ReportWire

Tag: Inflation

  • Fed won’t get key inflation data before next rate decision as BLS cancels October CPI release

    [ad_1]

    The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics is the principal Federal agency responsible for measuring labor market activity, working conditions, and price changes in the economy.

    Bill Clark | Getty Images

    The Bureau of Labor Statistics said it was canceling the release of the October consumer price index, leaving the Federal Reserve without a key piece of inflation data to ponder when it next decides on interest rates on Dec. 10.

    The CPI data, previously scheduled to be released on Nov. 7, was canceled because the government shutdown made it impossible for the BLS to “retroactively collect” certain parts of survey data, the agency said on its website.

    November’s CPI data, previously scheduled to be released on Dec. 10, will now be released on Dec. 18 after the Fed decision, the BLS said.

    Bureau data collectors compile the index through several methods, including personal visits and phone calls that were not possible during the shutdown. The BLS also uses online data and household surveys that also would make it difficult to retroactively collect information.

    In addition to the Fed announcement, the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Economic Analysis said another key inflation measure, the personal consumption expenditures price index, “is to be rescheduled” though no firm date has been announced. The Fed uses the PCE price index as its main inflation forecasting tool. The gauge had been set for release Nov. 26.

    Fed officials have voiced concerns about being in a data fog as they try to formulate monetary policy. The central bank’s Federal Open Market Committee approved a quarter percentage point rate cut in late October, but minutes from the meeting reflected worries over getting an incomplete picture.

    “This is a temporary state of affairs. And we’re going to do our jobs, we’re going to collect every scrap of data we can find, evaluate it, and think carefully about it,” Fed Chair Jerome Powell said after the October meeting. “What do you do if you’re driving in the fog? You slow down. … There’s a possibility that it would make sense to be more cautious about moving.”

    However, New York Fed President John Williams said Friday he thinks the Fed probably has “room for a further adjustment in the near term,” implying the likelihood of a cut sometime soon.

    Other Fed officials, such as Governor Christopher Waller, have said policymakers still have enough information to make informed decisions, even with the data drought from the shutdown.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Millions of Floridians’ utility bills will soon go up. Here’s what to know

    [ad_1]

    TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — Millions of electricity customers in President Donald Trump’s adopted home state of Florida will see their bills rise, after a regulatory board approved what environmental advocates say is one of the largest utility rate increases in the state’s history.

    The price hike will affect an estimated 12 million Floridians — roughly half the state’s population — at a time when voters are citing economic concerns as a top issue, and as Democrats and Republicans brace for a debate over affordability in the intensifying midterm battle to control Congress.

    The Florida Public Service Commission approved the rate increase Thursday for Florida Power & Light, the state’s largest power company, over the strong objections of advocates for the elderly, conservation groups, and the state-appointed advocate for Florida ratepayers, who called the proposal “disproportionately favorable” to corporate interests.

    In a statement, FPL said the rate increase is needed to make “smart, necessary investments in the grid to power Florida’s growth,” while keeping customers’ bills “well below the national average.”

    Here’s what to know.

    The new rates will kick in Jan. 1 and run through 2029. According to FPL, the monthly bill for a typical residential customer in most of Florida will go up by $2.50 a month, from about $134.14 to $136.64. Following other rate hikes in recent years, the average FPL customer will pay hundreds of dollars more each year than they did in 2021, when the typical monthly bill was $101.70, according to legal filings in the case.

    Across the south Atlantic region, which includes Florida, the average monthly electric bill cost residential customers $152.04 in 2024, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

    Nationally, household electric bills are rising more rapidly than wages and inflation, according to a recent analysis by the National Energy Assistance Directors’ Association, with prices increasing by more than 10.5% between January and August of this year.

    Combined with higher consumer prices and higher energy costs caused by extreme weather events, lower income families are hit hardest by the increases, which advocates say are forcing some to choose whether to “eat or heat.”

    “Even modest rate increases can force painful trade-offs between paying energy bills and covering essentials such as food, rent, or medicine,” reads the NEADA analysis.

    FPL maintains that the rate increases are necessary to power the growing and hurricane-prone state. The Florida Public Service Commission, a state board appointed by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis, approved the rate hike, instead of a counterproposal from the Florida Office of Public Counsel.

    A coalition of environmental conservation groups and consumer advocates opposed the rate hikes for months.

    “FPL should not be allowed to pad their profits on the backs of residential customers like me,” reads a petition circulated by AARP Florida. “Please consider the impact to residential customers and put our needs above corporate profits.”

    A bipartisan group of more than two dozen state and local elected officials also signed a joint letter to oppose the increase. Meanwhile, an influential Republican state senator has been calling for broader changes to the state agency responsible for regulating the utilities.

    Already, Trump is signaling that he’ll focus on affordability next year as he and Republicans try to maintain their slim congressional majorities, while Democrats are blaming Trump for rising household costs.

    Electricity costs were a key issue in this month’s elections for governor in New Jersey and Virginia, a data center hot spot, and in Georgia, where Democrats ousted two Republican incumbents for seats on the state’s utility regulatory commission.

    Voters in New Jersey, Virginia, California and New York City all cited economic concerns as the top issue. Rising electricity costs aren’t expected to ease and many Americans could see an increase on their monthly bills in the middle of next year’s campaigns.

    A recent analysis of consumer data found that more people are falling behind on paying their bills to keep on the lights and heat their homes — a warning sign for the U.S. economy that could drive voters’ decision making next year.

    ___

    Kate Payne is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Millions of Floridians’ Utility Bills Will Soon Go Up. Here’s What to Know

    [ad_1]

    TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) — Millions of electricity customers in President Donald Trump’s adopted home state of Florida will see their bills rise, after a regulatory board approved what environmental advocates say is one of the largest utility rate increases in the state’s history.

    The price hike will affect an estimated 12 million Floridians — roughly half the state’s population — at a time when voters are citing economic concerns as a top issue, and as Democrats and Republicans brace for a debate over affordability in the intensifying midterm battle to control Congress.

    The Florida Public Service Commission approved the rate increase Thursday for Florida Power & Light, the state’s largest power company, over the strong objections of advocates for the elderly, conservation groups, and the state-appointed advocate for Florida ratepayers, who called the proposal “disproportionately favorable” to corporate interests.

    In a statement, FPL said the rate increase is needed to make “smart, necessary investments in the grid to power Florida’s growth,” while keeping customers’ bills “well below the national average.”


    How much will Floridians’ rates rise?

    The new rates will kick in Jan. 1 and run through 2029. According to FPL, the monthly bill for a typical residential customer in most of Florida will go up by $2.50 a month, from about $134.14 to $136.64. Following other rate hikes in recent years, the average FPL customer will pay hundreds of dollars more each year than they did in 2021, when the typical monthly bill was $101.70, according to legal filings in the case.

    Across the south Atlantic region, which includes Florida, the average monthly electric bill cost residential customers $152.04 in 2024, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

    Nationally, household electric bills are rising more rapidly than wages and inflation, according to a recent analysis by the National Energy Assistance Directors’ Association, with prices increasing by more than 10.5% between January and August of this year.

    Combined with higher consumer prices and higher energy costs caused by extreme weather events, lower income families are hit hardest by the increases, which advocates say are forcing some to choose whether to “eat or heat.”

    “Even modest rate increases can force painful trade-offs between paying energy bills and covering essentials such as food, rent, or medicine,” reads the NEADA analysis.


    What has the reaction been?

    FPL maintains that the rate increases are necessary to power the growing and hurricane-prone state. The Florida Public Service Commission, a state board appointed by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis, approved the rate hike, instead of a counterproposal from the Florida Office of Public Counsel.

    A coalition of environmental conservation groups and consumer advocates opposed the rate hikes for months.

    “FPL should not be allowed to pad their profits on the backs of residential customers like me,” reads a petition circulated by AARP Florida. “Please consider the impact to residential customers and put our needs above corporate profits.”

    A bipartisan group of more than two dozen state and local elected officials also signed a joint letter to oppose the increase. Meanwhile, an influential Republican state senator has been calling for broader changes to the state agency responsible for regulating the utilities.


