If I am unemployed and need to feed my family I'm going to work

Lutnick: Tariffs are not inflation. It is outrageous that people think tariffs are inflation. What inflation means is I'm going to go buy this tie. And I know the tie is going to cost 30 bucks. But next year I think the tie is going to cost $33. And the year after it's going to… pic.twitter.com/YkGMU79sNd

— Acyn (@Acyn) September 12, 2025

I had no idea the number was that high.

I got curious… according to ChatGPT 20 years ago there were 371 billionaires.

There are now a record 900 American billionaires which means 500 American billionaires are too poor to make this year’s Forbes 400.

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) September 12, 2025

boognish_bear said:

---

I had no idea the number was that high.

I got curious… according to ChatGPT 20 years ago there were 371 billionaires.

There are now a record 900 American billionaires which means 500 American billionaires are too poor to make this year’s Forbes 400.

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) September 12, 2025

---

It will trickle down soon!

I'm not opposed to billionaires, just always laugh at trickle down economics. This is capitalism, not socialism, you numnuts. It rewards greed, not figuring out how to pay your workers any better than you have to.

Kroger, the Cincinnati-based grocery chain, is laying off almost 1,000 corporate employees as part of an ongoing restructuring effort#MacroEdge

— MacroEdge (@MacroEdgeRes) September 12, 2025

Porteroso said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

I had no idea the number was that high.

I got curious… according to ChatGPT 20 years ago there were 371 billionaires.

There are now a record 900 American billionaires which means 500 American billionaires are too poor to make this year’s Forbes 400.

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) September 12, 2025

---

It will trickle down soon!

I'm not opposed to billionaires, just always laugh at trickle down economics. This is capitalism, not socialism, you numnuts. It rewards greed, not figuring out how to pay your workers any better than you have to.

---

Have never understood the negative attitudes towards the people that pay most of the taxes and provide most of the jobs. Those that are always angry about someone that has more than they do will never find happiness.

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

I had no idea the number was that high.

I got curious… according to ChatGPT 20 years ago there were 371 billionaires.

There are now a record 900 American billionaires which means 500 American billionaires are too poor to make this year’s Forbes 400.

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) September 12, 2025

---

It will trickle down soon!

I'm not opposed to billionaires, just always laugh at trickle down economics. This is capitalism, not socialism, you numnuts. It rewards greed, not figuring out how to pay your workers any better than you have to.

---

Have never understood the negative attitudes towards the people that pay most of the taxes and provide most of the jobs. Those that are always angry about someone that has more than they do will never find happiness.

---

Many do that, true, they compare what they have with what soneone else has.

What I am doing, is wondering if it is healthy to have wealth so concentrated, at a time when the middle class is shrinking. Today's job market aside, it is not a good situation. The economy is best when the middle class grows. I think we all know that. If we are adding ultra wealthy salaries as a tradeoff for more impoverished, it is not a good trade for society.

Porteroso said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

I had no idea the number was that high.

I got curious… according to ChatGPT 20 years ago there were 371 billionaires.

There are now a record 900 American billionaires which means 500 American billionaires are too poor to make this year’s Forbes 400.

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) September 12, 2025

---

It will trickle down soon!

I'm not opposed to billionaires, just always laugh at trickle down economics. This is capitalism, not socialism, you numnuts. It rewards greed, not figuring out how to pay your workers any better than you have to.

---

Have never understood the negative attitudes towards the people that pay most of the taxes and provide most of the jobs. Those that are always angry about someone that has more than they do will never find happiness.

---

Many do that, true, they compare what they have with what soneone else has.

What I am doing, is wondering if it is healthy to have wealth so concentrated, at a time when the middle class is shrinking. Today's job market aside, it is not a good situation. The economy is best when the middle class grows. I think we all know that. If we are adding ultra wealthy salaries as a tradeoff for more impoverished, it is not a good trade for society.

---

My problem is how people wish to "correct" wealth imbalance.

A lot of folks think letting government decide how much wealth individuals should be "allowed" to have. That is so execrably bad an idea that under no circumstances should a sane person give that any support whatsoever.

