Business
Commentary: The latest government inflation and GDP figures are worthless, and will be for months to come
The federal government’s monthly releases of economic statistics — especially the inflation rate and growth as tracked by gross domestic product — have long occasioned partisan preening (or denunciation) and for a general public stock-taking of the health of the economy.
Not this month. This time, they’re the occasion for doubt and confusion.
On Dec. 18, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that inflation had fallen to an annual rate of 2.7% in November, down from 3% in September and well below the 3.1% consensus of economists. And on Tuesday, the Bureau of Economic Analysis reported that real gross domestic product had shot up by a surprising 4.3% annual rate in the third quarter of 2025 ended Sept. 30.
The numbers give you meaningful information about the system, but not about how people experience their actual lives.
— Zachary Karabell
Unsurprisingly, the Trump administration and its Republican acolytes seized on the figures to boast about Trump’s economic policies. White House economic advisor Kevin Hassett proclaimed the inflation figure to be “an absolute blockbuster report.” He described the GDP figure as “a great Christmas present for the American people.”
“America is winning again,” crowed House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) after the GDP report. He called it “the direct result of congressional Republicans and President Trump delivering policies that drive growth and expand opportunity for American families and workers.”
Um, not so fast.
The economists whose jobs involve scrutinizing those statistics to glean what they really mean don’t view them as unalloyed support for Trumponomics. Quite the contrary. Many see them as artifacts of the long government shutdown, which halted the collection of data that go into those reports, severely distorting the results. Furthermore, they expect the flaws in those reports to persist well into 2026, undermining their usefulness as true economic indicators.
“You’ve got to take it with a grain of salt,” said Diane Swonk, chief economist at KPMG US, of the inflation report. “It’s confusing and it doesn’t quite square with prices that we’ve observed.”
A close examination of the GDP figures also underscores the narrow basis driving economic growth in recent months — it’s essentially the product of robust spending by wealthy consumers and massive corporate investments in AI technology. For middle- and lower-income Americans, the economic present and future don’t look anywhere as sunny as the numbers would suggest.
“The numbers give you meaningful information about the system, but not about how people experience their actual lives,” says financial analyst and economic commentator Zachary Karabell, whose 2014 book “The Leading Indicators” injected some perspective on how we interpret economic statistics and explained why our faith in them is often misplaced.
Indeed, consumer confidence has been sinking for months, according to the Conference Board. That points to an enduring question about the U.S. economy: Whose economy is it?
More than ever, it belongs to the rich, producing a “K-shaped” economy, which has been playing out in shopping patterns this holiday season, as my colleague Caroline Petrow-Cohen recently wrote.
According to Bank of America analysts, since this spring, spending by the highest-earning third of Americans has been soaring, while that of middle- and lower-income households has stagnated. In part that’s because the stock market has remained vibrant.
Since the top 20% of households as measured by income own about 87% of directly-held equities, stock market gains “tend to disproportionately benefit the higher-income cohort,” the BofA analysts noted. By contrast, “almost 30% of lower-income households appear to be living ‘paycheck to paycheck.’”
The highest-earning 10% of households now account for nearly half of all consumer spending, according to Moody’s Analytics. That’s the highest level since the data began to be collected in the 1980s, when the rich accounted for only about one-third of spending.
Job growth may already have turned negative, even if the published employment figures don’t yet show it, Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell acknowledged during a Dec. 10 news conference following the Fed’s decision to lower interest rates by 0.25 percentage points.
Non-farm payroll gains have averaged about 40,000 a month since April, Powell observed. “We think there’s an overstatement in these numbers by about 60,000,” he said. “So that would be negative 20,000 per month.”
The divergence between the gross economic statistics and the lived experience of Americans is nothing new. It was remarked on by Robert F. Kennedy Sr. in a speech in March 1968, less than three months before his nascent presidential campaign was ended by an assassin’s bullet.
“Gross national product counts air pollution and cigarette advertising, and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage,” he observed. “It counts special locks for our doors and the jails for the people who break them. It counts the destruction of the redwood and the loss of our natural wonder in chaotic sprawl. It counts napalm and counts nuclear warheads and armored cars for the police to fight the riots in our cities. … Yet the gross national product does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education or the joy of their play. … It measures neither our wit nor our courage, neither our wisdom nor our learning, neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country, it measures everything in short, except that which makes life worthwhile.”
That brings us to the specific flaws in the latest statistics.
The government shutdown, which lasted 43 days from Oct. 1 to Nov. 12, was the most important cause of gaps in the collected data for the consumer price index calculation. As Swonk noted in a social media post, cutbacks at the BLS had already reduced the staff assigned to sampling prices by 25%. That prompted the agency to substitute “imputed” numbers for hard data.
