Dollar Tree is set to close some of its Family Dollar stores. The reasons given for the closures vary. Some of the articles say it’s because the acquisition of Family Dollar by Dollar Tree has turned out to be more of a problem than it’s worth. The two stores don’t mesh well together. Still, there are plans to open combo stores where both stores are in the same building. One article I recently read, “Crime magnets, food deserts? US dollar stores in the dock” partially blames lackluster Christmas sales. “Dollar Tree said in March that it planned to close nearly 1,000 of its Family Dollar outlets after poor holiday sales. Discount stores have also struggled with shifts in consumer demand and rising costs.” (Biron, 2024) A different article, “Dollar Tree Raising Some Prices to $7 as 6-Figure Earners Flock to the Discount Store.” said, “Dollar Tree also announced that it is closing 1,000 Family Dollar stores, representing 12% of its total store count. The company also said in the earnings call that it continues to deal with increased theft at Family Dollar, which is only one of many factors behind store closures. As a result, the company has locked up certain products and placed others behind registers.” (Nesbit, 2024)

Either way, it’s clear that the authors of most of the recent articles about Dollar Tree are clearly not fans of Dollar Tree and its ilk. After reading some of these articles, you’d think dollar stores were responsible for the inflation we are experiencing. Most of the authors act like it’s a crime to earn a profit in order to keep your business from bankruptcy and continue to pay your employees. Yes, when Dollar Tree tacked on that additional $0.25 to their prices it did signal that the inflation problem was worse than what the woke media would have you believe. Maybe the propagandists don’t, but I appreciate the position Dollar Tree is in. The business model Dollar Tree had had that worked for years, and they probably expected to continue on indefinitely, no longer works in this high inflation environment. The selling point had been that you could walk into the store and buy whatever you saw there for $1.00 plus any applicable tax. Now that’s no longer possible.

Still, it appears that the propagandists want Dollar Tree to just take the loss — sell the item for less than they can acquire it for in order to hide the fact that there’s an inflation problem. How typical of the woke to steamroll over everything and everyone in order to have their way and then expect someone else to take the pain for it. Heaven forbid they change course when their policies turn out to be a disaster. No, they scapegoat instead.

“While dollar stores use the allure of single-digit prices to bring customers in, they “actually end up costing customers more in the long run,” Sasha Rogelberg said for Fortune. This is especially true for essential products, since “toilet paper, soap, and groceries cost more per unit price at dollar stores than they do as other large retailers.” (Klawans, 2024)

Yes, there are savings to be made buying in bulk — there always has been. It has been a way to get your money to go further. But then, that’s the rub. What if you have to finance your bulk purchases with a high interest rate credit card? Or worse yet, you’ve already tapped out your credit? Then, there becomes a use for a store that sells things in smaller quantities. The problem once again is that it’s not a good thing to be priced out of buying bulk, which can be a way to get financially ahead. But that’s the economic reality we’re in. Some people can no longer afford to invest in a larger quantity in order to gain a discount per ounce or per count. But instead of acknowledging that there is an inflation problem that has led to an interest rate hike on credit, woke propagandists have instead decided to engage in the less than helpful practice of blaming the retailers for not taking the financial loss on themselves by charging bulk prices per ounce or count for smaller quantities. Eventually, undercharging would probably cause them to lose their business since no one is forecasting that the widespread inflationary prices will go back down.

And yet the attack on dollar stores continues with moves even being made to restrict the expansion of dollar stores in some communities. “Critics of these stores, which stayed open during the COVID-19 pandemic to provide essential items and saw swift expansion afterwards, say they attract crime, like shoplifting, are often poorly maintained and push out grocery shops and other businesses. They also say the stores create “food deserts” where consumers have little access to healthy, fresh produce. Supporters say the so-called small box retailers offer a lifeline to low-income families.” (Biron, 2024) The Dollar Tree response was thus: “A spokesperson for Dollar Tree said Chicago’s decision meant it and other small box retailers “will essentially be prohibited from opening new or relocated stores” in the city. The move “will bring more harm than help to the very communities it claims to support by limiting the flexibility to improve stores and provide new offerings to people in these communities,” the spokesperson told Context.” (Biron, 2024)