Part of me likes the idea of 'growing the middle class', were it not that the term 'middle class' is massaged and manipulated to serve political goals (like most of Biden's bills pretended to help ordinary Americans but in truth just funneled money to Democrats and Leftists and blamed everything on Trump). If you really want to help regular Americans, getting politicians out of the process is usually the best step. Giving perks to favored groups, companies and individuals is also something we should cut out, and both parties are guilty as hell of that.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

I had no idea the number was that high.

I got curious… according to ChatGPT 20 years ago there were 371 billionaires.

There are now a record 900 American billionaires which means 500 American billionaires are too poor to make this year’s Forbes 400.

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) September 12, 2025

---

It will trickle down soon!

I'm not opposed to billionaires, just always laugh at trickle down economics. This is capitalism, not socialism, you numnuts. It rewards greed, not figuring out how to pay your workers any better than you have to.

---

Have never understood the negative attitudes towards the people that pay most of the taxes and provide most of the jobs. Those that are always angry about someone that has more than they do will never find happiness.

---

Many do that, true, they compare what they have with what soneone else has.

What I am doing, is wondering if it is healthy to have wealth so concentrated, at a time when the middle class is shrinking. Today's job market aside, it is not a good situation. The economy is best when the middle class grows. I think we all know that. If we are adding ultra wealthy salaries as a tradeoff for more impoverished, it is not a good trade for society.

---

My problem is how people wish to "correct" wealth imbalance.

A lot of folks think letting government decide how much wealth individuals should be "allowed" to have. That is so execrably bad an idea that under no circumstances should a sane person give that any support whatsoever.

Part of me likes the idea of 'growing the middle class', were it not that the term 'middle class' is massaged and manipulated to serve political goals (like most of Biden's bills pretended to help ordinary Americans but in truth just funneled money to Democrats and Leftists and blamed everything on Trump). If you really want to help regular Americans, getting politicians out of the process is usually the best step. Giving perks to favored groups, companies and individuals is also something we should cut out, and both parties are guilty as hell of that.

---

I agree that politicians will not actually fix it of their own volition. But it is definitely a systemic issue. Part of it is the fact that most billionaires have publicly traded companies that are beholden to shareholders. Sone might get sued and the share price drop if all the sudden they decided a few billion is enough, I'll just pay the workers better.

It is a system that rewards greed. I am a big fan of capitalism, but greed does need to be checked. I dont have the answer, though a simple one might be limiting a CEO's profit to a percentage of the total worker compensation. A CEO of a company with 10,000 workers cannot take home more than the 10,000 combined, or if he/she does, they have to meet certain requirements concerning the compensation of their workforce. Something like that.

Porteroso said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

I had no idea the number was that high.

I got curious… according to ChatGPT 20 years ago there were 371 billionaires.

There are now a record 900 American billionaires which means 500 American billionaires are too poor to make this year’s Forbes 400.

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) September 12, 2025

---

It will trickle down soon!

I'm not opposed to billionaires, just always laugh at trickle down economics. This is capitalism, not socialism, you numnuts. It rewards greed, not figuring out how to pay your workers any better than you have to.

---

Why do we have a five-day work week and an eight-hour day as standard?

D. C. Bear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

I had no idea the number was that high.

I got curious… according to ChatGPT 20 years ago there were 371 billionaires.

There are now a record 900 American billionaires which means 500 American billionaires are too poor to make this year’s Forbes 400.

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) September 12, 2025

---

It will trickle down soon!

I'm not opposed to billionaires, just always laugh at trickle down economics. This is capitalism, not socialism, you numnuts. It rewards greed, not figuring out how to pay your workers any better than you have to.

---

Why do we have a five-day work week and an eight-hour day as standard?

---

Explain what Henry Ford has to do with my comment.

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

I had no idea the number was that high.

I got curious… according to ChatGPT 20 years ago there were 371 billionaires.

There are now a record 900 American billionaires which means 500 American billionaires are too poor to make this year’s Forbes 400.

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) September 12, 2025

---

It will trickle down soon!

I'm not opposed to billionaires, just always laugh at trickle down economics. This is capitalism, not socialism, you numnuts. It rewards greed, not figuring out how to pay your workers any better than you have to.

---

Have never understood the negative attitudes towards the people that pay most of the taxes and provide most of the jobs. Those that are always angry about someone that has more than they do will never find happiness.

---

Many do that, true, they compare what they have with what soneone else has.

What I am doing, is wondering if it is healthy to have wealth so concentrated, at a time when the middle class is shrinking. Today's job market aside, it is not a good situation. The economy is best when the middle class grows. I think we all know that. If we are adding ultra wealthy salaries as a tradeoff for more impoverished, it is not a good trade for society.

---

My problem is how people wish to "correct" wealth imbalance.

A lot of folks think letting government decide how much wealth individuals should be "allowed" to have. That is so execrably bad an idea that under no circumstances should a sane person give that any support whatsoever.

Part of me likes the idea of 'growing the middle class', were it not that the term 'middle class' is massaged and manipulated to serve political goals (like most of Biden's bills pretended to help ordinary Americans but in truth just funneled money to Democrats and Leftists and blamed everything on Trump). If you really want to help regular Americans, getting politicians out of the process is usually the best step. Giving perks to favored groups, companies and individuals is also something we should cut out, and both parties are guilty as hell of that.

---

It is a system that rewards greed. I am a big fan of capitalism, but greed does need to be checked. I dont have the answer, though a simple one might be limiting a CEO's profit to a percentage of the total worker compensation. A CEO of a company with 10,000 workers cannot take home more than the 10,000 combined, or if he/she does, they have to meet certain requirements concerning the compensation of their workforce. Something like that.

---

I could get on board with something like this. That of course is a step away from pure capitalism...but seems like a common sense guardrail. Plus...it's not like we don't already have a few protective guardrails in place like antitrust laws and federal minimum wage.

I know ChatGPT is not gospel…but here are some numbers I got from a quick search:



Capitalism has blessed this country greatly with wealth. It has made us the strongest economy in the world and given us the strongest military. I would never advocate for socialism... but I don't know what endgame we are headed toward with capitalism?

It feels like a Texas Holdem tournament where everyone at all the tables starts out with the same number of chips. But the closer you get to the end of the game certain players have huge stacks of chips...if you are the small stack at the end it gets to a point where you cannot possibly compete anymore even with great decision-making with the cards you are dealt.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

I had no idea the number was that high.

I got curious… according to ChatGPT 20 years ago there were 371 billionaires.

There are now a record 900 American billionaires which means 500 American billionaires are too poor to make this year’s Forbes 400.

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) September 12, 2025

---

It will trickle down soon!

I'm not opposed to billionaires, just always laugh at trickle down economics. This is capitalism, not socialism, you numnuts. It rewards greed, not figuring out how to pay your workers any better than you have to.

---

Have never understood the negative attitudes towards the people that pay most of the taxes and provide most of the jobs. Those that are always angry about someone that has more than they do will never find happiness.

---

Many do that, true, they compare what they have with what soneone else has.

What I am doing, is wondering if it is healthy to have wealth so concentrated, at a time when the middle class is shrinking. Today's job market aside, it is not a good situation. The economy is best when the middle class grows. I think we all know that. If we are adding ultra wealthy salaries as a tradeoff for more impoverished, it is not a good trade for society.

---

My problem is how people wish to "correct" wealth imbalance.

A lot of folks think letting government decide how much wealth individuals should be "allowed" to have. That is so execrably bad an idea that under no circumstances should a sane person give that any support whatsoever.

Part of me likes the idea of 'growing the middle class', were it not that the term 'middle class' is massaged and manipulated to serve political goals (like most of Biden's bills pretended to help ordinary Americans but in truth just funneled money to Democrats and Leftists and blamed everything on Trump). If you really want to help regular Americans, getting politicians out of the process is usually the best step. Giving perks to favored groups, companies and individuals is also something we should cut out, and both parties are guilty as hell of that.

---

One piece and a quick fix would be to discontinue the regressive tax on the middle and lower classes which President Trump affectionately calls tariffs.

Housing prices have fallen significantly in most markets yet younger generations still cannot afford to buy. We are in for a difficult six to eight months. Maybe longer.

Porteroso said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

I had no idea the number was that high.

I got curious… according to ChatGPT 20 years ago there were 371 billionaires.

There are now a record 900 American billionaires which means 500 American billionaires are too poor to make this year’s Forbes 400.

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) September 12, 2025

---

It will trickle down soon!

I'm not opposed to billionaires, just always laugh at trickle down economics. This is capitalism, not socialism, you numnuts. It rewards greed, not figuring out how to pay your workers any better than you have to.

---

Why do we have a five-day work week and an eight-hour day as standard?

---

Explain what Henry Ford has to do with my comment.

---

His capitalism, not socialism, caused a good bit of "trickle down."

Serious credit card delinquencies are at their highest level in 14 years, per Bloomberg: pic.twitter.com/AhPaLHcVOi

— unusual_whales (@unusual_whales) September 12, 2025

Porteroso said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

I had no idea the number was that high.

I got curious… according to ChatGPT 20 years ago there were 371 billionaires.

There are now a record 900 American billionaires which means 500 American billionaires are too poor to make this year’s Forbes 400.

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) September 12, 2025

---

It will trickle down soon!

I'm not opposed to billionaires, just always laugh at trickle down economics. This is capitalism, not socialism, you numnuts. It rewards greed, not figuring out how to pay your workers any better than you have to.

---

other than that fact that with skill, you are able to move to a different field/area/state whatever and make more money. You are dictated what and how you earn in most socialist economies. So yeah, freedom of movement of labor is part of the trickle down you don't think exists.

trey3216 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

I had no idea the number was that high.

I got curious… according to ChatGPT 20 years ago there were 371 billionaires.

There are now a record 900 American billionaires which means 500 American billionaires are too poor to make this year’s Forbes 400.

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) September 12, 2025

---

It will trickle down soon!

I'm not opposed to billionaires, just always laugh at trickle down economics. This is capitalism, not socialism, you numnuts. It rewards greed, not figuring out how to pay your workers any better than you have to.

---

other than that fact that with skill, you are able to move to a different field/area/state whatever and make more money. You are dictated what and how you earn in most socialist economies. So yeah, freedom of movement of labor is part of the trickle down you don't think exists.

---

Some trickles down, but a whole lot remains as net worth. Hard to remain a billionaire if you let you wealth trickle out.

It's funny how the socialists still think capitalism is all about greed. As the late great Milton Friedman pointed out, greed is part of human nature. Every economic system is based upon it. The difference is that capitalism channels those energies in directions that benefit everyone while socialism creates brutal dictatorships that kills millions of innocent people and enslaves everyone else. In the 30th century well over 100 million were killed in the name of socialism. Meanwhile, capitalism enables everyone to succeed, spectacularly. That "trickle down" becomes a flood unless corrupt politicians interfere.

Porteroso said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

I had no idea the number was that high.

I got curious… according to ChatGPT 20 years ago there were 371 billionaires.

There are now a record 900 American billionaires which means 500 American billionaires are too poor to make this year’s Forbes 400.

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) September 12, 2025

---

It will trickle down soon!

I'm not opposed to billionaires, just always laugh at trickle down economics. This is capitalism, not socialism, you numnuts. It rewards greed, not figuring out how to pay your workers any better than you have to.

---

other than that fact that with skill, you are able to move to a different field/area/state whatever and make more money. You are dictated what and how you earn in most socialist economies. So yeah, freedom of movement of labor is part of the trickle down you don't think exists.

---

Some trickles down, but a whole lot remains as net worth. Hard to remain a billionaire if you let you wealth trickle out.

---

they don't have to let with "trickle out". They help create wealth for others merely by increasing theirs in the form of jobs and income, property purchases, and investment growth.

That's how it becomes a flood

trey3216 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

I had no idea the number was that high.

I got curious… according to ChatGPT 20 years ago there were 371 billionaires.

There are now a record 900 American billionaires which means 500 American billionaires are too poor to make this year’s Forbes 400.

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) September 12, 2025

---

It will trickle down soon!

I'm not opposed to billionaires, just always laugh at trickle down economics. This is capitalism, not socialism, you numnuts. It rewards greed, not figuring out how to pay your workers any better than you have to.

---

other than that fact that with skill, you are able to move to a different field/area/state whatever and make more money. You are dictated what and how you earn in most socialist economies. So yeah, freedom of movement of labor is part of the trickle down you don't think exists.

---

Some trickles down, but a whole lot remains as net worth. Hard to remain a billionaire if you let you wealth trickle out.

---

they don't have to let with "trickle out". They help create wealth for others merely by increasing theirs in the form of jobs and income, property purchases, and investment growth.

---

Prove it. Give everything you own to rich people so they can create wealth for you.

I do understand what wealthy people do. I am saying that billionaires do not remain billionaires if their wealth trickles down. Some wealth will. But say you have a billion in the stock market. It creates very few jobs, pays very few salaries, compared to paying employees better. It becomes a sunk illiquid asset, which is wildly different from what you are talking about in salary and wealth creation for others.

Some companies profit share very well. Others do not. Amazon for example. The disparity between the wealth of that workforce, and Bezos, is so large that it alone causes people to question capitalism. Im saying we can limit not the company's profit, but 1 man's ludicrous profit, still have capitalism, and not have so many question it. If enough question it, a guy like Bernie, or lady like Harris, is eventually elected.

Capitalism is far and away the best economic system, but does need to be checked from time to time, same as any large system governing hundreds of millions of people.

If you’re wondering why real incomes are collapsing, here’s one reason:

“.. almost 14% of workers are getting no raises.”

- Met Life pic.twitter.com/lHzZxd0ShO

— Kalani o Māui (@MauiBoyMacro) September 12, 2025

Scott Bessent: Kristen, if things are so bad, why was the GDP 3.3%? Why is the stock market at a new high? pic.twitter.com/TaRwsfj9G5

— unusual_whales (@unusual_whales) September 13, 2025

Porteroso: " Give everything you own to rich people so they can create wealth for you."

You know, Porteroso, you have made some good posts recently, but this comment was far below your ability. It manages to trivialize the entire issue by presenting it in a way absolutely nobody here supports.

The thing about Economics, is that it is built on the whole of work and production. Over the time Humanity has been around, we have learned that governments are incredibly bad at making economies succeed, and so the successful countries are the ones which keep government out of economies the most.

You despise the rich. I get it. That hate blinds you to the facts of the matter, which include that there are a lot of rich people who do good, as well as the fact that someone else being rich almost never has anything to do with your own wealth.

But of course it's always easier to blame someone who succeeds, then find your own way to build your success.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso: " Give everything you own to rich people so they can create wealth for you."

You know, Porteroso, you have made some good posts recently, but this comment was far below your ability. It manages to trivialize the entire issue by presenting it in a way absolutely nobody here supports.

The thing about Economics, is that it is built on the whole of work and production. Over the time Humanity has been around, we have learned that governments are incredibly bad at making economies succeed, and so the successful countries are the ones which keep government out of economies the most.

You despise the rich. I get it. That hate blinds you to the facts of the matter, which include that there are a lot of rich people who do good, as well as the fact that someone else being rich almost never has anything to do with your own wealth.

But of course it's always easier to blame someone who succeeds, then find your own way to build your success.

---

Please read what I post before responding. Dont just read 1 sentence then respond to that. Just a bit of effort is required to have a conversation.

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso: " Give everything you own to rich people so they can create wealth for you."

You know, Porteroso, you have made some good posts recently, but this comment was far below your ability. It manages to trivialize the entire issue by presenting it in a way absolutely nobody here supports.

The thing about Economics, is that it is built on the whole of work and production. Over the time Humanity has been around, we have learned that governments are incredibly bad at making economies succeed, and so the successful countries are the ones which keep government out of economies the most.

You despise the rich. I get it. That hate blinds you to the facts of the matter, which include that there are a lot of rich people who do good, as well as the fact that someone else being rich almost never has anything to do with your own wealth.

But of course it's always easier to blame someone who succeeds, then find your own way to build your success.

---

Please read what I post before responding. Dont just read 1 sentence then respond to that. Just a bit of effort is required to have a conversation.

---

you gave a 1 sentence response and a 6 paragraph reprisal on that response. That's your own damn fault

trey3216 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso: " Give everything you own to rich people so they can create wealth for you."

You know, Porteroso, you have made some good posts recently, but this comment was far below your ability. It manages to trivialize the entire issue by presenting it in a way absolutely nobody here supports.

The thing about Economics, is that it is built on the whole of work and production. Over the time Humanity has been around, we have learned that governments are incredibly bad at making economies succeed, and so the successful countries are the ones which keep government out of economies the most.

You despise the rich. I get it. That hate blinds you to the facts of the matter, which include that there are a lot of rich people who do good, as well as the fact that someone else being rich almost never has anything to do with your own wealth.

But of course it's always easier to blame someone who succeeds, then find your own way to build your success.

---

Please read what I post before responding. Dont just read 1 sentence then respond to that. Just a bit of effort is required to have a conversation.

---

you gave a 1 sentence response and a 6 paragraph reprisal on that response. That's your own damn fault

---

I gave 1 response which was the post. I'm the victim here, don't victim shame me because people read the first sentence then hit reply! Whaaaaa!!!

BREAKING 🚨: U.S. Banks

U.S. Banks are now sitting on $395 Billion in unrealized losses as of Q2 2025 👀 pic.twitter.com/5TIUkSckiJ

— Barchart (@Barchart) September 13, 2025

Porteroso said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso: " Give everything you own to rich people so they can create wealth for you."

You know, Porteroso, you have made some good posts recently, but this comment was far below your ability. It manages to trivialize the entire issue by presenting it in a way absolutely nobody here supports.

The thing about Economics, is that it is built on the whole of work and production. Over the time Humanity has been around, we have learned that governments are incredibly bad at making economies succeed, and so the successful countries are the ones which keep government out of economies the most.

You despise the rich. I get it. That hate blinds you to the facts of the matter, which include that there are a lot of rich people who do good, as well as the fact that someone else being rich almost never has anything to do with your own wealth.

But of course it's always easier to blame someone who succeeds, then find your own way to build your success.

---

Please read what I post before responding. Dont just read 1 sentence then respond to that. Just a bit of effort is required to have a conversation.

---

you gave a 1 sentence response and a 6 paragraph reprisal on that response. That's your own damn fault

---

I gave 1 response which was the post. I'm the victim here, don't victim shame me because people read the first sentence then hit reply! Whaaaaa!!!

---

I gave you a fully appropriate reply.

You should acknowledge it, and adjust your choice of words accordingly.

$2.5 billion in net income last 12M

Brutal

— long_short_trader1 (@LS_trader1) September 14, 2025

JUST IN 🚨: A staggering $7.5 Trillion is now sitting in money market funds, a new all-time high 🤑

** Note: This is a fresh update from FRED ** pic.twitter.com/qDe3qxK40D

— Barchart (@Barchart) September 13, 2025

Financial advisors licking their chops wanting to invest those Trillions

STxBear81 said:

---

Members of Congress licking their chops wanting to "invest" those Trillions

---

Fixed it fer ya.

JUST IN: Fraud fueled jobless claims, per Bloomberg.

A massive spike in jobless claims on Thursday heightened fears of a swift labor market deterioration — but it turns out many of those claims were fake.

The big jump, which took national claims to a four-year high and jolted…

— unusual_whales (@unusual_whales) September 16, 2025

Further details

The spike in US jobless claims to 263,000 (week ending Sep 6, 2025) was largely due to fraudulent filings in Texas, where claims rose by 15,000 amid identity fraud attempts since Labor Day. Without the fraud, national claims would be around 240,000—elevated but not signaling…

— Grok (@grok) September 16, 2025