March, 04 2025, 12:25pm EDT

Preview: Jobs Report Could Signal Rapid Turn in Labor Market
In advance of Friday’s highly anticipated jobs report, CEPR Senior Economist Dean Baker released the following statement:
“It is remarkably dangerous to treat economic policy like a reality TV show. This jobs report could signal a rapid turn in the labor market. We went from perhaps the strongest labor market in half a century to one marked by uncertainty in almost every sector. While we are not likely to pick up much of the effect of the DOGE cuts, we should see some impact, particularly on the hiring side. Many businesses have put hiring plans on hold; this is especially true in the healthcare sector, but we could see similar trends with state and local governments, universities, and other sectors that rely on federal support. It is not out of the question for job growth to be close to zero in February, and we may also see a modest uptick in the unemployment rate.”
Baker’s full analysis appears below. Read it online here.
February 2025 Jobs Preview: What to Expect in the Jobs Report
The February employment report is the first of the Trump administration. While we are not likely to pick up much of the effect of the DOGE cuts, we should see some impact. Remember, the reference period is the week/pay period that includes the 12th. This is before most of the firings went into effect, and there was no noticeable uptick in the unemployment insurance claims at that point (although we did see an uptick later in the month).
However, we are likely to see an effect on the hiring side. Many businesses have put hiring plans on hold, as they wait to see what DOGE will try to cut and what the courts will uphold. This is especially the case in the healthcare sector, which had been the largest source of job growth in the recovery, averaging over 50,000 new jobs a month in the last year. A large portion of the funding for hospitals, doctors’ fees, and nursing homes comes from Medicaid and other programs that may be in DOGE’s crosshairs. As a result, we can expect employers in the sector to be very cautious in taking on new workers.
There is a similar story with state and local governments, which also were a leading source of job growth in the last year. They are concerned that they will not be seeing federal grants that had been promised. Universities are also looking at large cutbacks in federal support and feel the need to be cautious about hiring.
With the key sectors supporting job growth sharply slowing hiring, job growth is likely to be close to zero in February. This may also lead to a modest uptick in the unemployment rate, as people entering the labor force or losing jobs find themselves unable to find new ones. The unemployment rate may tick up to 4.1 percent, or even 4.2 percent.
Sharp Slowing in Immigrant Employment
The new population controls make it difficult to do year-over-year comparisons (the data are not seasonally adjusted) of employment of immigrants, but it is possible to do a crude workaround to get ballpark numbers. If we assume that the increase in the number of people identified as Hispanic or Asian added by the population controls are immigrants, and we apply the employment-to-population ratio for immigrants to this number, we can get a rough estimate of the increase in employment that is due to the population controls.
The new population controls added a total of 2,121,000 people identified as either Hispanic or Asian. Applying the 63.0 percent employment-to-population ratio to this number implies that it added 1,336,000 to the employment number for non-native workers in January. Correcting for this, employment of non-native workers would have been 727,000 higher in January 2025 than in January 2024. The year-over-year increase had been well over 1,000,000 for most months in 2024, peaking in February at 1,694,000.
With this adjustment, the year-over-year figure is likely to show a far smaller increase in February, due both to Trump’s deportation threats and also the sharp slowing in immigration by the change in the Biden administration’s policy last June.
Wage Growth Could Slow
The strong labor market of the Biden years led to healthy wage growth, which was translating into strong real wage growth in the last year and a half as inflation slowed. The unemployment rate will still be low in February, even if there is a modest uptick, but workers fearful about future job prospects may be reluctant to push for pay increases. The monthly data on wages are erratic, but it is likely we will see some evidence of slowing wage growth in the February report.
Share of Unemployment Due to Voluntary Quits
One of the measures reflecting workers’ confidence in the state of the labor market is their willingness to leave a job before they have a new one lined up. This measure had already been relatively low given the near 4.0 percent unemployment rates we have been seeing, but that could reflect the fact that workers were relatively satisfied with their jobs after massive shifting in 2021-2023. We may see a notable fall in this number from the 13.2 percent share in January.
Hours and Productivity
The index of aggregate weekly hours fell 0.2 percent in January. This was due to a possibly weather-related (or LA fire related) reduction in the length of the average workweek. With weak employment growth, we are likely to see at best a modest increase in aggregate weekly hours in February.