    The politics of power bills

    Already, Trump is signaling that he’ll focus on affordability next year as he and Republicans try to maintain their slim congressional majorities, while Democrats are blaming Trump for rising household costs.

    Voters in New Jersey, Virginia, California and New York City all cited economic concerns as the top issue. Rising electricity costs aren’t expected to ease and many Americans could see an increase on their monthly bills in the middle of next year’s campaigns.

    A recent analysis of consumer data found that more people are falling behind on paying their bills to keep on the lights and heat their homes — a warning sign for the U.S. economy that could drive voters’ decision making next year.

    Kate Payne is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.

    Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Photos You Should See – Nov. 2025

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • Florida approves electric bill rate hike: What we know

    [ad_1]

    Florida Power & Light (FPL), the largest electric utility in the United States, said it has approval from the regulator to increase customers’ base rates over the next four years, which critics say could cost consumers billions of dollars amid the country’s affordability crisis.

    Why It Matters

    FPL serves about 12 million people, making it an influential force in the industry and potentially setting a precedent for other companies.

    The increase comes after several years of high inflation, with the cost of living, notably groceries, remaining high for Americans and becoming a lightning rod for the administration of President Donald Trump, who campaigned last year on decreasing prices.

    The average cost of electricity per kilowatt-hour in the U.S. rose to 18.8 cents in September, compared with 17.8 cents in September 2024 and 13.7 cents in September 2020, according to data from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.

    What To Know

    The settlement is expected to lead to base-rate increases of $945 million in 2026 and $705 million in 2027. FPL also would collect additional amounts in 2028 and 2029 for solar-energy and battery-storage projects, CBS reported.

    According to FPL, starting January 1, 2026, the average residential electric bill for a customer using 1,000 kilowatt-hours will increase by $2.50 per month, a rise of about 2 percent, increasing bills from $134.14 to $136.64 in most areas of Florida. 

    The agreement, developed in collaboration with a broad coalition of customer groups, sets rates for 2026 through 2029, the utility said.

    FPL President and Chief Executive Armando Pimentel said the approval from the state Public Service Commission “is a win for our customers and a win for the entire state.”

    In seeking the increase, the utility had argued that higher rates were necessary to invest in “electric service infrastructure,” citing “far higher” than expected costs of components and labor.

    But the settlement drew opposition from the state Office of Public Counsel, which by law represents utility customers, and several consumer groups, per CBS.

    “I certainly think that this case will wind up in front of the Florida Supreme Court,” said attorney Bradley Marshall, who represents consumer groups Florida Rising, the League of United Latin American Citizens of Florida and the Environmental Confederation of Southwest Florida, CBS also reported.

    This is a breaking news story. Updates to follow. 

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • America’s deepening affordability crisis summed up in 5 charts

    [ad_1]

    Although inflation across the U.S. is far cooler than in the post-pandemic years, millions of Americans say they still feel the pinch of rising prices, struggle to pay the bills and express concern about their financial prospects. 

    Price increases are nowhere near the level reached in June of 2022, when the Consumer Price Index hit a 40-year high of 9.1%. Yet many people feel squeezed by the cost of simple daily necessities, including the ability to afford healthy food, and by long-term increases in the cost of essentials such as housing and health care.

    This affordability crisis is rooted in a combination of both longstanding economic issues dating back decades and more recent developments. For instance, housing costs have surged partly due to a lack of available homes, a result of cutbacks in construction following the Great Recession, while more recently steep new U.S. tariffs have fueled inflation.  

    Inflation and the economy now rank as Americans’ top national concerns, according to an October CBS News poll. 

    “Everything is going up in price very quickly,” said Jeremy Tolbert, a 47-year-old web developer in Lawrence, Kansas.

    With his family’s monthly health care premiums set to rise 18% to $2,600 next year, he’s planning to cut back in other areas. “Our food budget is going to go down — we’re not talking about eating beans and rice, but going from a comfortable middle-class lifestyle to eating how we did when we first got out of college,” Tolbert said.

    Here are five key categories of spending that many Americans are struggling to afford.

    Food

    Almost half of Americans say it’s harder to afford groceries today than it was a year ago, according to a September survey by Axios and the Harris Poll. Only 19% said food prices are cheaper than a year earlier, with roughly a third seeing no change. 

    Growth in food prices has eased considerably, although it is still rising, with the latest CPI report showing grocery prices rose 2.7% in September on an annual basis, a sharp contrast to the 11.4% increase in 2022. Overall, however, food prices as of September were more than 18% higher than in January of 2022, according to the CBS News price tracker. 

    Shoppers don’t assess food costs the same way economists do. They focus on their day-to-day spending — which keeps climbing — and compare their out-of-pocket spending today with what they paid several years ago, according to research from the University of Florida. 

    In other words, people’s experience of inflation and how they measure it in their daily lives may not mesh with official economic measures that paint a more optimistic picture. 

    Meanwhile, other recent signals underscore the difficulty many Americans have simply putting food on the table. Roughly 14% of U.S. households reported food insecurity on average between January and October, up from 12.5% in 2024, according to data from Purdue University’s Center for Food Demand Analysis and Sustainability.

    In New York City, for example, 40% of local families can’t afford their weekly food costs, according to new data from charitable organization Robin Hood and Columbia University.

    Housing

    Almost three-quarters of Americans said housing has grown more unaffordable in their communities in recent years, according to an October poll from YouGov and the University of Florida Center for Public Interest Communications. 

    The data backs that up, with a homebuyer today needing to earn $121,400 a year to afford a typical home, meaning that their monthly costs would remain below 30% of their annual income, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta. The average American earns about $84,000 a year, highlighting the considerable gap between incomes and home prices.

    Several forces have pushed housing costs higher. The rate of home construction plunged after the 2008-09 financial crisis, leading to a shortfall in housing inventory. Meeting today’s demand for housing would require building as many as 4 million additional homes beyond current construction levels, Goldman Sachs estimates.

    The low interest rates that prevailed during the pandemic, when homebuyers could secure mortgages below 3%, sparked a buying rush that sent prices soaring. Even with a slight cooling this year, homes are selling for about 25% above their 2019 levels, while mortgage rates have more than doubled since their pandemic lows.

    Child care

    The challenge of affording child care is another pain point for many families. In 2024, the average annual cost of care for one child around the U.S. topped $13,000, up 30% from 2020, according to Child Care Aware America, a nonprofit group. 

    Families with a single child can end up paying between roughly 9% and 16% of their median income on full-time day care, according to the Department of Labor. That means parents are often spending more on child care than they do on other expenses, such as groceries or even rent, data shows.

    Gina Monroe, a 42-year-old mom based in Massapequa, New York, said the financial strain of child care has made her and her husband think twice about having another child. She started sending her 2-year-old son to day care in September and pays around $450 a week.

    “Nothing’s getting any cheaper,” she told CBS News.

    Child care costs have surged partly because there aren’t enough early education workers to support the number of children who need care, according to experts. The industry also pays meager wages, adding to the challenges of recruiting new workers, said Keri Rodrigues, co-founder and president of the National Parents Union, an advocacy group for American families.

    Health care

    Americans are also getting socked by rising health care costs, ranging from higher insurance premiums to out-of-pocket expenses such as deductibles and co-pays. The increase in medical costs stems largely from the emergence of more expensive treatments, such as the popular GLP-1 weight loss drugs, as well as an aging population that requires more care, according to consulting firm Mercer. 

    The cost of health care was at the center of the longest government shutdown in U.S. history, with Democratic lawmakers pushing to extend a tax credit to defray the cost of health insurance for 22 million Americans who buy coverage through the Affordable Care Act. 

    The shutdown ended without an agreement to extend the subsidies, which means low- and middle-income households that previously qualified for the tax credits would likely see their ACA premiums rise from an average of $888 in 2025 to $1,904 in 2026, according to a KFF analysis.

    Employees who get their insurance through employer-based plans are likely to see their health care costs rise as much as 7% for their 2026 plans, according to Mercer.

    Electricity and utility costs

    Americans now pay an average of $265 per month in utility costs, up 12% since last year, according to a new report from The Century Foundation, a progressive think tank, and advocacy group Protect Borrowers.