“Those cases can show up as zeros in the percent change of the release,” Swonk wrote — obviously lowering the bottom-line figure. A sampling scheduled for mid-October had to be canceled, so figures dating from August were used instead — concealing any price increases in subsequent months.
A major problem concerns housing costs, which account for about one-third of the data inputs for the CPI. Because the BLS was unable to collect rental data for October, it implied that the monthly change in rents was 0% in October — further skewing the reported CPI lower. Experts say it will take at least six months to use newly collected data to provide a reliable estimate of housing inflation.
The delay in sampling, Swonk adds, means that some seasonal price phenomena were missed. She points specifically to airfares — the originally scheduled sampling would have incorporated a pre-Thanksgiving run-up in fares, but by the time the data were collected fares had returned to a non-holiday level.
Inflation data also are incorporated into GDP estimates — the lower the inflation rate, Swonk notes, the better the GDP looks. An artificially reduced inflation rate will translate into higher reported GDP growth.
All this might have a limited economic impact — corporations, banks and academic economists generally have sources other than the government to reach their conclusions — if not for the partisan political exploitation of the numbers.
As Karabell reported in his 2014 book, Simon Kuznets, the government statistician who helped to codify the collection of government figures in the 1930s, was concerned about how politics would give the statistics a misleading social significance.
“These numbers have turned into absolute markets of the human condition,” Karabell wrote, “when they are simply statistical descriptions of specific systems.”
Economists have warned that some economic factors haven’t yet fully played out. That includes Trump’s tariffs, which in their execution have been lower than they appeared on the surface, and higher healthcare premiums, which have been forecast or announced but won’t actually become effective until 2026.
If the job market continues to weaken, that will show up more vividly in 2026. The interplay between “a surging economy and a soft labor market,” argues Joseph Brusuelas, chief economist at the business consulting firm RSM, “is likely to be the major economic narrative next year.”
A Delaware Court of Chancery judge delivered a blow to wrestling impresario Vince McMahon and other World Wrestling Entertainment officials earlier this week.
Judge J. Travis Laster, vice chancellor of the Delaware Court of Chancery, issued sanctions for “spoliation of evidence” in the shareholder lawsuit over the 2023 merger between Ultimate Fighting Championship and WWE.
Laster ruled on Tuesday that WWE executives destroyed evidence by using the auto-delete setting on the messaging app Signal, enabling potentially relevant communications to be deleted.
The ruling means the court will operate under the assumption that five potentially damaging statements are true while allowing the defendants to rebut them.
The statements, according to the ruling, include that McMahon’s decision on the merger was “influenced” by Endeavor Executive Chairman Ari Emanuel’s “promise” to provide him with a continued role at the company and to indemnify him and provide legal support as federal investigators were looking into claims of alleged sexual misconduct.
McMahon pursued a deal with Endeavor in 2022 before WWE initiated its strategic review process, and both McMahon and then-WWE President Nick Khan worked with The Raine Group, a strategic financial advisor, “to steer the process to Endeavor and away from other potential bidders,” the ruling states.
In September 2023, entertainment giant Endeavor, the parent company of UFC, acquired WWE and merged the two sports entities to form a new, publicly traded company, TKO Group Holdings, in a deal worth $21.4 billion.
A month later, a group of shareholders filed suit against McMahon and other company officials in Delaware Chancery Court, claiming McMahon orchestrated a “sham sale process.”
Representatives for McMahon, WWE and TKO were not immediately available for comment.
According to the suit, McMahon, WWE’s controlling shareholder, turned down higher offers and excluded other bidders who would have ousted him and instead chose a deal that favored Endeavor’s Emanuel, a “close friend and longtime ally,” enabling McMahon to continue running WWE and shielding him from federal investigations related to a raft of sexual misconduct claims.
The complaint also alleges that the $21.4-billion deal undervalued the company and was “far below the offers” WWE’s board could have received from other interested parties had they “made any effort to negotiate in good faith.”
The litigation is related to the 2022 investigation by WWE’s board that found that McMahon made at least $14.6 million in payments between 2006 and 2022 for “alleged misconduct.” McMahon has denied claims of misconduct.
The settlements were made to women, including WWE employees, who alleged that McMahon initiated unwanted sexual contact and coerced women into performing sexual acts on him. In one case, first reported by the Wall Street Journal, a woman claimed that McMahon sent her unsolicited nude photos of himself.
McMahon’s alleged misconduct became the subject of ongoing investigations by the Securities and Exchange Commission and the U.S. Department of Justice.
“I am confident that the government’s investigation will be resolved without any findings of wrongdoing,” McMahon said in a statement to The Times in 2023.
Last January, the SEC announced it had settled charges against McMahon alleging he had violated federal securities laws by failing to disclose a pair of settlement agreements to WWE worth $10.5 million.
