Recent economic data indicate a weakening labor market, prompting concern among analysts about the direction of the U.S. economy. The August jobs report showed only 22,000 new positions created, falling far short of the expected 75,000. The unemployment rate has risen to its highest level in four years, signaling a shift in economic momentum. Manufacturing has been particularly affected, with 12,000 jobs lost in the sector last month, contributing to a cumulative loss of 78,000 under the current administration—contrary to campaign promises of revitalizing the industry.
Inflation remains above the Federal Reserve’s 2% target at 2.9%, complicating the central bank’s policy options. While some argue for interest rate cuts to stimulate employment, others caution that doing so could worsen inflation, especially if supply-side constraints are the primary driver of economic stagnation. Economists point to trade tariffs and reduced immigration as key factors limiting production capacity and labor availability. One analyst noted that 2025 could mark the first year of population decline in U.S. history, which would further dampen economic growth.
Consumer sentiment has also deteriorated. A Wall Street Journal poll found that only 25% of Americans believe their standard of living will improve—the lowest level since 1986. This pessimism persists despite relatively strong economic indicators, suggesting a disconnect between data and public perception. Analysts attribute this to a broader erosion of trust in institutions and a growing sense of economic insecurity.
There is also criticism of political rhetoric that prioritizes symbolism over substance. One commentator dismissed the rebranding of the Pentagon as a superficial gesture lacking strategic value, while another expressed concern over military actions taken without clear legal or operational justification. These moves, some argue, reflect a leadership style more attuned to media optics than sound governance.
Looking ahead, the administration faces mounting challenges as economic conditions weaken and public confidence wanes. With midterm elections approaching, the trajectory of the economy could play a decisive role in shaping political outcomes.
— news from PBS
— News Original —
Brooks and Bouie on economic warning signs
Geoff Bennett: n nFrom today’s weaker-than-expected jobs report to the president rebranding the Pentagon, it’s been another jam-packed week of news. n nFor analysis, we turn now to the analysis of Brooks and Bouie. That’s David Brooks and Jamelle Bouie, both columnists at The New York Times. Jonathan Capehart is away this evening. n nIt’s good to see you both. n nSo, as we reported, the August jobs report is out today, and the numbers are fairly bleak. The U.S. economy added just 22,000 jobs last month, well short of forecasts. The unemployment rate ticked up to its highest number in four years, a setback for President Trump, David, but it could, on the other hand, bolster his argument that the Fed should cut interest rates when it meets later this month. n nHow do you see it? n nDavid Brooks: n nWell, inflation is still over what the Fed wants. It’s 2.9, and they set a target of 2. So they’re in a bit of a pickle. They might cut a little bit, 25 basis points, but it’s hard to see them cutting a lot more because of the inflation threat. n nThis is caused by — as Austan Goolsbee sort of suggested earlier in the program, I think it’s caused by uncertainty about the tariffs, but then also the cuts in immigration. 2025 could be the first year in American history where America loses population. And immigrants, whether you like high immigration or don’t, they’re an economic boon to the country. n nAnd if you take away all that labor, you’re taking away a source of economic strength. One of the things that was more interesting about the report was that the number of manufacturing jobs lost last month was 12,000, and that brings the total number of lost manufacturing jobs under the Trump administration of 78,000 people. n nThat’s not what he was promising when he was running. So he’s really not helping. And, finally, the most depressing thing for me and the most concerning is attitudes about what’s happening. The Wall Street Journal had a poll out earlier this week where they asked people, do you think there’s a chance, any chance, your living standard will go up? Only 25 percent of Americans say that. n nThat’s the lowest level since 1986. Something weird has happened about people’s view of the country and the economy. There’s a way to predict how people will view the economy based on economic statistics. And up until COVID, the statistics and the consumer sentiment rose and fall together. n nAfter COVID, they’re totally diverged. The economic statistics look pretty good, but the people’s view of the economy is cratering. And that’s just a generalized loss of faith, the growth of pessimism. n nJamelle Bouie, The New York Times: n nWell, the labor market is clearly weakening. n nAnd I think that it is something that is going to be a real challenge for the administration. It’s, I think, important to recognize that Trump won reelection or won this second term on essentially an economic argument: I will lower the cost of