This would ordinarily imply a good story for productivity growth, which has been strong since the pandemic. However, the most recent data on consumption, trade, and housing imply weak and possibly negative GDP growth for the quarter. We are still early in the quarter, but if the economy is actually shrinking, we are not likely to have a strong quarter for productivity.
Manufacturing and Construction
These highly cyclical sectors are both likely to show weakness in February. Manufacturing employment had already been trending slightly downward, losing 105,000 jobs over the last year, as high interest rates took a toll on durable goods purchases and investment.
Construction has also weakened in recent months, adding an average of just 6,000 jobs a month since September, down from 18,000 a month in the prior 12 months. Employment could turn negative in February as housing remains weak, the factory construction boom has peaked, and many projects in both the private and public sector are put on hold.
Weak Job Growth in Most Sectors
With the health care and state and local government sectors both likely showing weak growth in February, it is difficult to see what sectors can pick up the slack. Retail added a very strong 34,300 jobs in January, but this was likely a fluke of seasonal adjustment as fewer workers hired for the holiday season meant that fewer were laid off in January.
Restaurant employment may see a bounce back after being depressed by the LA fires and unusually bad weather in January. Employment in professional and technical services is likely to be weak, as many companies put hiring plans on hold. There could be a good story for the temp help sector as employers look to get additional labor without making long-term commitments.
Uncertainty Takes a Big Hit to Labor Market in February
Apart from the pandemic, most of us have probably never seen such a rapid turn in the labor market as we are likely witnessing now. We went from perhaps the strongest labor market in half a century to one marked by uncertainty in almost every sector. Perhaps we will get a clearer picture of the economy’s direction in the months ahead, but for now, much is up in the air and it is not a good environment for businesses to make plans.
The Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) was established in 1999 to promote democratic debate on the most important economic and social issues that affect people's lives. In order for citizens to effectively exercise their voices in a democracy, they should be informed about the problems and choices that they face. CEPR is committed to presenting issues in an accurate and understandable manner, so that the public is better prepared to choose among the various policy options.
(202) 293-5380LATEST NEWS
Amazon Won't Display Tariff Costs After Trump Whines to Bezos
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said all companies should be "displaying how much tariffs contribute to the total price of products."
Apr 29, 2025
Amazon said Tuesday that it would not display tariff costs next to products on its website after U.S. President Donald Trump called the e-commerce giant's billionaire founder, Jeff Bezos, to complain about the reported plan.
Citing an unnamed person familiar with Amazon's supposed plan, Punchbowl Newsreported that "the shopping site will display how much of an item's cost is derived from tariffs—right next to the product's total listed price."
Many Amazon products come from China. While U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent claimed Sunday that "there is a path" to a tariff deal with the Chinese government, Trump has recently caused global economic alarm by hitting the country with a 145% tax and imposing a 10% minimum for other nations.
According toCNN, which spoke with two senior White House officials on Tuesday, Trump's call to Bezos "came shortly after one of the senior officials phoned the president to inform him of the story" from Punchbowl.
"Of course he was pissed," one officials said of Trump. "Why should a multibillion-dollar company pass off costs to consumers?"
Asked about how the call with Bezos went, Trump told reporters: "Great. Jeff Bezos was very nice. He was terrific. He solved the problem very quickly, and he did the right thing, and he's a good guy."
Earlier Tuesday, during a briefing, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt called Amazon's reported plan "a hostile and political act," and said that "this is another reason why Americans should buy American."
Leavitt also asked why Amazon didn't have such displays during the Biden administration and held up a printed version of a 2021 Reutersreport about the company's "compliance with the Chinese government edict" to stop allowing customer ratings and reviews in China, allegedly prompted by negative feedback left on a collection President Xi Jinping's speeches and writings.
Asked whether Bezos is "still a Trump supporter," Leavitt said that she "will not speak to" the president's relationship with him.
As CNBCdetailed Tuesday:
Less than two hours after the press briefing, an Amazon spokesperson told CNBC that the company was only ever considering listing tariff charges on some products for Amazon Haul, its budget-focused shopping section.
"The team that runs our ultra low cost Amazon Haul store has considered listing import charges on certain products," the spokesperson said. "This was never a consideration for the main Amazon site and nothing has been implemented on any Amazon properties."