But the criticism continues … ““This whole thing has exploded,” said Kennedy Smith, a senior researcher with the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR), which published a report on the “Dollar Store Invasion” last year. As word gets out more about communities that have been successful in controlling dollar store development … others are coming to ask for guidance,” she told Context.” (Biron, 2024) “The closures give communities “an opportunity to re-set the clock and find better ways to ensure that residents have convenient and affordable access to healthy food. With fewer dollar stores, it will be easier for communities to develop or attract better food options,” Smith said.” (Biron, 2024)

Yet, even the author of the “Crime magnets, food deserts? US dollar stores in the dock.”  article admits, “there is evidence that the retailers are responding to a genuine demand. The first national survey last year by the non-profit Center for Science in the Public Interest found more than 80% of respondents said the stores helped their communities, were convenient and allowed them to stretch tight budgets.” (Biron, 2024)

But criticism of the dollar store phenomenon persisted in the article: “Broader food access was also highlighted by researchers with UCLA Anderson and the University of Toronto, who found that around one grocery store will close for every three dollar stores that open within a two-mile radius.” (Biron, 2024) And, “In a petition calling for a ban, people in Tangipahoa said they had been negatively affected by the “saturation” of dollar stores, which they said had increased traffic, affected drainage, diminished small businesses and attracted litter and crime.” (Biron, 2024)

The Klawans article is also rife with criticism. “Indeed, while simply shopping elsewhere may seem like an obvious solution, customers “already shopping at dollar stores may not have a choice,” Rogelberg said for Fortune. The “thousands of dollar stores cropping up across the U.S. may seem like a win for shoppers looking for convenience,” but “dollar store expansions have also forced out independent grocers and created food deserts in the areas they occupy.” This means that dollar stores, which are “heavily reliant on cash-strapped shoppers with few options,” have “little motivation to do away with shrinkflation.” (Klawans, 2024)

Still, one woman in the Biron article was willing to work with Dollar Tree in order to remedy the chain’s perceived shortcomings. The article states, “Lorraine Cochran-Johnson, a former commissioner in DeKalb County, Georgia, believes the key to striking a balance between the pros and cons of dollar stores lies in collaboration.” as well as, “Cochran-Johnson drew up legislation to encourage the stores to offer fresh food items, and now many include a cold food section selling milk, cheese and more, she said.” (Biron, 2024)

And yet, you can’t sell those fresh food items for $1.25. So now Dollar Tree is planning to offer items up to $7.00 limit. While most items will still be at the $1.25 price point, others will now range from $1.50 to $7.00. It’s of note that the Klawans article mentions the $7.00 price limit and the shrinking sizes, but neglects to mention that most items will remain $1.25. The Nesbit article mentions, “In the company’s most recent earnings call, executive chairman and CEO Rick Dreiling said the increase was part of Dollar Tree’s “multi-price point strategy” to offer shoppers a more “relevant assortment,” Business Insider reported. He also noted that most of Dollar Tree’s new shoppers in 2023 came from households earning more than $125,000 per year.” (Nesbit, 2024) He also added that “Higher-priced items will include food, snacks, beverages, pet care, personal care and more.” (Nesbit, 2024) Klawans misinterprets the information about the more affluent customers in the following, “And despite what Dollar Tree executives said, statistics show the majority of dollar store customers sit in low-income brackets.” (Klawans, 2024) CEO Rick Dreiling actually said new customers, not all customers.

In the end, apparently Dollar Tree can’t win. When they offer healthier food options for more money the implication is made that the company is catering to the wealthy. If they don’t offer healthier options, the company is a “crime magnet” and a creator of “food deserts.”