goods and services. I will ensure prosperity. n nAnd he won narrowly on that basis. And if — his term thus far has been characterized by job losses, by slowdowns, by rising inflation, by the exact opposite of what he promised. This, to me, signals that the administration’s and the president’s party is simply in trouble going into the end of this year and the beginning of next year and the beginning of midterm elections, say nothing of the upcoming elections in New Jersey and Virginia, where we will start to get a sense of where the public stands with regards to Republican governance. n nDavid Brooks: n nI think it probably pleases people to hammer the Fed. I mean, they’re unelected. A lot of people don’t like it. Republicans don’t like it. n nBut just to give Jerome Powell credit where it’s due, never before in American history have we brought down inflation without recession. And he did it, along with the other Fed governors. So I think what they have achieved over the last several years to me is kind of remarkable. But no president likes the Fed because he wants the Fed to pump up the — or pump up — or pump down interest rates, if you can pump down something… n n(Laughter) n nDavid Brooks: n nYes, I mean, he’s a personalist. He thinks the office of the presidency is not something that belongs to the American people, but it belongs to him. n nAnd this has been a pretty consistent theme, in fact, amazingly consistent theme, throughout his entire administration. And we relied on the idea that some things are sacred, some things you just don’t do. There are lines. We all have these — like, in journalism, we’re not going to be journalists and also run for office as a Democrat and Republican. We’re just not going to do that. There’s a line. n nAnd the fact that they didn’t — weren’t intuitively and instinctively appalled by the idea of crossing that line shows that just the norm has gone away. n nJamelle Bouie: n nI — part of me wants to say that this is just kind of silly. I mean, first of all, the executive order specifically says you can call the Department of Defense Department of War as well if you want to, but officially it is still the Department of Defense, right? That’s established by congressional statute. That’s not something the president kind of just changed unilaterally. n nI suppose you can say that, beyond whatever P.R. thing he’s looking at, it’s supposed to signal the return of, as secretary of defense — I’m not going to call him secretary of war — Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth says, maximum lethality. n nAnd I suppose it’s demonstrated by the recent attack on the boat allegedly of Venezuelan drug dealers. But as has emerged out of that, what we see are a lot of questions about the decision-making that went into that, about the legality of that strike. n nThis recommitment to lethality appears to also be kind of a P.R. thing. Like, I don’t see anything strategic or interested in the national security interests of the United States. What I see here is a president who understands the entire world as a kind of television show, and secretary of war sounds better for TV than secretary of defense. n nDavid Brooks: n nAnd, you know, the Pentagon was renamed in the late ’40s. And the people who were there when it was renamed were people like James Forrestal, who was secretary of defense, and then later George Marshall. And the Joint — chairman of the Joint Chiefs was Omar Bradley, literally the guys who won in World War II. n nAnd they did not have anything to prove about their machismo. And I found that the people I admire who really have shown toughness in combat, men and women, they don’t need to brag about it. They don’t need to say secretary of war. They’re like, no, I’m not going to do that. You will never hear one of them say, hey, let’s lock and load. They just don’t talk that way. n nAnd this crew — to go from George Marshall to Pete Hegseth, that’s a long way. And I’m conservative. I believe government should be careful about assuming what it knows, because the world is really complicated. And sending a missile at some ship where you don’t know what’s on the ship, that’s just foolish. n nIt’s killing people, potentially — well, absolutely, when you don’t even know what they’re doing. There’s a reason we board ships, because you want to have some evidence that you’re actually going after drug dealers, rather than whatever, some random 11 people on a boat. And so the targeting of ships using acts of war what should be acts of law enforcement really does cross a line to me. n nJamelle Bouie: n nBut I think he sees the elevation of Mamdani to the mayorship as just something he thinks is bad for New York. I suppose he believes it’s bad for the country. He doesn’t see it in its political interest and wants to see an ally, Cuomo, who has given every indication that he would cooperate with the administration, especially with immigration enforcement, in the New York mayor’s office. n nI think that the strategy here is probably misguided. New Yorkers do not approve of Trump. And giving Mamdani an opportunity to basically run against Trump, which is what Adams doing — Adams dropping out would do, I think would only be down to Mamdani’s benefit.