    Average Utility Bills Nationwide (Line chart)

    The surge stems from a succession of rate hikes across the U.S, as electricity demand outstrips supply. In 2025 alone, more than 124 million Americans are expected to see some sort of rate increase in their energy bill, a recent PowerLines report found.

    Even if you do your best to shut off every light, some fixed costs are unavoidable, such as the so-called “delivery charge,” or what a utility charges to send electricity from a power plant to a home, said Rodrigues of the National Parents Union.

    The energy burden falls most acutely on low- and middle-income families, who spend between 6% and 10% of their income on energy, or three to five times that of higher-income households, according to the National Energy Assistance Directors Association.

    Edited by

    Alain Sherter

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Sharp disagreements over economy threaten Federal Reserve interest rate cut

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON (AP) — What was once seen as a near-certain cut in interest rates next month now looks more like a coin flip as Federal Reserve officials sharply disagree over the economy’s health and whether stubborn inflation or weak hiring represent a bigger threat.

    In several speeches in the past week, some policymakers have registered greater concern over persistent inflation in an echo of the “affordability” concerns that played a large role in elections earlier this month.

    At the same time, another camp is much more concerned about meager hiring and the threat that the “low-hire, low-fire“ job market could worsen into one where layoffs become more widespread.

    The turmoil on the Fed’s 19-member interest-rate setting committee reflects a deeply uncertain economic outlook brought about by multiple factors, including tariffs, artificial intelligence, and changes in immigration and tax policies.

    “It’s reflective of a ton of uncertainty,” said Luke Tilley, chief economist at M&T Bank. “It’s not surprising at all that there’s a wide divergence of opinions.”

    Fewer rate cuts by the Fed could leave borrowing costs for homes and cars elevated. More expensive mortgages and auto loans contribute to the widespread view, according to polls, that the cost of living is too high.

    Some Fed watchers say that an unusually high number of dissents are possible at the December 9-10 meeting, regardless of whether the central bank reduces rates or not. Krishna Guha, an analyst at Evercore ISI, said a decision to cut could lead to as many as four or five dissents, while a decision to keep rates unchanged could produce three.

    Four dissenting votes would be highly unusual, given the Fed’s history of seeking consensus. The last time four officials dissented was in 1992, under then-Chair Alan Greenspan.

    Fed governor Christopher Waller on Monday noted that critics of the Fed often accuse it of “group think,” since many of its decisions are made unanimously.

    “People who are accusing us of this, get ready,” Waller said Monday in remarks in London. “You might see the least group think you’ve seen … in a long time.”

    The differences have been exacerbated by the government shutdown’s interruption of economic data, a particular challenge for a Fed that Chair Jerome Powell has often described as “data dependent.” The government’s last jobs report was for August, and inflation for September.

    September jobs data will finally be published Thursday, and are expected to show a small gain of 50,000 jobs that month and an unchanged unemployment rate at a still-low 4.3%.

    For now, Wall Street investors put the odds of a December rate cut at 50-50, according to CME Fedwatch, down sharply from nearly 94% a month ago. The decline has contributed to the stock market’s drops this week.

    After cutting their key rate in September for the first time this year, Fed policymakers signaled they expected to cut twice more, in October and December.

    But after implementing a second reduction Oct. 29, Powell poured cold water on the prospects of another cut, describing it as “not a foregone conclusion — far from it.”

    And speeches last week by a raft of regional Fed officials pushed the market odds of a December cut even lower. Susan Collins, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, said, “in all of my conversations with contacts across New England, I hear concerns about elevated prices.”

    Collins said that keeping the Fed’s key rate at its current level of about 3.9% would help bring inflation down. The economy “has been holding up quite well” even with interest rates where they are, she added.

    Several other regional presidents voiced similar concerns, including Raphael Bostic of the Atlanta Fed, Alberto Musalem of the St. Louis Fed, and Jeffrey Schmid at the Kansas City Fed. Musalem, Collins, and Schmid are among the 12 officials who vote on policy this year. Schmid dissented in October in favor of keeping rates unchanged.

    “When I talk to contacts in my district, I hear continued concern over the pace of price increases,” Schmid said Friday. “Some of this has to do with the effect of tariffs on input prices, but it is not just tariffs — or even primarily tariffs — that has people worried. I hear concerns about rising health care costs and insurance premiums, and I hear a lot about electricity.”

    On Monday, however, Waller argued that sluggish hiring is a bigger concern, and renewed his call for a rate cut next month.

    “The labor market is still weak and near stall speed,” he said. “Inflation through September continued to show relatively small effects from tariffs and support the hypothesis that tariffs … are not a persistent source of inflation.”

    Waller also dismissed the concern — voiced by Schmid and others — that the Fed should keep rates elevated because inflation has topped the Fed’s 2% target for five years. So far that hasn’t led the public to worry that inflation will stay elevated for an extended period, Waller noted.

    “You can’t just sort of say it’s been above target for five years, so I’m not going to cut,” he added. “You got to give us better answers than that.”

    There could be consensus for an interest rate cut if, say, new data for October and November show the economy shedding jobs, according to Esther George, the former president of the Kansas City Fed.

    It’s also worth noting that many economists had expected multiple dissents in September, but instead only Stephen Miran, a governor appointed that month by President Donald Trump, voted against the rate cut decision, in favor of an even bigger reduction.

    “Registering a dissent is a hard decision, and I think you’re going to find people that are speaking today that wouldn’t follow through with a vote in that direction,” she said. “I think you’re going to find enough consensus, whichever way they go.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Target expects sales slump to last through holiday season

    [ad_1]


    Target’s third-quarter profit tumbled as the retailer struggles to lure shoppers who are being pressed by stubbornly high inflation.

    The Minneapolis company said Wednesday that it expects its sales slump to extend through the critical holiday shopping season.

    Investors have punished Target’s stock recently, sending it down 43% over the past year. Shares edged lower before the opening bell.

    Turning around the 19% profit slide in the most recent quarter is the latest challenge to incoming CEO Michael Fiddelke, a 20-year company veteran who is being promoted from chief operating officer early next year. The succession comes as the discount retailer tries to reverse a persistent sales malaise and to revive its reputation as the place to go for affordable but stylish products.

    Last month, Target announced it would eliminate about 1,800 corporate positions, which included hundreds of layoffs as well as leaving open positions unfilled. Fiddelke told employees in an email the move was part of an effort to “move faster and simplify how we work.”

    Earlier this year, Target mandated its commercial unit employees return to working in the office at least three days a week.  

    Note: The video above originally aired Nov. 10, 2025.

    [ad_2]

    CBS Minnesota

    Source link

  • Child care expenses top the cost of rent in dozens of U.S. cities, analysis finds. See where.

    [ad_1]

    As child care costs soar, many Americans today find themselves paying more for a caregiver than they do for their monthly rent, according to a new analysis. 

    Child care costs for parents with two kids exceed rental costs in 85 of the country’s largest metro areas, personal finance site LendingTree found. In Omaha, Neb., Milwaukee, Wis., and Buffalo, N.Y., which have the highest child care costs in the country relative to local rents, families with an infant and a 4-year-old under care on average pay more than double the cost of their rent.

    Families around the U.S. pay an average of $1,282 for full-time infant care, still below the average monthly cost to rent a two-bedroom unit, LendingTree’s data shows. Families with two children, on the other hand, spend an average of $2,252 per month on child care.

    LendingTree, which determined how child care costs stack up against rent in 100 cities. compiled its findings using data from nonprofit group Child Care Aware of America and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

    Exorbitant child care costs are contributing to what amounts to a crisis of affordability for many Americans, who also face rising food, housing, energy and health care costs. A survey of roughly 3,000 people released this week by Brigham Young University and Deseret News found that 7 in 10 respondents said that raising children is unaffordable, a sentiment that has surged over the last decade.

    One parent facing a child care crunch is New York City resident Gina Monroe, who started sending her son to day care in September.

    “Having to have a household with both parents working and a grandmother that was getting too old to take care of a two-year-old, you don’t have a choice,” she told CBS News.

