One additional note you may find interesting: a new study finds immigrants in care work leads to a substantial decrease in death in the elderly population. https://www.nber.org/papers/w34791
It's like this everywhere — attacking the clean energy production, when his SV donors are desperate to get their hands on anything that produces electricity, no matter the cost; embracing anti-vaxxing, and then when too many white babies start to die — "no not like that"; all these farmers protesting after they vote for him, like a clockwork.
MARYSE, 56, HAS BEEN A HOME CARE WORKER in the United States ever since she moved here from Haiti sixteen years ago. Over the years, she estimates, she’s cared for more than two dozen people. Most have been seniors in physical or cognitive decline—among them, a Purple Heart recipient who had served in the Army and a former pilot who had flown missions over France and Africa during World War II. She has also cared for younger people with physical disabilities, including one who had cerebral palsy and another who had suffered severe head trauma in a car accident.
That kind of producerist kitsch could be found in back copies of government issued farming advisories when I was young. It made me properly nostalgic, it did.
"...breathing a sigh of relief as the January job numbers came in much higher than expected...."
Job numbers always need revision in the months to come, but I will not be surprised to see extensive revisions of this particular number. In the last few days, Trumps flunkies have been trying to lower expectations, so they saw bad news coming. And if the news was bad enough, then there is a fair chance that they decided simply to lie.
Why not? They lie about everything.
Let's see what independent job reports say in the weeks to come.
Thanks for the illustration. I would have thought you made it up as a bad joke but apparently it's real. Not just 1930s but blatantly... what's the word? oh yeah... Aryan. Considering the huge role of cultural themes in politics, this may be the most significant part of your post.
Given what happened the last time the BLS came out with a disappointing number oughtn't we be a little skeptical of any numbers coming out of there that come in better than expected.
Those January numbers are monthly numbers that are volatile and always subject to change. Probably more so coming from the Trump BLS.
The annual numbers in the report are pretty solid and extremely bad. So minimizing the annual numbers in view of the monthly numbers is dishonest at the least.
And as for that “Trump was supposed” thing mid-post: He was supposed to per what or whom? His lying self? His enablers? Fully supportive Big Media, nearly always happy to echo GOP—not just Trump—lies? Certainly didn’t come from anyone sane who’d been paying attention…
I don't really understand how you are engaging with this. You seem to totally misunderstand the meaning and intent of the piece. I did not in any way minimize the yearly numbers. I pointed out that the annual numbers were bad and that the monthly numbers were bad sans care work. And I'm obviously referring to the purported ideas of Trumpist propaganda; I'm not giving it any credence. As I wrote, I'm pointing out the irony of the discrepancy between their imagined economic future and the reality. This is a really puzzling response. I'm saying just about exactly what you are saying.
I was not so much engaging with you directly as to provide some additional context for anyone who didn’t read about these numbers personally. A problem with the issue, but not the post, is that as part of for the course, the establishment media are portraying these numbers as better as they are; there’s still a tendency for people to treat establishment media reporting on the big issues as being in any way trustworthy which is wrong and has proven dangerous over the years.
No issue with anything you wrote; trying to be additive.
One additional note you may find interesting: a new study finds immigrants in care work leads to a substantial decrease in death in the elderly population. https://www.nber.org/papers/w34791
I had exactly the same thought seeing those numbers, John. It goes to show how utterly quixotic in a way the Trump project is.
It's like this everywhere — attacking the clean energy production, when his SV donors are desperate to get their hands on anything that produces electricity, no matter the cost; embracing anti-vaxxing, and then when too many white babies start to die — "no not like that"; all these farmers protesting after they vote for him, like a clockwork.
From https://substack.com/home/post/p-187274058, which I heartily recommend:
MARYSE, 56, HAS BEEN A HOME CARE WORKER in the United States ever since she moved here from Haiti sixteen years ago. Over the years, she estimates, she’s cared for more than two dozen people. Most have been seniors in physical or cognitive decline—among them, a Purple Heart recipient who had served in the Army and a former pilot who had flown missions over France and Africa during World War II. She has also cared for younger people with physical disabilities, including one who had cerebral palsy and another who had suffered severe head trauma in a car accident.
That kind of producerist kitsch could be found in back copies of government issued farming advisories when I was young. It made me properly nostalgic, it did.
"...breathing a sigh of relief as the January job numbers came in much higher than expected...."
Job numbers always need revision in the months to come, but I will not be surprised to see extensive revisions of this particular number. In the last few days, Trumps flunkies have been trying to lower expectations, so they saw bad news coming. And if the news was bad enough, then there is a fair chance that they decided simply to lie.
Why not? They lie about everything.
Let's see what independent job reports say in the weeks to come.
I think they were mostly concerned with how bad the 2025 numbers were gonna look
Thanks for the illustration. I would have thought you made it up as a bad joke but apparently it's real. Not just 1930s but blatantly... what's the word? oh yeah... Aryan. Considering the huge role of cultural themes in politics, this may be the most significant part of your post.
Given what happened the last time the BLS came out with a disappointing number oughtn't we be a little skeptical of any numbers coming out of there that come in better than expected.
Trust but verify.
Those January numbers are monthly numbers that are volatile and always subject to change. Probably more so coming from the Trump BLS.
The annual numbers in the report are pretty solid and extremely bad. So minimizing the annual numbers in view of the monthly numbers is dishonest at the least.
And as for that “Trump was supposed” thing mid-post: He was supposed to per what or whom? His lying self? His enablers? Fully supportive Big Media, nearly always happy to echo GOP—not just Trump—lies? Certainly didn’t come from anyone sane who’d been paying attention…
I don't really understand how you are engaging with this. You seem to totally misunderstand the meaning and intent of the piece. I did not in any way minimize the yearly numbers. I pointed out that the annual numbers were bad and that the monthly numbers were bad sans care work. And I'm obviously referring to the purported ideas of Trumpist propaganda; I'm not giving it any credence. As I wrote, I'm pointing out the irony of the discrepancy between their imagined economic future and the reality. This is a really puzzling response. I'm saying just about exactly what you are saying.
I was not so much engaging with you directly as to provide some additional context for anyone who didn’t read about these numbers personally. A problem with the issue, but not the post, is that as part of for the course, the establishment media are portraying these numbers as better as they are; there’s still a tendency for people to treat establishment media reporting on the big issues as being in any way trustworthy which is wrong and has proven dangerous over the years.
No issue with anything you wrote; trying to be additive.
It sounded hostile.
Maybe!
These times are *very* triggering for me.
But if you read my initial post as in any way as an attack on you, that’s my failure because it absolutely was not meant as any such thing.
If I had *any* substantive issues with your writing, I wouldn’t be a paid subscriber.
Hope that’s clarifying.