McMahon agreed to pay more than $1.7 million in a civil penalty and in reimbursement to WWE, without admitting or denying the agency’s findings. Federal prosecutors also have dropped their criminal investigation.
In January 2024, McMahon resigned as executive chairman of the board of TKO Group, one day after a former WWE employee, Janel Grant, sued the company, McMahon and former head of talent relations John Laurinaitis, alleging sexual assault, trafficking and emotional abuse.
Grant claimed that McMahon agreed to pay her $3 million in exchange for her silence.
The shareholder trial is set to begin on June 8. McMahon, Emanuel, Khan, TKO President Mark Shapiro, and WWE Chief Content Officer Paul “Triple H” Levesque are expected to testify.
In a high-stakes decision that will shape California’s economy for years, air officials late Friday approved a sweeping overhaul of the state’s signature climate program, cap-and-invest.
The 10-3 vote from the California Air Resources Board determines how aggressively the Golden State will curb planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions in the years ahead — and how billions of dollars in revenue will flow through communities, businesses and public programs statewide.
Cap-and-invest was nation-leading when it launched in 2013. The program forces major polluters to pay for their share of emissions by buying allowances at auctions or being granted them for free. It uses the revenue to fund public transit projects, wildfire prevention, affordable housing, clean energy, electric vehicles and safe drinking water.
The pollution limit — or cap — declines each year, reducing the total amount of emissions in the state and helping California reach its ambitious climate targets, including 100% carbon neutrality by 2045.
The Legislature voted last year to extend cap-and-invest through 2045. Officials at the Air Resources Board then spent the last several months drafting and revising the plan voted on this week, which received considerable feedback from oil and gas companies, environmental groups, lobbyists and lawmakers all jockeying for different priorities.
Some 200 people testified in person during the marathon two-day meeting preceding the vote, and the final proposal received more than 1,000 written comments.
Industry groups warned that capping emissions too much and too quickly would push refineries out of the state and drive up already soaring energy costs. But environmentalists and other stakeholders said giving too many concessions to fossil fuel interests would defeat the program’s purpose, which is to drive down emissions along a pathway consistent with what scientists say could preserve a recognizable climate.
The program was always planned to become stricter as the years unfolded, to give businesses more time to make the stronger reductions in their emissions.
Officials were under legal, market and budgetary pressure to pass a plan without delay, and also said it’s important for California to signal market certainty.
“It is no secret that climate policy is at a crossroads — under attack by an openly hostile and well-funded opposition and upended by global economic upheaval,” CARB chair Lauren Sanchez said during the meeting. “At a moment of uncertainty at the federal and international levels, California has the opportunity to lead with consistency.”
Among the key updates to the program are the removal of 118 million pollution permits, or allowances, from the market by 2030, and 900 million after 2030. Officials say this will amount to a steep, 11% annual lowering of the cap by the end of this decade, and 7% from 2031 to 2045, in keeping with the state’s mandated targets.
Critically, however, the update will also create a new pool of 118 million allowances above the cap that polluters can apply for and receive if they invest in decarbonization projects, a program dubbed the Manufacturing Decarbonization Incentive.
The incentive program is intended to discourage regulated industries from leaving the state. Two major refineries have announced exit plans in recent years, including Valero’s Benecia refinery and Phillips 66’s Los Angeles refinery, which shut down in 2025.
But many critics — including transit, affordable housing, environmental justice and clean water groups — said this amounts to a dismantling of the program.
“CARB has proposed creating exactly 118.3 million additional allowances … outside the cap, the precise number of allowances that must be removed from the cap to keep us on track for our 2030 targets,” said Caroline Jones, a senior analyst with the nonprofit Environmental Defense Fund. “This undermines the cap’s role in actually limiting climate pollution, which is the core function of this program.”
The board approved the decarbonization incentive but committed to additional workshops and evaluations of the program before issuing any allowances for it.
Other updates include more free allowances for industrial facilities and refineries, which regulators said will help reduce pressure on gasoline prices. Critics described the free permits as subsidies for oil and gas.
The update will also shift some allowances from gas to electric utilities, and increase funding for the California Climate Credit, a rebate that appears automatically on people’s utility bills.
But perhaps most controversial is how the update will affect the program’s multibillion-dollar revenue, which flows into the state’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund each year and is distributed to various programs. Cap-and-invest has delivered $35 billion for climate projects in California since its inception.
The new incentive pool will mean the loss of $2 billion annually to the fund, or roughly half the amount it has received in recent years, according to an analysis from the Legislative Analyst’s Office.
While the Air Resources Board does not determine how the fund is divvied up — that’s the Legislature — opponents warned that this could amount to significant cuts for the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program, the Low Carbon Transit Operations Program, the SAFER drinking water program and the Community Air Protection Program, among many others that rely on revenue from cap-and-invest.