    The 42-year-old said she pays $450 a week to send her son to a day care center on nearby Long Island. That’s less than her monthly mortgage payment of $3,200, but still represents one of her family’s biggest expenses, she said.

    The financial strain of everyday life in the U.S., especially following the fierce inflation that erupted during the pandemic, has emerged as a political flashpoint this year. 

    For example, the Trump administration has in recent weeks floated several ideas aimed at easing costs for Americans, including proposals for a $2,000 tariff rebate check and a 50-year mortgage. The administration also last week announced tariff exemptions on some popular grocery store staples, including bananas, beef and coffee, as Americans continue to battle elevated food costs. 

    Incoming New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani also made issues around affordability the centerpiece of his campaign, urging city officials to establish free child care for children ages 6 weeks to 5 years old.

    Why are child care costs soaring?

    Child care expenses have been rising steadily for years, and show little sign of relenting. From 2020 to 2024, costs rose nearly 30%, data from the nonprofit group Child Care Aware shows. 

    The main driver for that surge, according to experts: a shortage of early education workers and available places at daycare centers, relative to the enormous demand for such services from families around the U.S.

    To that end, Schulz pointed to what she described as “child care deserts” in some regions, where parents face a dearth of acceptable options. These are most common in low-income rural areas, which have difficulty recruiting and retaining a qualified workforce, a 2023 government report found. 

    Where high-quality child care is in short supply, the owners can charge a premium given they face little competition, Schulz noted. 

    Many households also don’t have the benefit of having nearby family members who can help with child care responsibilities, Keri Rodrigues, co-founder and president of the National Parents Union, an advocacy group for American families, told CBS News.

    “What we actually need are policies that recognize the modern realities of working families and what the true cost of raising children in America actually is right now,” she said.

    Edited by

    Alain Sherter

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • What to expect from your Thanksgiving grocery bill this year

    [ad_1]

    In the past year, food prices are up more than 3%, and President Trump has been getting a healthy serving of complaints. He responded, two weeks before Thanksgiving, by rolling back tariffs on hundreds of food products. Kelly O’Grady explains what to expect with your holiday grocery bill.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump promises to send $2,000 tariff dividend checks ‘probably the middle of next year, a little bit later than that’ | Fortune

    [ad_1]

    President Donald Trump promised on Monday that his administration will begin issuing $2,000 “tariff dividend” checks to Americans around the middle of 2026, the most specific timetable he has offered yet on a proposal that can’t seem to find a home within a campaign-esque promise, economic argument and political provocation.

    “We’re going to be issuing dividends later on, somewhere prior to … probably the middle of next year, a little bit later than that,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office, according to Axios. The payments, he said, would go to “individuals of moderate income, middle income.”

    The commitment marks an escalation from Trump’s earlier, vaguer assertions that tariffs are generating enough money to fund direct payments to American households. But turning the idea into actual checks is far more complicated than his easy-going rhetoric suggests.

    Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent made that clear over the weekend, saying on Fox News that the administration “needs legislation” to distribute any such dividend. 

    “We will see,” he added. Bessent also implied that the structure could take forms other than a check — for instance, a tax rebate — signaling uncertainty inside the administration about what Trump’s proposal even is.

    The math is another obstacle. A $2,000-per-person dividend, even if limited to Americans with low or middle incomes, would cost well over the $200 billion that Trump’s tariffs have brought in. If the checks resembled the COVID-era stimulus structure — which went to adults and children alike— the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates the price tag could reach $600 billion. That would mean that Trump’s tariffs would be a net $400 billion negative for the U.S. in 2026, based on current projections. 

    And the future of that revenue is itself uncertain. The Supreme Court is expected to rule within months on whether Trump exceeded his authority when he imposed sweeping tariffs by invoking national emergency powers. So far, both conservative and liberal supreme court justices have seemed skeptical of his arguments. If the Court rules against him, the administration may have to somehow refund billions in collected duties to importers, which would be the opposite of Trump’s promised “dividend.” Trump argues the stakes are existential, claiming a loss could cost the U.S. $3 trillion in refunds and lost investment.

    The White House did not immediately respond to Fortune’s request for comment.

    Still, Trump continues to present tariffs as an all-purpose economic engine: a way to protect U.S. factories, pressure foreign governments, strengthen the federal budget, and now, finance what he has described as a populist windfall. Trump and the Republican party broadly have been focused on winning voters’ favor back on “affordability” ever since Democrats’ swept elections earlier this month. The President even said on Friday that he would roll back tariffs on beef, coffee, tropical fruits and commodities, even as he continues to insist that tariffs don’t raise prices. 

    “Affordability is a lie when used by the Dems. It is a complete CON JOB,” he wrote Friday on Truth Social. 

    [ad_2]

    Eva Roytburg

    Source link

  • Fact check: Is Walmart’s Thanksgiving deal cheaper under Trump than Biden?

    [ad_1]

    Facing falling consumer confidence and widespread concern about inflation, President Donald Trump said a Walmart Thanksgiving dinner package shows his policies are lowering prices.

    Trump used the talking point in a Nov. 10 interview with Fox News’ Laura Ingraham. Days earlier, Trump referred to Walmart during a Nov. 6 dinner with Central Asia leaders, and said, “When you look at a 25% reduction in costs for Thanksgiving between Biden and me … that’s a tremendous number.”

    Trump, who campaigned on a promise to tackle inflation, has pushed back — sometimes misleadingly — against discussions of grocery prices increasing on his watch. His Walmart example misleads by pointing to one corporate offering as evidence of grocery prices falling overall. 

    This year, Walmart is advertising a package of Thanksgiving dinner ingredients for $40. That is $15 less than the Thanksgiving grocery package it promoted in 2024. But the 27% price drop is not from lower-priced goods. It’s because some items were removed or downsized from the 2025 dinner promotion.

    Even so, a retail expert warned against relying on one large retailer’s prices to tell a broader story. Any store can charge less for items for reasons other than a decline in wholesale costs, including courting inflation-weary consumers. A grocer can also offer certain items as “loss leaders,” which means the company accepts losses on some items and makes up the difference from customers’ purchases of other, higher-margin items.

    The White House did not respond to an inquiry for this article.

    Comparing the 2024 and 2025 Walmart Thanksgiving packages

    Several items were consistent in Walmart’s 2024 and 2025 Thanksgiving promotions: turkey, bread rolls, canned corn, gravy mix, pie crust, pumpkin, evaporated milk and potatoes. Other 2025 food items were newly added: Stove Top brand turkey stuffing, baby carrots, canned green beans and macaroni and cheese.

    However, some items that had been included in the 2024 meal were either eliminated or downsized in this year’s promotion. 

    Items that were removed included chicken broth; fresh onions and celery; poultry seasoning; Marie Callender’s pecan pie; frozen whipped topping; mini marshmallows; Jiffy Corn muffin mix; and three bags of sweet potatoes. Three items also were downsized: cranberries (from a 14 ounce can to 12 ounces of fresh berries), mushroom soup (two cans to one) and crispy fried onions (from 6 ounces of French’s to 4.5 ounces of Kinder’s).

    We used Walmart’s website to calculate the value of the items added to, subtracted from and downsized in the 2025 basket. The prices were as of Nov. 12 and included sale prices reported that day.

    In all, the additions to the 2025 basket totaled $7.79, while the subtractions and downsized products totaled $24.35. This means the package declined in value by $16.56.

    The $16.56 decline in value is roughly comparable to the $15 price reduction for the 2025 basket. The price decline can be attributed to fewer products and smaller volumes, rather than lower food costs.

    “It is very unlikely that a typical household’s Thanksgiving shopping trip costs them 25% less than last year, unless they are feeding 25% fewer people or people are eating 25% less,” said Christopher Conlon, an economist at New York University’s Stern School of Business. 

    Federal price data shows that grocery prices are up almost 1.9% since Trump took office, with a few items — including eggs and bread — falling but others rising, including meats, coffee and sweets.

    Even if Walmart’s Thanksgiving package had decreased price on an apples-to-apples (or pumpkin-to-pumpkin) basis, that wouldn’t be proof that grocery prices are lower, Conlon said. Any company can lower prices on certain goods as a marketing tactic — especially a company as big as Walmart, which can subsidize lower prices on some goods with higher prices on others.

    Holiday packages such as Walmart’s do not “provide an accurate measure of year-on-year price changes but instead signal to consumers, ‘Shop here if you’re worried about prices,’” Conlon said. 

    Our ruling

    Trump said Walmart’s 2025 package of Thanksgiving dinner ingredients shows a “25% reduction in costs for Thanksgiving between Biden and me.”

    Trump referred to selections of Thanksgiving dinner groceries that Walmart promoted for $55 in 2024 and $40 this year, a 27% decline. 

    However, the 2024 and 2025 grocery packages are not identical. The $15 price decline is not from lower food prices; it is because some items were removed or downsized from the 2025 dinner promotion. Customers are paying less because they are getting less.

    Even if the Walmart comparison had been apples-to-apples, it alone would not be proof that grocery prices broadly have decreased by 25%. Companies can offer some items for less to get customers in the door and then make up the loss on higher-margin products purchased elsewhere in the store.

    The Walmart dinner package’s price did fall by about 25%, but not because of lower food prices. We rate the statement Mostly False.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Nearly a quarter of U.S. households live paycheck to paycheck, report finds

    [ad_1]

    A growing share of lower-income Americans are struggling to get by financially as their wages fail to keep up with inflation, according to a recent analysis. 

    Roughly 29% of lower-income households are living paycheck to paycheck, up slightly from 2024 and from 27.1% in 2023, data from the Bank of America Institute shows. The financial firm defines that as spending more than 95% of household income on necessities such as housing, gasoline, groceries, utility bills and internet service. 

    In 2025, nearly a quarter of all U.S. households lived paycheck to paycheck, Bank of America estimates. Several factors explain why many people are falling behind.

    First, the nation’s inflation rate this year has edged up to an annual rate of 3% after dipping to 2.3% in April. The rise in consumer prices this year is well below their pandemic-era peak of 9.1% in 2022, but remains above the Federal Reserve’s target rate of 2%. 

    “Inflation is picking back up again, and cost increases are picking back up again,” said Joe Wadford, an economist at the Bank of America Institute, which recently examined the financial pressures facing Americans by income. “That’s definitely going to put some renewed pressure on those households.”

    Second, the cost of groceries and other essentials is continuing to rise as lower-wage workers see their paychecks and purchasing power stagnate. In October, wages for lower-income households were up only 1% from a year ago, according to Bank of America deposit data. 

    “The gap between their wages and expenses has just continued to widen since the beginning of the year,” Wadford said. “When the cost of living is increasing 3% but your wages are only increasing 1%, you’re just going to really struggle to keep up.”

    Lower-wage workers experienced strong wage growth during the pandemic and subsequent economic recovery, but that rise has slowed sharply since late 2022, according to Elise Gould, senior economist at the Economic Policy Institute. One factor weighing on wage growth — a decline in job openings and the rate at which workers are leaving their jobs.

    “When people aren’t looking for other offers or quitting, that is going to cause wage growth to slow,” she said. 

    While lower-income households are struggling to scrape by, middle- and higher-income households are on firmer financial footing, buoyed by stronger wage growth. This group has seen little to no increase in the share of households living paycheck to paycheck, the Bank of America Institute found. 

    “These higher-income cohorts are more able to absorb the recent reacceleration in inflation due to their outsized wage growth,” Wadford wrote in the report.

    That bifurcation is fueling what economists refer to as the “K-shaped economy,” a term experts use to describe the divergence in spending and financial health between wealthier Americans and people with more modest incomes. 

    Gould also noted that many low-income Americans are unbanked and that Bank of America’s findings, which are drawn from an analysis of its depositor data, may not fully capture the impact of slowing wage growth on poor households.

    “You’re missing some of the bottom end and how much pain [and] economic distress they may be feeling,” she said.

    Edited by

    Alain Sherter

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • America’s path out of $38 trillion national debt crisis likely involves pushing up inflation and ‘eroding Fed independence,’ says JPMorgan Private Bank | Fortune

    [ad_1]

    While optimistic economists argue that America can grow its way out of a debt crisis, pessimists believe the real outcome will be somewhat less popular.

    Business leaders, policymakers, and investors are growing increasingly concerned by the United States’s borrowing burden, currently sitting at $38.15 trillion. The worry isn’t necessarily the size of this debt, but rather America’s debt-to-GDP ratio—and hence, its ability to convince investors that it can reliably pay back that debt. It currently stands at about 120%.

    To reduce that ratio requires either GDP to increase or scaling down the debt. On the latter end, this could include cutting public spending. This was already tried by the Trump administration, with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) under Elon Musk claiming to have saved $214 billion.

    While those savings were drastically lower than promises made by the Tesla CEO when DOGE was first formed, and they’re a drop in the ocean of the bigger U.S. deficit picture, it does reveal the renewed focus Washington is giving to debt.

    This will be a prevailing theme for investors as well, according to JPMorgan Private Bank’s outlook for 2026. (The ban serves high net worth individuals.) The report, released today, says there are three issues investors need to bear in mind: Position for the AI revolution, get comfortable with fragmentation over globalization, and prepare for a structural shift in inflation.

    It is this final part, a shift in inflation, which is where the debt question comes in.

    JPMorgan writes: “Some market participants warn of a coming U.S. debt crisis. In the most extreme scenario, the Treasury holds an auction and buyers are nowhere to be found. We see a more subtle risk. In this scenario, instead of a sudden spike in yields, policymakers make a deliberate shift. They tolerate stronger growth and higher inflation, allowing real interest rates to fall and the debt burden to shrink over time.”

    A key snag in the plan is the toleration of higher inflation: After all, this is the remit of the Federal Reserve’s Open Market Committee (FOMC), which is tasked with keeping inflation as close to 2% as possible. While the FOMC could be swayed to take a broader view than its dual mandate of stable prices and maximum employment if a national debt crisis impacted these factors, it may need more than arguments from politicians.

    The method of allowing the debt burden to shrink thanks to lower rates is called financial repression, and could have knock-on effects on other parts of the economy over time. For example, Fortune reported over the weekend that America’s housing crisis happened, in part, due to a period of sustained low rates after the financial crisis.

    To orchestrate this repression could take some maneuvering, JPMorgan says: “We could see a less straightforward path to reduce the U.S. government’s debt load. Policymakers could erode Fed independence and effectively inflate the debt away by driving a stronger nominal growth environment characterized by higher inflation and, over the near term at least, lower real interest rates.”

    The less popular route

    Economists have previously described the looming debt crisis as a game of “chicken” to Fortune, as one administration passes the issue on to the next without plucking up the courage to address fundamental spending or revenue-raising changes.

    With an ageing American population, any government move to scale back social and healthcare spending would be likely be unpopular enough to prevent it from coming to fruition, the bank says. Likewise, increasing taxes are a sure-fire way to turn off voters.

    The report adds: “U.S. tax collections as a share of GDP are near the low end among OECD nations, suggesting ample capacity—if not the political will—to raise tax revenue to reduce debt. Similarly, mandatory spending on entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare could be curtailed to ‘bend the curve,’ as economists refer to efforts to slow the pace of future spending growth. But those options may prove politically unpalatable.”

    That said, the Trump administration has mustered some “peculiar” proposals for increasing revenue, without too much pushback from the public. One option is foreign cash, with the president claiming his “gold card” visa scheme could generate up to $50 trillion by selling cards to would-be American citizens at a price tag of $5 million apiece. However, America is already home to the majority of the world’s millionaires and the U.S. may struggle to find individuals who could afford such a card.

    Then, of course, there are tariffs, which raked in a record $31 billion in August. Debate is rife about whether U.S. consumers will end up ultimately paying for the policy, or whether the cost will be “eaten” by foreign firms. With a lack of data during the government shutdown, there’s no way to see whether that inflationary pressure is being passed through yet.

    The good news is, “at the moment, investors seem comfortable financing the U.S. government’s debt,” the outlook report added. At the time of writing, U.S. 30-year treasury yields sit at 4.7%, similar to where they began 2025, suggesting buyers of American borrowing are not yet demanding higher premiums to be enticed.

    JPMorgan adds: “U.S. Treasury bond buyers have been lining up, their demand on average 2.6x greater than supply. But the growing debt-to-GDP ratio of nearly 120% of GDP is troubling to most investors and economists. Solving the problem will be tricky.”

    [ad_2]

    Eleanor Pringle

    Source link

  • Americans still struggling after weeks without federal food aid: “It’s either food or lights”

    [ad_1]

    Economic promises helped Donald Trump get re-elected. Now, he has an affordability problem, and his administration is facing backlash from consumers over the cost of living. Ali Bauman has more on efforts to bring relief.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Workers turn to ‘polyworking’ to combat frozen salaries and inflation

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK (AP) — As workers face frozen salaries, inflation and fear of layoffs, some have decided to branch out from their traditional careers. They’re taking on side jobs to bring in additional income and provide a backup plan should they find themselves out of work, or adding second, third and sometimes fourth jobs — what some call “polyworking” — to the mix.

    Take Katelyn Cusick, 29. She beautifies displays as a visual merchandiser for Patagonia at her full-time job. Then she works a side gig managing social media influencers for a German shoe brand for 10 to 15 hours per week. She also has an Etsy shop where she sells paintings. If that wasn’t enough, she ushers at concerts in the San Francisco Bay Area — a way to see live shows for free.

    “Every day is different and every day feels like a new day,” Cusick said. “That is ultimately why I started doing all these side hustles, just because I wanted to switch it up. I don’t want to just do the same thing every day.”

    The extra income also helps her pay her student loans and manage the high cost of living, a welcome assist since wages at her full-time job have stayed flat for several years, she said.

    Some are drawn to side jobs because of instability in their workplace, or the perception that they may lose their income. Still others, reluctant to trust one employer to provide a steady job that lasts, are supplementing their main roles with gig work on apps such as Uber and Grubhub.

    This article is part of AP’s Be Well coverage, focusing on wellness, fitness, diet and mental health. Read more Be Well.

    “We have seen stagnant salaries, we’ve seen inflation, we’ve seen the cost of living overall increasing, even beyond our inflation measures,” said Alexandrea Ravenelle, sociologist and gig economy researcher at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. “So people are looking for ways to supplement and to build themselves a little bit of a safety net.”

    Some are creating “portfolio careers” where they work a variety of jobs, each building different valuable skills. In Cusick’s case, side work keeps her social media marketing skills current.

    “Rather than having one job that you can have for many, many years and thinking about your career progression as a linear pathway, some people are putting together multiple side hustles based on their skills and interests and making the money work by having multiple revenue streams,” said Elaine Chen, director of the Derby Entrepreneurship Center at Tufts University.

    Career experts and those with side jobs share tips on how to get started and what to avoid if you’re considering branching out from your 9-to-5.

    Follow a passion

    If you’re embarking on a side business on top of a full-time job, consider picking something you’re naturally interested in, since you’ll spend a lot of free time on the venture.

    “You have to love it,” Chen said. “Usually it is something that the person is really passionate about.”

    For Josie White, 31, that passion was mental health. After struggling with schizoaffective disorder and finding effective treatment, she wanted to help others who have mental health challenges feel less alone.

    While working full-time as a fundraiser for Shelter the Homeless, a nonprofit organization in Salt Lake City, White decided to pursue public speaking on the side and began looking for opportunities to address groups and conferences where she could share her own experiences with mental illness “to reassure people that there is hope and a light at the end of the tunnel.”

    Be realistic about money

    Launching a side hustle may require initial investment, and it can take a considerable amount of time before it generates income.

    When White started her side business, she began by offering her speaking services as an unpaid volunteer. She landed some gigs training nonprofit staff and speaking about fundraising, which wasn’t her original goal, but those opportunities helped her gain experience.

    Over the past year she’s booked 10 speaking engagements, and four of those will be paid, she said. She’s taken the money she earned so far and re-invested it into developing her public speaking skills.

    “The goal is ultimately to get paid, but right now I’m putting in the legwork to reach that,” White said. “It’s starting to snowball.”

    Know the risks of gig work

    Some side jobs, such as gig work delivering groceries or driving passengers, may generate income right away.

    Tom Ritter of Syracuse, New York, was supplementing his income as a workforce management specialist at a nonprofit by making deliveries for Instacart and Spark, Walmart’s delivery platform, on top of his full-time job. The side work helped him pay his bills, especially when he recently lost his day job.

    “For me, even that extra couple hundred dollars a month went a long way, and it still does,” Ritter, 39, said.

    Ravenelle cautioned against relying too heavily on gig work for income. It can be hard to transition back to full-time, permanent jobs, where workers typically wait two weeks or more for a first paycheck, and gig work carries a stigma among some employers, she said.

    Plus, if gig workers are earning good wages, the platforms will typically change the algorithms so they earn less money, Ravenelle said. “The house always wins when it comes to the gig platforms,” she said.

    Be skeptical

    Once people are looking for side jobs, they should be cautious if an opportunity found online seems too good to be true. Some online influencers promote business ideas that are more akin to scams.

    In Ravanelle’s research she’s spoken with people who saw online videos about making money selling microgreens.

    “They thought they could make thousands of dollars a month, working from home, growing microgreens in their kitchen, and then selling them to high-end restaurants,” Ravenelle said. “No. The person who sells you the grow lights and gives you the classes is the person who’s making the money.”

    Finding the time

    Starting a second job or career can dig into personal time, reducing opportunities to exercise or be with family and friends.

    White works Monday through Thursday at Shelter the Homeless, clocking 40 to 45 hours per week. With Fridays off, she spends that day practicing speaking skills or generating new business.

    “I wouldn’t describe my life as balanced,” she said. “But am I enjoying it? Yes. And I think that matters.”

    ___

    Share your stories and questions about workplace wellness at [email protected]. Follow AP’s Be Well coverage, focusing on wellness, fitness, diet and mental health at https://apnews.com/hub/be-well

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Government will release September jobs report next week

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — The Labor Department will release its numbers on September hiring and unemployment next Thursday, a month and a half late, marking the beginning of the end of a data drought caused by the 43-day federal government shutdown.

    The statistical blackout meant that the Federal Reserve, businesses, policymakers and investors have largely been in the dark about inflation, job creation, GDP growth and other measures of the U.S. economic health since late summer.

    Thomas Simons and Michael Bacolas at Jefferies, a financial firm, wrote in a commentary Friday that over 30 reports from the Labor Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Economic Analysis and Census Bureau were delayed by the political standoff.

    The Labor Department did not release its weekly report on the number of Americans signing up for unemployment benefits for seven straight weeks. That jobless claims report is seen as a potential early indicator of where the labor market is headed.

    The Labor Department did release its consumer price index for September — the most popular measurement of inflation — nine days late on Oct. 24. The government made an exception for that report because of its urgency: It is used to calculate the annual cost of living adjustment for tens of millions of Americans receiving Social Security and other federal benefits.

    The interruption of federal economic statistics came at an awkward time. President Donald Trump’s policies — sweeping, ever-changing import taxes and massive deportations of people working in the United States illegally — are creating uncertainty about the economic outlook.

    And the economy has sent conflicting signals: Economic growth looked solid at midyear and unemployment has been low. But job growth has lost momentum, and inflation has remained stubbornly above the Federal Reserve’s 2% target, partly because of the impact of Trump’s tariffs.

    Jefferies’ Simons expects the September employment report to show that employers added 65,000 jobs that month — unimpressive, but up from a meager 22,000 in August. He figures that unemployment remained at a low 4.3%.

    The data cutoff has caused consternation on Wall Street and deepened divisions among Fed officials over whether to cut interest rates for a third straight time at their next meeting in December.

    This week, some Fed policymakers have suggested that a lack of data is one reason they may support holding off on another rate cut.

    As a result, fresh reports on jobs and inflation in the coming weeks and months will carry huge weight at the Fed because new numbers could help resolve disagreements between those who support another interest rate reduction and those who are opposed.

    Even with the government reopened, however, it could take a few more weeks for the data to fully recover. Earlier this week, Kevin Hassett, a top White House economist, said only a part of October’s jobs report — originally scheduled to be released Nov. 7 — will eventually be released.