But in a follow-up statement an hour after that one, the spokesperson clarified that the plan to show tariff surcharges was "never approved" and is "not going to happen."
In response to Bloomberg also reporting on Amazon's claim that tariff displays were never under consideration for the company's main site, U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick wrote on social media Tuesday, "Good move."
Before Amazon publicly killed any plans for showing consumers the costs from Trump's import taxes, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said on the chamber's floor Tuesday that companies should be "displaying how much tariffs contribute to the total price of products."
"I urge more companies, particularly national retailers that compete with Amazon, to adopt this practice. If Amazon has the courage to display why prices are going up because of tariffs, so should all of our other national retailers who compete with them. And I am calling on them to do it now," he said.
Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar (D-Texas) on Tuesday framed the whole incident as an example of how "Trump has created a government by and for the billionaires," declaring: "If anyone ever doubted that Trump, and Musk, and Bezos, and the billionaires are all [on] one team, just look at what happened at Amazon today. Bezos immediately caved and walked back a plan to tell Americans how much Trump's tariffs are costing them."
Casar also claimed Bezos wants "big tax cuts and sweatheart deals," and pointed to Amazon's Prime Video paying $40 million to license a documentary about the life of First Lady Melania Trump. In addition to the film agreement, Bezos has come under fire for Amazon's $1 million donation to the president's inauguration fund.
As the owner of
The Washington Post, Bezos—the world's second-richest person, after Trump adviser Elon Musk—also faced intense criticism for blocking the newspaper's planned endorsement of the president's 2024 Democratic challenger, Kamala Harris, and demanding its opinion page advocate for "personal liberties and free markets."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Medicare for All, Says Sanders, Would Show American People 'Government Is Listening to Them'
"The goal of the current administration and their billionaire buddies is to pile on endless cuts," said one nurse and union leader. "Even on our hardest days, we won't stop fighting for Medicare for All."
Apr 29, 2025
On Tuesday, Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Democratic Reps. Pramila Jayapal of Washington and Debbie Dingell of Michigan reintroduced the Medicare for All Act, re-upping the legislative quest to enact a single-payer healthcare system even as the bill faces little chance of advancing in the GOP-controlled House of Representatives or Senate.
Hundreds of nurses, healthcare providers, and workers from across the country joined the lawmakers for a press conference focused on the bill's reintroduction in front of the Capitol on Tuesday.
"We have the radical idea of putting healthcare dollars into healthcare, not into profiteering or bureaucracy," said Sanders during the press conference. "A simple healthcare system, which is what we are talking about, substantially reduces administrative costs, but it would also make life a lot easier, not just for patients, but for nurses" and other healthcare providers, he continued.
"So let us stand together," Sanders told the crowd. "Let us do what the American people want and let us transform this country. And when we pass Medicare for All, it's not only about improving healthcare for all our people—it's doing something else. It's telling the American people that, finally, the American government is listening to them."
Under Medicare for All, the government would pay for all healthcare services, including dental, vision, prescription drugs, and other care.
"It is a travesty when 85 million people are uninsured or underinsured and millions more are drowning in medical debt in the richest nation on Earth," said Jayapal in a statement on Tuesday.
In 2020, a study in the peer-reviewed medical journal The Lancet found that a single-payer program like Medicare for All would save Americans more than $450 billion and would likely prevent 68,000 deaths every year. That same year, the Congressional Budget Office found that a single-payer system that resembles Medicare for All would yield some $650 billion in savings in 2030.
Members of National Nurses United (NNU), the nation's largest union of registered nurses, were also at the press conference on Tuesday.
In a statement, the group highlighted that the bill comes at a critical time, given GOP-led threats to programs like Medicaid.
"The goal of the current administration and their billionaire buddies is to pile on endless cuts and attacks so that we become too demoralized and overwhelmed to move forward," said Bonnie Castillo, registered nurse and executive director of NNU. "Even on our hardest days, we won't stop fighting for Medicare for All."
Per Sanders' office, the legislation has 104 co-sponsors in the House and 16 in the Senate, which is an increase from the previous Congress.
A poll from Gallup released in 2023 found that 7 in 10 Democrats support a government-run healthcare system. The poll also found that across the political spectrum, 57% of respondents believe the government should ensure all people have healthcare coverage.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Advocates Warn GOP Just Unveiled 'Most Dangerous Higher Ed Bill in US History'
"This is the boldest attempt we've seen in recent history to segregate higher education along racial and class lines," said the Debt Collective.