It’s also useful to point out that it doesn’t appear that the company is raking in the dough at the $1.25 price point. “The company reported a fourth-quarter net loss of $1.71 billion and a net loss of $998.4 million for fiscal year 2023, Supermarket News reported.” (Nesbit, 2024) Yet, Klawans insists, “The rampant shrinkflation, as in other types of stores, has “resulted in tasty profit margins for both Dollar General and Dollar Tree,” Bill Wilson said for Supermarket News.” (Klawans, 2024) Klawans then seems to contradict himself by pointing out that Dollar Tree is closing stores. “The shrinkflation doesn’t necessarily appear to be helping to avoid other drastic measures; Dollar Tree and its subsidiary, Family Dollar, announced it will close nearly 1,000 stores in the next few years due to a lackluster 2023. While this may help the company, it is “likely to leave a void for Americans with already limited shopping choices,” CNN said. So, which is it? Dollar Tree is a useful resource for the poor and therefore they have a moral obligation to keep their stores open? Or, are they supposedly a scourge that causes “food deserts” by driving out competition? And do we even know there is competition willing to move into these areas? I guess we’ll find out soon if any traditional groceries swoop in to fill that void created by the store closures.

In the end, yes, there is a problem, but the problem isn’t being caused by Dollar Tree.

(Biron, 2024)

Biron, C. (2024, April 22). “Crime magnets, food deserts? US dollar stores in the dock.” Context. https://www.context.news/socioeconomic-inclusion/crime-magnets-food-deserts-us-dollar-stores-in-the-dock

(Klawans, 2024)

Klawans, J. (2024, March 29). “Why are dollar stores a microcosm for America’s shrinkflation problem?” THE WEEK US. https://theweek.com/business/economy/dollar-stores-americas-shrinkflation-problem

(Nesbit, 2024)

Nesbit, J. (2024, March 22). “Dollar Tree Raising Some Prices to $7 as 6-Figure Earners Flock to the Discount Store.” Yahoo Finance. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/dollar-tree-raising-prices-7-201647729.html

Read Full Post »

It’s Booming! Part 2: Another Term to Explain It All Away

3/15/24

They call it “money dysmorphia.” Yeah, I’m not kidding. It is a new word that has been added to the lexicon of wokeism. It basically means social media is making young adults feel financially inadequate when in fact the economy is actually working well for them! In the article, “Nearly half of young adults have ‘money dysmorphia,’ survey finds. Here are the symptoms.” it states that, “The average household’s net worth has soared in recent years, rising 37% between 2019 and 2022, according to the survey of consumer finances from the Federal Reserve.” (Dickler, 2024) And yet people aren’t feeling well-off. How can that be? Money dysmorphia! Still, the author later admits that, a “prolonged period of high inflation and instability has chipped away at most consumers’ buying power and confidence. Instagram is also partly to blame.” (Dickler, 2024) Notice how the article starts off by admitting that things like inflation have something to do with people’s feelings of financial inadequacy then it pivots to blaming social media. Attacks on social media are being ratcheted up recently. Now, according to the article, the pressure to impress strangers online has warped our perception of financial reality as well.

Then, the article goes on to say that “more than half of Americans earning more than $100,000 a year say they live paycheck to paycheck, another report by LendingClub found.” (Dickler, 2024) Apparently, the cost of living is so high where these people live that it eats away at their income until they have no discretionary income. And really isn’t that what feeling rich is about? The means to have your will met? Isn’t that what really causes people to do the things listed in the article like going on expensive trips and buying things they don’t need? They want to feel powerful and in control? And apparently when they had discretionary income — when the cost of living was less — they felt that way. The media can call this reality whatever they like; they can blame it on a need to impress other people on social media, but in the end I don’t see how telling people they have enough money and implying they are nuts not to see it is going to work. As long as they can’t do as they please whenever they please they aren’t going to feel rich.