    The Bureau of Labor Statistics will likely have enough data from businesses to calculate how many jobs were gained or lost last month. Much of that is submitted electronically. But a separate survey of households, which is used to calculate the unemployment rate, didn’t take place during the shutdown.

    As a result, for the first time in 77 years, the BLS may not calculate an unemployment rate for the month of October.

    Other White House officials have previously said there also won’t be an October inflation report, because the data couldn’t be gathered due to the government shutdown. That will pose a challenge for the Fed, which is seeking to determine whether inflation is headed back to 2%.

    The data interruption occurred just a couple of months after Trump fired the director of the BLS, Erika McEntarfer, after it produced employment figures Aug. 1 that he didn’t like. They showed only modest job gains in July and sharply smaller increases in May and June than previously estimated.

    Still, economists said the upcoming reports should be free from bias. Currently, there are no political appointees at the agency, after Trump withdrew his nominee to head the BLS Sept. 30.

    “The data are being produced by roughly the same set of people as in the past,” Aaron Sojourner, senior economist at the W.E. Upjohn Institute, said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump misleads on Thanksgiving dinner price comparison

    [ad_1]

    Facing falling consumer confidence and widespread concern about inflation, President Donald Trump said a Walmart Thanksgiving dinner package shows his policies are lowering prices.

    Trump used the talking point in a Nov. 10 interview with Fox News’ Laura Ingraham. Days earlier, Trump referred to Walmart during a Nov. 6 dinner with Central Asia leaders, and said, “When you look at a 25% reduction in costs for Thanksgiving between Biden and me … that’s a tremendous number.”

    Trump, who campaigned on a promise to tackle inflation, has pushed back — sometimes misleadingly — against discussions of grocery prices increasing on his watch. His Walmart example misleads by pointing to one corporate offering as evidence of grocery prices falling overall. 

    This year, Walmart is advertising a package of Thanksgiving dinner ingredients for $40. That is $15 less than the Thanksgiving grocery package it promoted in 2024. But the 27% price drop is not from lower-priced goods. It’s because some items were removed or downsized from the 2025 dinner promotion.

    Even so, a retail expert warned against relying on one large retailer’s prices to tell a broader story. Any store can charge less for items for reasons other than a decline in wholesale costs, including courting inflation-weary consumers. A grocer can also offer certain items as “loss leaders,” which means the company accepts losses on some items and makes up the difference from customers’ purchases of other, higher-margin items.

    The White House did not respond to an inquiry for this article.

    Comparing the 2024 and 2025 Walmart Thanksgiving packages

    Several items were consistent in Walmart’s 2024 and 2025 Thanksgiving promotions: turkey, bread rolls, canned corn, gravy mix, pie crust, pumpkin, evaporated milk and potatoes. Other 2025 food items were newly added: Stove Top brand turkey stuffing, baby carrots, canned green beans and macaroni and cheese.

    However, some items that had been included in the 2024 meal were either eliminated or downsized in this year’s promotion. 

    Items that were removed included chicken broth; fresh onions and celery; poultry seasoning; Marie Callender’s pecan pie; frozen whipped topping; mini marshmallows; Jiffy Corn muffin mix; and three bags of sweet potatoes. Three items also were downsized: cranberries (from a 14 ounce can to 12 ounces of fresh berries), mushroom soup (two cans to one) and crispy fried onions (from 6 ounces of French’s to 4.5 ounces of Kinder’s).

    We used Walmart’s website to calculate the value of the items added to, subtracted from and downsized in the 2025 basket. The prices were as of Nov. 12 and included sale prices reported that day.

    In all, the additions to the 2025 basket totaled $7.79, while the subtractions and downsized products totaled $24.35. This means the package declined in value by $16.56.

    The $16.56 decline in value is roughly comparable to the $15 price reduction for the 2025 basket. The price decline can be attributed to fewer products and smaller volumes, rather than lower food costs.

    “It is very unlikely that a typical household’s Thanksgiving shopping trip costs them 25% less than last year, unless they are feeding 25% fewer people or people are eating 25% less,” said Christopher Conlon, an economist at New York University’s Stern School of Business. 

    Federal price data shows that grocery prices are up almost 1.9% since Trump took office, with a few items — including eggs and bread — falling but others rising, including meats, coffee and sweets.

    Even if Walmart’s Thanksgiving package had decreased price on an apples-to-apples (or pumpkin-to-pumpkin) basis, that wouldn’t be proof that grocery prices are lower, Conlon said. Any company can lower prices on certain goods as a marketing tactic — especially a company as big as Walmart, which can subsidize lower prices on some goods with higher prices on others.

    Holiday packages such as Walmart’s do not “provide an accurate measure of year-on-year price changes but instead signal to consumers, ‘Shop here if you’re worried about prices,’” Conlon said. 

    Our ruling

    Trump said Walmart’s 2025 package of Thanksgiving dinner ingredients shows a “25% reduction in costs for Thanksgiving between Biden and me.”

    Trump referred to selections of Thanksgiving dinner groceries that Walmart promoted for $55 in 2024 and $40 this year, a 27% decline. 

    However, the 2024 and 2025 grocery packages are not identical. The $15 price decline is not from lower food prices; it is because some items were removed or downsized from the 2025 dinner promotion. Customers are paying less because they are getting less.

    Even if the Walmart comparison had been apples-to-apples, it alone would not be proof that grocery prices broadly have decreased by 25%. Companies can offer some items for less to get customers in the door and then make up the loss on higher-margin products purchased elsewhere in the store.

    The Walmart dinner package’s price did fall by about 25%, but not because of lower food prices. We rate the statement Mostly False.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Food insecurity around the U.S. has risen this year, survey finds

    [ad_1]

    The share of Americans reporting trouble affording food is rising this year amid persistently high grocery costs, according to a recent report from Purdue University.

    Roughly 14% of U.S. households reported food insecurity on average between January and October, up from 12.5% in 2024, according to the latest data from Purdue’s Center for Food Demand Analysis and Sustainability.

    While the prevalence of food insecurity around the U.S. fluctuates month to month, the overall rate had been declining since 2022, when an average of 15.4% of households were food insecure as inflation hit 40-year highs following the pandemic. 

    Although the pace of inflation has declined since 2022, food insecurity is likely rising because food prices remain far above pre-pandemic levels, according to Poonam Gupta, a research associate at the Urban Institute, a think tank in Washington, D.C.

    “Even though inflation slowed a lot this year, we’re nowhere near the amount that we were spending on food even just a couple of years ago,” she said.

    Gupta also said more Americans could struggle to put food on the table in 2026, with an estimated 2.4 million SNAP recipients potentially losing benefits due to new work requirements in the Republican-backed “big, beautiful” tax and spending bill signed into law in July by President Trump. 

    The Purdue researchers define food insecurity as some members of a household at times not being able to afford a balanced meal, as well as occasionally having to skip a meal or eating less for financial reasons. 

    Purdue’s survey has become one of the few remaining national measures of food insecurity, since the U.S. Department of Agriculture canceled its annual Household Food Security survey in September, which had been conducted since 2001.

    In scrapping the USDA assessment of food insecurity, the Trump administration said in September that the survey was “redundant, costly, politicized and extraneous.”

    But researchers told CBS News that the government data was widely respected. Craig Gundersen, a Baylor University economics professor who has studied food insecurity for 30 years, called the USDA survey the “gold standard measure.” 

    Joseph Balagtas, director of Purdue’s Center for Food Demand Analysis, said the school surveys about 1,200 adults a month, compared to 30,000 people surveyed yearly by the USDA. 

    Even so, he said, Purdue’s findings have generally mirrored federal food security data because participants are asked identical questions and because they use statistical methods to ensure their data is representative of the general population.

    Edited by

    Alain Sherter

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump is ramping up a new effort to convince a skeptical public he can fix affordability worries

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump is adjusting his messaging strategy to win over voters who are worried about the cost of living with plans to emphasize new tax breaks and show progress on fighting inflation.

    The messaging is centered around affordability, and the push comes after inflation emerged as a major vulnerability for Trump and Republicans in Tuesday’s elections, in which voters overwhelmingly said the economy was their biggest concern.

    Democrats took advantage of concerns about affordability to run up huge margins in the New Jersey and Virginia governor races, flipping what had been a strength for Trump in the 2024 presidential election into a vulnerability going into next year’s midterm elections.

    White House officials and others familiar with their thinking requested anonymity to speak for this article in order to not get ahead of the president’s actions. They stressed that affordability has always been a priority for Trump, but the president plans to talk about it more, as he did Thursday when he announced that Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk would reduce the price of their anti-obesity drugs.

    “We are the ones that have done a great job on affordability, not the Democrats,” Trump said at an event in the Oval Office to announce the deal. “We just lost an election, they said, based on affordability. It’s a con job by the Democrats.”

    The White House is keeping up a steady drumbeat of posts on social media about prices and deals for Thanksgiving dinner staples at retailers such as Walmart, Lidl, Aldi and Target.

    “I don’t want to hear about the affordability, because right now, we’re much less,” Trump told reporters Thursday, arguing that things are much better for Americans with his party in charge.

    “The only problem is the Republicans don’t talk about it,” he said.

    The outlook for inflation is unclear

    As of now, the inflation outlook has worsened under Trump. Consumer prices in September increased at an annual rate of 3%, up from 2.3% in April, when the president first began to roll out substantial tariff hikes that suddenly burdened the economy with uncertainty. The AP Voter Poll showed the economy was the leading issue in Tuesday’s elections in New Jersey, Virginia, New York City and California.

    Grocery prices continue to climb, and recently, electricity bills have emerged as a new worry. At the same time, the pace of job gains has slowed, plunging 23% from the pace a year ago.

    The White House maintains a list of talking points about the economy, noting that the stock market has hit record highs multiple times and that the president is attracting foreign investment. Trump has emphasized that gasoline prices are coming down, and maintained that gasoline is averaging $2 a gallon, but AAA reported Thursday that the national average was $3.08, about two cents lower than a year ago.

    “Americans are paying less for essentials like gas and eggs, and today the Administration inked yet another drug pricing deal to deliver unprecedented health care savings for everyday Americans,” said White House spokesman Kush Desai.

    Trump gets briefed about the economy by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and other officials at least once a week and there are often daily discussions on tariffs, a senior White House official said, noting Trump is expected to do more domestic travel next year to make his case that he’s fixing affordability.

    But critics say it will be hard for Trump to turn around public perceptions on affordability.

    “He’s in real trouble and I think it’s bigger than just cost of living,” said Lindsay Owens, executive director of Groundwork Collaborative, a liberal economic advocacy group.

    Owens noted that Trump has “lost his strength” as voters are increasingly doubtful about Trump’s economic leadership compared to Democrats, adding that the president doesn’t have the time to turn around public perceptions of him as he continues to pursue broad tariffs.

    New hype about income tax cuts ahead of April

    There will be new policies rolled out on affordability, a person familiar with the White House thinking said, declining to comment on what those would be. Trump on Thursday indicated there will be more deals coming on drug prices. Two other White House officials said messaging would change — but not policy.

    A big part of the administration’s response on affordability will be educating people ahead of tax season about the role of Trump’s income tax cuts in any refunds they receive in April, the person familiar with planning said. Those cuts were part of the sprawling bill Republicans muscled through Congress in July.

    This individual stressed that the key challenge is bringing prices down while simultaneously having wages increase, so that people can feel and see any progress.

    There’s also a bet that the economy will be in a healthier place in six months. With Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell’s term ending in May, the White House anticipates the start of consistent cuts to the Fed’s benchmark interest rate. They expect inflation rates to cool and declines in the federal budget deficit to boost sentiment in the financial markets.

    But the U.S. economy seldom cooperates with a president’s intentions, a lesson learned most recently by Trump’s predecessor, Democrat Joe Biden, who saw his popularity slump after inflation spiked to a four-decade high in June 2022.

    The Trump administration maintains it’s simply working through an inflation challenge inherited from Biden, but new economic research indicates Trump has created his own inflation challenge through tariffs.

    Since April, Harvard University economist Alberto Cavallo and his colleagues, Northwestern University’s Paola Llamas and Universidad de San Andres’ Franco Vazquez, have been tracking the impact of the import taxes on consumer prices.

    In an October paper, the economists found that the inflation rate would have been drastically lower at 2.2%, had it not been for Trump’s tariffs.

    The administration maintains that tariffs have not contributed to inflation. They plan to make the case that the import taxes are helping the economy and dismiss criticisms of the import taxes as contributing to inflation as Democratic talking points.

    The fate of Trump’s country-by-country tariffs is currently being decided by the Supreme Court, where justices at a Wednesday hearing seemed dubious over the administration’s claims that tariffs were essentially regulations and could be levied by a president without congressional approval. Trump has maintained at times that foreign countries pay the tariffs and not U.S. citizens, a claim he backed away from slightly Thursday.

    “They might be paying something,” he said. “But when you take the overall impact, the Americans are gaining tremendously.”

    _____

    Associated Press writers Will Weissert and Michelle L. Price contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • 2 Federal Reserve officials oppose an interest rate cut in December

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — Two Federal Reserve officials expressed opposition Wednesday to another interest rate cut at the central bank’s next meeting in December, further muddying the outlook for the Fed’s next steps.

    The remarks by Susan Collins, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, and Raphael Bostic, president of the Atlanta Fed, suggest that the central bank’s rate-setting committee could be tilting against what had been an expected third straight cut next month.

    The officials cited several reasons for keeping rates unchanged, after a reduction in September and in October. They argued that inflation is stubbornly elevated and has been above the Fed’s 2% target for nearly five years, while the economy is resilient and doesn’t appear to need more rate cuts. The job market is stumbling, with hiring nearly at a standstill, but layoffs still seem muted, they said.

    Another factor has been the government shutdown, which has cut off the economic data the Fed relies on to discern the economy’s path. On Wednesday White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said that the jobs and inflation reports for October would likely never be released.

    “Formulating an economic outlook is challenging — and the limited data compounds the difficulty,” Collins said in a speech in Boston.

    “It will likely be appropriate to keep policy rates at the current level for some time … in this highly uncertain environment,” she added.

    That is a shift from her previous speech in October, when she expressed support for at least one more rate cut.

    Earlier Wednesday, Bostic said he remains concerned inflation is too high, and added that, “I … favor keeping the funds rate steady until we see clear evidence that inflation is again moving meaningfully toward its 2% target.” Bostic said earlier Wednesday that he will retire when his current term ends on Feb. 28, 2026.

    Their remarks come at an unusually challenging time for the Fed, with the economy facing both weak hiring and elevated inflation. Typically, the Fed would reduce its rate to encourage borrowing, spending and job gains, while it would keep it unchanged — or even raise it — to combat inflation.

    The 19 officials on the Fed’s rate-setting committee narrowly supported three rate cuts this year at their September meeting, but Chair Jerome Powell said at a news conference late last month that the committee remains divided and another cut in December was not a “foregone conclusion.”

    David Seif, chief economist for developed markets at Nomura Securities, expects the Fed will skip a rate cut in December and won’t reduce borrowing costs again until March.

    “There is a large segment of the Fed that is uncomfortable with a December cut,” Seif said.

    Collins also said that additional reductions to the Fed’s rate could, by boosting the economy, accelerate inflation.

    “Absent evidence of a notable labor market deterioration, I would be hesitant to ease policy further, especially given the limited information on inflation due to the government shutdown,” she said.

    Bostic, meanwhile, said the Atlanta Fed’s surveys of businesses show that many companies intend to raise prices next year, a sign that inflation may not cool anytime soon.

    “We cannot breezily assume inflationary pressures will quickly dissipate after a one-time bump in prices from new import duties,” Bostic said, referring to President Donald Trump’s tariffs. “Across all our information sources, I see little to no evidence that we should be sanguine about the forward trajectory of inflation.”

    Some Fed officials, such as Fed governor Stephen Miran, have argued that the tariffs will only temporarily lift prices and outside those one-time increases, inflation is cooling.

    [ad_2]

    Source link