“This could create serious consequences, including a potential zeroing out of the state’s support for critical emission reduction programs,” said Phillip Fine, executive officer at the Bay Area Air District. “Striking the right balance is critical, but all consequences must be fully considered.”
It was a sentiment echoed by many who delivered comments during the board meeting.
“These additional allowances would not only endanger our emissions targets, they would also flood the auction market and depress cap-and-invest revenues,” said Pam Odell of the group Climate Action California. “These revenues fund vital programs, promote climate resilience, clean transit and transportation, and public health, especially in the most heavily exposed front-line communities.”
Some groups came out in support of the update, however, including Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric. The plan strikes a “balance between program stringency and affordability,” Fariya Ali, air and climate policy manager with PG&E, said during the meeting.
Assemblymember Jacqui Irwin (D-Thousand Oaks), who authored the bill that reauthorized the program last year, was cautiously supportive, noting that she would like to see more guardrails around the incentive program to ensure it aligns with state climate targets. But delaying the update would only create more uncertainty at a time when the Trump administration is already canceling clean energy funds and revoking California’s authority to set clean vehicle standards, she said.
“If we fail now to adopt the proposed amendments to cap-and-invest, it would be without a doubt the greatest victory that the Trump administration could possibly hope for to achieve against California’s climate policies this year,” Irwin said.
Oil and gas groups were tepid. Jodie Muller, chief executive of the Western States Petroleum Assn., said the update provides some near-term relief for refineries, but leaves too much uncertainty after 2030 to drive continued investment.
Brian McDonald, regulatory affairs manager with Marathon Petroleum Corp., said similarly that the oil company is “deeply concerned that the current proposal does not go far enough to provide the regulatory certainty needed to sustain in-state fuel production.”
In a briefing ahead of the vote, California climate economist Danny Cullenward said the update threatens both the “cap” aspect of the program by introducing the new allowance pool, and the “invest” aspect by threatening to reduce the program’s revenues.
The proposal is “being presented as a compromise when in fact it is sacrificing both of the key goals of the program,” he said.
The new plan is slated to go into effect Sept. 1.
Layoffs have continued with another tech company saying it was cutting people to enable it to use more artificial intelligence.
Groupon announced in a security filing this month that it will cut up to 400 jobs, or nearly 25% of its worldwide workforce, as part of a broader restructuring plan to make the platform AI-native. The Chicago company plans to carry out the layoffs in the coming months.
Earlier the company’s Chief Executive Officer Dušan Šenkypl had said the company “fell short of our expectations” last quarter.
Since 2022, more than 800,000 tech workers have been laid off, according to Layoffs.fyi, a website that tracks job cuts.
The surge in pink slips started in 2023, when companies that had gone on hiring sprees during the COVID-19 pandemic began to cut back. From January to April this year, U.S. tech employers announced 85,411 job cuts, up 33% from the same period last year, according to global outplacement and executive coaching firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas.
Groupon said in the filing that the decision to shift toward an AI-based company is to “better deliver on our mission, serving both customers and merchants.”
The company said the layoffs will cost it as much as $13 million, but save it more than $20 million per year.
This announcement comes as many e-commerce companies are shifting their business models to AI to reduce costs by automating many roles.
Artificial intelligence has also triggered fierce competition for top talent and is also fueling tens of thousands of layoffs this year. The result is that the class divide is widening in Silicon Valley as a tiny group of employees are landing unprecedented packages for AI skills, while many others struggle to find work.
The have-nots are doing everything that used to guarantee great jobs — refreshing resumes, optimizing LinkedIn profiles and doing interviews — but companies are much more picky these days. The tech jobless are rethinking their lives. Some are taking pay cuts, while others are leaving tech. Some are going back to study or launch startups. Some have retired.
Groupon shares, which have fallen 27% over the last 12 months, slipped 1% on Thursday to $21.20.
-
Education3 seconds agoVideo: Can California Convince Teens to Work in Construction?
-
Technology12 minutes agoBackrooms is a certified blockbuster with a $38 million opening day
-
World15 minutes agoHamas struggles to fill leadership ranks as Israel hunts Oct 7 terrorists
-
Politics20 minutes agoAnti-ICE agitator charged with allegedly biting officers during Delaney Hall clashes
-
Health27 minutes agoWhat to do if someone is having a stroke, after Jill Biden revealed debate-night fears
-
Sports30 minutes agoDispatch audio reveals what was heard inside Josh Jacobs’ home before alleged domestic violence arrest
-
Technology35 minutes agoCab-less electric trucks hit Ohio roads
-
Business42 minutes ago
Vince McMahon and others are sanctioned for destroying evidence in WWE shareholder lawsuit