Apr 29, 2025
At a markup session held by a U.S. House committee on the Republican Party's recently unveiled higher education reform bill Tuesday, one Democratic lawmaker had a succinct description for the legislation.
"This bill is a dream-killer," said Rep. Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.) of the so-called Student Success and Taxpayer Savings Plan, which was introduced by Education and Workforce Committee Chairman Tim Walberg (R-Mich.) as part of an effort to find $330 billion in education programs to offset President Donald Trump's tax plan.
Tasked with helping to make $4.5 trillion in tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans possible, Walberg on Monday proposed changes to the Pell Grant program, which has provided financial aid to more than 80 million low-income students since it began in 1972. The bill would allocate more funding to the program but would also reduce the number of students who are eligible for the grants, changing the definition of a "full-time" student to one enrolled in at least 30 semester hours each academic year—up from 12 hours. Students would be cut off from the financial assistance entirely if they are enrolled less than six hours per semester.
David Baime, senior vice president for government relations for the American Association of Community Colleges, suggested the legislation doesn't account for the realities faced by many students who benefit from Pell Grants.
"These students are almost always working a substantial number of hours each week and often have family responsibilities. Pell Grants help them meet the cost of tuition and required fees," Baime toldInside Higher Ed. "We commend the committee for identifying substantial additional resources to help finance Pell, but it should not come at the cost of undermining the ability of low-income working students to enroll at a community college."
The draft bill would also end subsidized loans, which don't accrue interest when a student is still in college and gives borrowers a six-month grace period after graduation, starting in July 2026. More than 30 million borrowers currently have subsidized loans.
The proposal would also reduce the number of student loan repayment options from those offered by the Biden administration to just two, with borrowers given the option for a fixed monthly amount paid over a certain period of time or an income-based plan.
At the markup session on Tuesday, Bonamici pointed to her own experience of paying for college and law school "through a combination of grants and loans and work study and food stamps," and noted that her Republican colleagues on the committee also "graduated from college."
"And more than half of them have gone on to earn advanced degrees," said the congresswoman. "And yet those same individuals who benefited so much from accessing higher education are supporting a bill that will prevent others from doing so."
“In a time when higher ed is being attacked, this bill is another assault,” @RepBonamici calls out committee leaders for wanting to gut financial aid.
“With this bill, they will be taking that opportunity [of higher ed] away from others. This bill is a dream killer.” pic.twitter.com/UjTYvnOEKv
— Student Borrower Protection Center (@theSBPC) April 29, 2025
Democrats on the committee also spoke out against provisions that would cap loans a student can take out for graduate programs at $100,000; the Grad PLUS program has allowed students to borrow up to the cost of attendance.
The Parent PLUS program, which has been found to provide crucial help to Black families accessing higher education, would also be restricted.
"Black students, brown students, first-generation college students, first-generation Americans, will not have access to college," said Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.).
“We cannot take away access to loans, and not replace it with anything else, not make the system better. We know the outcome here—Black, brown, and poor students will not figure it out. Instead, only elite students from the 1% will continue to access education.”@RepSummerLee🙇 pic.twitter.com/oGbRH154Ed
— Student Borrower Protection Center (@theSBPC) April 29, 2025
As the Student Borrower Protection Center (SBPC) warned last week, eliminating the Grad PLUS program without also lowering the cost of graduate programs would "subject millions of future borrowers to an unregulated and predatory private student loan market, while doing little to reduce overall student debt and the need to borrow."
Aissa Canchola Bañez, policy director for SBPC, told The Hill that the draft bill is "an attack on students and working families with student loan debt."
"We've seen an array of really problematic proposals that are on the table for congressional Republicans," Canchola Bañez said. "Many of these would cause massive spikes for families with monthly student loan payments."
With the proposal, which Republicans hope to pass through reconciliation with a simple majority, the party would be "restructuring higher education for the worse," said the Debt Collective.
"It's the most dangerous higher ed bill in U.S. history," said the student loan borrowers union. "It strips the Department of Education of virtually every authority to cancel student debt. Eliminates every repayment program. Abolishes subsidized loans."
"This is the boldest attempt we've seen in recent history to segregate higher education along racial and class lines," the group added. "We have to push back."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular