The boom in American-born employees isn't real. Here's why
The foreign-born working-age population may well be shrinking. The flow of illegal immigration across the Mexican border slowed sharply last year and has ground almost to a halt this year, and since January the Trump administration has been narrowing legal immigration channels, canceling temporary legal immigration programs and increasing the pace of deportations for those here illegally. It's extremely unlikely that 1.9 million people ages 16 through 64 have left the country since March, but the direction at least could be correct.
Such an increase in the native-born working-age population, on the other hand, is impossible. Changes in that population are quite easy to predict, given that we know how many people were born in the US 16 to 64 years ago and how many have died since — and, while there admittedly aren't great recent statistics on this, the number of native-born Americans who leave the country permanently is most likely small. Just going by births, the 16-to-64 US population is due for six consecutive years of declines from this year through 2030.
All this is context for understanding the 2.5 million job increase in native-born employment since December that the BLS is also reporting. Given that it came after a year of foreign-born workers seemingly driving all US employment gains, it is understandably being greeted by Trump administration officials (and would-be Trump BLS chief E.J. Antoni) as evidence of a remarkable turnaround wrought by Trump's economic policies. As you can probably already tell from the population data I've cited, it's not that. But what is it, exactly? The big changes in population and employment are artifacts of how the BLS estimates population for the purposes of calculating the labor-force statistics it derives from the Census Bureau's monthly Current Population Survey, the so-called household survey. The priority is generating accurate percentage indicators such as the unemployment rate, labor-force participation rate and employment-population ratio, not reliable time series of the levels of employment or population.The establishment survey — aka Current Employment Statistics — that is the other contributor to the monthly BLS employment report is aimed at generating accurate estimates of the level of nonfarm payroll employment and is revised repeatedly as late responses come in and then a backup set of statistics based on state unemployment insurance records is released. A big downward revision in past months' payroll jobs totals in the employment report released early this month led Trump to fire the director of the BLS and nominate Antoni, a Heritage Foundation economist with a reputation for sloppy, partisan work, as the agency's new chief.The employment indicators from the household survey aren't subsequently revised, but every January the BLS does adjust its population numbers to align them with the latest population estimates from the Census Bureau. This December, the Census Bureau revised its national population estimates upward to better reflect the big wave in immigration from mid-2021 to mid-2024, estimating net immigration of 2.8 million people from mid-2023 to mid-2024, and increasing its estimate of 2021-2023 net immigration from 2.1 million to 4 million. This and other changes in the 2024 population estimates led the BLS to report a 3 million increase from December to January in the 16-and-older civilian, noninstitutional US population, with the gains split roughly evenly between native-born and foreign-born. Again, this wasn't because anybody at BLS thought the US 16-and-older population actually grew that much from December to January, just that the new population estimates were higher than the previous ones, and it doesn't revise earlier estimates. (For a more detailed explanation, I recommend this piece by Jed Kolko, who as undersecretary of commerce for economic affairs in the Biden administration oversaw the Census Bureau.)
The Census Bureau also makes forward-looking monthly population estimates once a year based on anticipated deaths, 16th birthdays and immigration trends, which the BLS uses to produce its monthly population totals until the next annual update. The monthly BLS estimates of changes in the native-born and foreign-born population and workforce, though, are based on what people say in the monthly household surveys. Since Donald Trump became president, foreign-born residents of the US appear to have become much less likely to respond to the surveys or tell survey takers they weren't born in the US. Because the overall monthly population numbers are on autopilot, this has resulted in declining foreign-born population and employment numbers and increasing native-born numbers.If native-born workers were in fact making big employment gains now, these would show up in their ratio of employment to population, which is best measured for so-called prime-age workers 25 to 54 so as not to be skewed by the aging of the population. Prime-age employment-to-population numbers for native- and foreign-born workers are not available in seasonally adjusted form and thus jump around a lot from month to month, so I've taken annual averages, which indicate that both native-born and foreign-born employment rates are flat and possibly beginning to trend downward. President Trump's immigration crackdown is to some extent based on the theory that it will improve job prospects for native-born workers by removing foreign-born competitors. Because immigration is the only possible source of growth in the US working-age population for the rest of this decade, though, stopping or reversing its flow will also make it hard to achieve much of any economic growth. So far, in any case, the net result for native-born workers appears to be no improvement at all.
(Join our ETNRI WhatsApp channel for all the latest updates) Elevate your knowledge and leadership skills at a cost cheaper than your daily tea. Swiggy, Tencent backer Prosus gets Rajinikanth fan to script India AI play
India's F&O boom puts spotlight on retail protection through education
Can new shipping laws bury the ghost of British legacy?
As big fat Indian wedding slims to budget, Manyavar loses lustre
Stock Radar: Bajaj Auto showing signs of reversal after falling over 30% from highs; medium term should 'buy the dip'
F&O Radar | Deploy Bull Call Ladder in JSW Steel stock to benefit from bullish outlook
Time for risk-takers to come out of hibernation? 5 mid-cap stocks from different sectors with an upside potential of up to 27%
Buy, Sell or Hold: Motilal Oswal initiates coverage on JSW Cement; Emkay Global sees over 30% upside in Gravita India
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
23 minutes ago
- Mint
Trump Warns ‘Not Playing Games' in Visit to Federal Police in DC
President Donald Trump visited a Park Police operations facility to thank federal law enforcement officers he's deployed to patrol the streets of Washington, DC, saying he expected their deployment to last 'for a while.' 'We're going to then go on to other places, but we're going to stay here for a while,' Trump said. 'We want to make this absolutely perfect, it's our capital.' The visit to the building in Washington's Anacostia neighborhood appeared less dramatic than his suggestion on a radio show earlier Thursday that he would be 'going out' with a patrol in a 'secret' trip with the police and military, but nevertheless returned focus to his controversial move last week to surge US officers and troops into the nation's capital and put the Metropolitan Police Department under federal control. 'We're not playing games. We're going to make it safe,' Trump said. The president brought hamburgers and pizza to the officers he visited to thank them for their service. Trump last week argued the city's carjackings and robberies there amounted to a national emergency. While a post-pandemic crime surge in DC stirred public safety fears, Justice Department data released in January showed violent crime in the city plunging to a 30-year-low. The effort marked Trump's highest-profile moves yet to drive home his law-and-order message. But they are deeply unpopular with DC residents and any appearance by the president on the streets of the nation's capital risked stoking tensions further. Vice President JD Vance, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller were heckled on Wednesday when they met with National Guard members at Union Station. Almost eight in 10 Washingtonians oppose Trump's takeover and 65% said they don't think it will make the city any safer, according to a Washington Post-Schar School poll. Over the last week, the administration has faced criticism that the federal deployment has focused on low-crime, tourist-friendly areas of Washington and has not produced a significant uptick of arrests. Attorney General Pam Bondi said Wednesday that the effort has resulted in 550 arrests and 76 illegal firearms being seized. But data from DC Mayor Muriel Bowser's office showed that MPD arrests in the week before the federal takeover were higher than the week after. The White House has been adamant that the numbers don't accurately depict the level of crime and blight in Washington. Trump has sought to discredit the city's crime statistics, ordering the Justice Department to investigate whether local officials falsified the figures. Democrats have dismissed the the move as a thinly veiled attempt for Trump to take power in the nation's capital and amplify his message that liberal policies are soft on crime. With assistance from Myles Miller. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
India.com
23 minutes ago
- India.com
Is Trump Ready To Risk Key Ally India For His America-First Agenda? Nikki Haley Sounds Alarm
Washington: 'To achieve America's foreign policy goals of outcompeting China, few objectives are more critical than getting relations between Washington and New Delhi back on track,' wrote Nikki Haley, U.S. President Donald Trump's fellow Republican and former U.N. ambassador, in an op-ed for Newsweek. She urged that India must be treated 'like the prized free and democratic partner that it is, not an adversary like China, which has thus far avoided sanctions for its Russian oil purchases, despite being one of Moscow's largest customers'. She warned that undoing decades of diplomatic momentum with the only Asian power capable of balancing Beijing would be a 'strategic disaster'. She also highlighted India's role in shifting supply chains away from China. 'While the Trump administration works to bring manufacturing back to our shores, India stands alone in its potential to manufacture at a China-like scale for products that cannot be quickly or efficiently produced here, like textiles, inexpensive phones and solar panels,' she said. Add Zee News as a Preferred Source Haley described New Delhi as a 'crucial asset to the free world's security', stressing that unlike authoritarian China, a rising democratic India strengthens the global order. Trump, however, has unsettled both allies and critics by threatening to impose an additional 25 per cent tariff on India for importing discounted oil from Russia. The measure comes on top of a similar levy already rolled out this month, taking the total duty to 50 per cent. Once hailed as Washington's counterweight to China, New Delhi now finds itself grouped with Brazil, whose President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva has already threatened retaliation. Beijing, the largest buyer of Russian crude, has been spared from similar penalties. 'Biggest Mistake' Geopolitical analyst Fareed Zakaria joined the wave of criticism. Speaking to CNN, he called the tariff push 'America's biggest foreign policy mistake', warning that even if Trump walks back the decision, 'the damage is done'. According to him, India now views the United States as 'unreliable, its willingness to be brutal to those whom it calls its friends' and may deepen its ties with Russia while easing tensions with China. 'Stupidest Tactical Move' Economist Jeffrey Sachs struck a similar note. On 'Breaking Points' with Krystal Ball and Saagar Enjeti, he said the White House is effectively binding the BRICS bloc closer together. He branded the tariffs 'the stupidest tactical move in U.S. foreign policy' and labelled Trump 'the great unifier of BRICS'. 'Tariff Tantrum' The pushback has reached Capitol Hill as well. Senior Congressman Gregory Meeks, a Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, denounced the policy as a 'tariff tantrum' that risks dismantling over two decades of strategic, economic and cultural ties. 'We have deep strategic, economic and people-to-people ties. Concerns should be addressed in a mutually respectful way consistent with our democratic values,' he said.
News18
34 minutes ago
- News18
US court throws out massive civil fraud penalty against President Trump
Agency: PTI Last Updated: New York, Aug 22 (AP) A New York appeals court has thrown out President Donald Trump's massive financial penalty while narrowly upholding a judge's finding that he engaged in fraud by exaggerating his wealth for decades. The Thursday's ruling spares Trump from a potential half-billion-dollar fine but bans him and his two eldest sons from serving in corporate leadership for a few years. Trump, in a social media post, claimed 'total victory" in the case, which stemmed from a civil lawsuit brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James. 'I greatly respect the fact that the Court had the Courage to throw out this unlawful and disgraceful Decision that was hurting Business all throughout New York State," the Republican wrote. James, a Democrat, focused on the parts of the decision that went her way, saying in a statement that it 'affirmed the well-supported finding of the trial court: Donald Trump, his company, and two of his children are liable for fraud." The ruling came seven months after Trump returned to the White House, his political fortunes unimpeded by the civil fraud judgment, a criminal conviction and other legal blows. A sharply divided panel of five judges in the state's mid-level Appellate Division couldn't agree on many issues raised in Trump's appeal, but a majority said the monetary penalty was 'excessive". A lower-court judge, Arthur Engoron, had ordered Trump last year to pay $355 million in penalties after finding that he flagrantly padded financial statements provided to lenders and insurers. With interest, the sum has topped $515 million. Additional penalties for executives at his company, the Trump Organisation, including sons Eric and Donald Trump Jr, have brought the total to $527 million with interest. 'While harm certainly occurred, it was not the cataclysmic harm that can justify a nearly half billion-dollar award" to the state, Judges Dianne Renwick and Peter Moulton wrote in one of three opinions shaping the appeals court's ruling. They called the penalty 'an excessive fine that violates the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution." Both were appointed by Democratic governors. Engoron's other punishments, upheld by the appeals court, have been on pause during Trump's appeal, and the president was able to hold off collection of the money by posting a $175 million bond. Donald Trump Jr celebrated the decision by mocking James, who had periodically posted a running tally of the fraud penalty, with interest. Over a post from James in February 2024, when the tally was nearly $465 million, Trump Jr wrote: 'I believe you mean $0.00. Thank you for your attention to this matter." The five-judge panel, which split on the merits of the lawsuit and Engoron's fraud finding, dismissed the monetary penalty in its entirety while also leaving a pathway for an appeal to the state's highest court, the Court of Appeals. In the meantime, Trump and his co-defendants, the judges wrote, can seek to extend the pause to prevent any punishments from taking effect. While the Appellate Division dispatches most appeals in a few pages in a matter of weeks, the judges weighing Trump's case took nearly 11 months to rule after oral arguments last fall and issued 323 pages of concurring and dissenting opinions with no majority. Rather, some judges endorsed parts of their colleagues' findings while denouncing others, enabling the court to rule. Two judges wrote that they felt James' lawsuit was justifiable and that she had proven her case but the penalty was too severe. One wrote that James exceeded her legal authority in bringing the suit, saying that if any lenders felt cheated, they could have sued Trump themselves, and none did. Another wrote that Engoron erred by ruling before the trial that James had proven Trump engaged in fraud. In his portion of the ruling, Judge David Friedman, appointed by a Republican governor, was scathing in his criticism of James for bringing the lawsuit. 'Plainly, her ultimate goal was not market hygiene' … but political hygiene, ending with the derailment of President Trump's political career and the destruction of his real estate business," Friedman wrote. 'The voters have obviously rendered a verdict on his political career. This bench today unanimously derails the effort to destroy his business." Trump and his co-defendants denied wrongdoing. At the conclusion of the civil trial in January 2024, Trump said he was 'an innocent man" and the case was a 'fraud on me". The Republican leader has repeatedly maintained the case and the verdict were political moves by James and Engoron, both Democrats. Trump's Justice Department has subpoenaed James for records related to the lawsuit, among other documents, as part of an investigation into whether she violated the president's civil rights. James' personal attorney Abbe D Lowell has said investigating the fraud case is 'the most blatant and desperate example of this administration carrying out the president's political retribution campaign". Trump and his lawyers said his financial statements weren't deceptive, since they came with disclaimers noting they weren't audited. The defence also noted bankers and insurers independently evaluated the numbers, and the loans were repaid. Despite such discrepancies as tripling the size of his Trump Tower penthouse, he said the financial statements were, if anything, lowball estimates of his fortune. During an appellate court hearing last September, Trump's lawyers argued that many of the case's allegations were too old and that James had misused a consumer protection law to sue Trump over private business transactions that were satisfactory to those involved. State attorneys said that while Trump insists no one was harmed by the financial statements, his exaggerations led lenders to make riskier loans and that honest borrowers lose out when others game their net worth numbers. The civil fraud case was just one of several legal obstacles for Trump as he campaigned, won and segued to a second term as president. On Jan 10, he was sentenced in his criminal hush money case to what's known as an unconditional discharge, leaving his conviction on the books but sparing him jail, probation, a fine or other punishment. He is appealing the conviction. top videos View all And in December, a federal appeals court upheld a jury's finding that Trump sexually abused writer E Jean Carroll in the mid-1990s and later defamed her, affirming a $5 million judgment against him. The appeals court declined in June to reconsider. Trump still can try to get the Supreme Court to hear his appeal. Trump also is appealing a subsequent verdict that requires him to pay Carroll $83.3 million for additional defamation claims. (AP) SCY SCY (This story has not been edited by News18 staff and is published from a syndicated news agency feed - PTI) view comments First Published: August 22, 2025, 04:45 IST News agency-feeds US court throws out massive civil fraud penalty against President Trump Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Loading comments...