Dickler, J. (2024, March 13). “Nearly half of young adults have ‘money dysmorphia,’ survey finds. Here are the symptoms.” CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2024/03/13/nearly-half-of-young-adults-have-money-dysmorphia-survey-finds.html

Read Full Post »

It’s Booming! Part 1

4/10/24

There’s so much propaganda out there that the economy is booming! Funny, one of the only things I see booming is inflation. So, I’ve decided to dissect some of the woke propaganda articles on this and other common themes such as climate change from time to time. After all, pretty much all of these articles conveniently lack a comments section. Therefore, they get to mount their podium and lecture at you as though you are a mere school child and they are your not to be questioned or challenged professor. In other words, you are deprived of the ability to mount a response. I find his frustrating.

The article, “The strong U.S. job market is in a ‘sweet spot,’ economists say.”, makes the following points. Facts: “The U.S. economy added 303,000 jobs in March, the largest gain in more than a year, the Bureau of Labor Statistics said in its monthly jobs report.” (Iacurci, 2024) “The unemployment rate also edged lower, to 3.8%.” (Iacurci, 2024) Spin: “It’s a bit harder for workers to find jobs relative to the “great resignation” era a few years ago.” (Iacurci, 2024) “But overall, the labor market looks healthy and sustainable and is giving inflation-adjusted raises to the average worker, economists said.” (Iacurci, 2024) The author spins that the economy is making progress without “overheating” as it did during the “great resignation” era. It’s adding jobs, but not too many. The spin is this is good for both the economy and workers. According to the author’s spin, “employers are adding ample jobs to their payrolls, unemployment hovers near historical lows, and worker buying power (so-called “real” wage growth) is steadily rising, economists said.”

Facts: “Employers added 303,000 jobs to payrolls in March, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported Friday. That’s the largest monthly gain since January 2023. Job growth in the first three months of 2024 — 274,000, on average — beats the 2019 pre-pandemic average by more than 100,000.” (Iacurci, 2024) “The U.S. unemployment rate declined to 3.8% in March, from 3.9% in February. Unemployment has been below 4% — a historically low mark — for more than two years.” (Iacurci, 2024) The author cites Julia Pollak, chief economist at ZipRecruiter who spins, “Those conditions are pushing employers to make “very attractive” offers to new hires and proactively recruit prospective candidates.” (Iacurci, 2024) The author mentions that, “The layoff rate has also been near a historic low for more than two years, as employers hang on to their current workforce.” (Iacurci, 2024) He fails to mention that the tech industry is experiencing severe layoffs. The author then goes on to blame the so-called hot labor market of 2021-2022 for contributing to the high inflation rate. The author admits that, “Wage growth has declined, to an annual 4.1% pace in March from a pandemic-era peak of 5.9% in March 2022, on average. But inflation has fallen more than that, which translates to an increase in household buying power since May 2023.” (Iacurci, 2024)

 “Real hourly earnings — wages after accounting for inflation — grew by 1.1% in February 2024 versus a year earlier.” (Iacurci, 2024) “While workers have lost some leverage, it’s still “relatively easy” to find a job and workers are now getting those inflation-adjusted raises,” Nick Bunker, economic research director for North America at job site Indeed said. (Iacurci, 2024)

The most misleading part of this article is that it’s dealing with rates of increase in wages as compared to rates of increase in inflation over a short period of time. Inflation damage is unfortunately cumulative. In the long term, wage increases consistently outstripping the rate of increase in inflation might make a noticeable difference to consumers. As it stands now, even if the trend continued, they are still contending with prices way too high as compared to their wages. It’s disingenuous for the author and his commenters to ignore the fact that our real wage is still dreadfully inadequate compared to the current cost of living. At best they can say that there has been a sign of improvement they can cite. Instead, they imply that the consumer can go out to their local store and buy more than they could a short while ago. That is wrong. I also think it’s premature to act as though the inflation crisis is over.

(Iacurci, 2024)

Iacurci, G. (2024, April 5). “The strong U.S. job market is in a ‘sweet spot,’ economists say.” CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2024/04/05/the-strong-us-job-market-is-in-a-sweet-spot-economists-say.html

Read Full Post »