Business
Democrats question whether it’s the economy anymore, stupid on August 11, 2023 at 8:00 am Business News | The Hill
It’s the economy, stupid.
For decades, that’s been seen as a sound political strategy behind every effective presidential campaign.
Focus on the economy and people’s pocketbooks — and get some good luck in terms of how the economy is actually running when you run for office — and voila: You get elected to the White House, and you win reelection.
The question a growing number of Democrats are asking, however, is whether that’s still the case, as President Biden deals with stronger economic numbers but low approval ratings.
At a time of ever-greater political polarization, when abortion rights is the hot election issue of the day and former President Trump continues to shadow and change the American political landscape, is it still the economy, stupid?
Even Democratic strategist James Carville, who coined the phrase, has acknowledged some doubts.
“Well, I’ve always thought so,” Carville, 78, said last week to CNN’s Wolf Blitzer when he was asked point-blank if he still believed the political philosophy for which he’ll be remembered.
“I’m starting to doubt myself a little bit, because this economy is quite good. Maybe it will kick in. And sometimes it takes a while for people to feel it,” he said.
In an interview with The Hill, Carville said he generally still believes that yes, it is the economy, stupid.
But he expressed a mixture of frustration and exasperation that Biden’s approval ratings remain stuck in the low 40s, even as unemployment is at a historic low and inflation has fallen.
“The economic bounce back, it was had by any measure … but, for whatever reason, people are not connecting this, [they] don’t think that economy’s that good,” Carville told The Hill. “To the extent they think it’s good, they’re not giving the president’s policies very much credit for it.”
“I can understand how these guys are disheartened,” he said of the White House. “So you wonder, well, why this disconnect?”
A number of presidents have also been punished by voters for either a faltering economy or the perception it is poor, from Democratic President Jimmy Carter to GOP President George H.W. Bush.
The economy was a terrible headwind on Republican John McCain’s presidential campaign in 2008, though voter fatigue with foreign wars and Democrat Barack Obama’s star power were also negative factors for him.
Obama inherited a difficult economy, and Democrats were famously shellacked in the 2010 midterms amid deep voter anger over a recession and government spending. But in 2012, Obama was able to win reelection, in part by convincing voters he better understood their economic problems than Republican candidate Mitt Romney.
The political scene has changed dramatically since 2012, with Republicans and Democrats even more firmly in their tribal camps in the Trump era. That has coincided with questions, at least, about the role of the economy in elections.
As recently as the 2022 midterms, Republicans expected to rally to big wins in House and Senate races amid polls showing voters greatly unhappy with the state of the economy. Instead, other issues — particularly abortion, in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade, seemed much more determinative.
Republicans did win back the House majority, but with a much smaller margin than expected. They failed to win back the Senate.
The economy seems much better today than even a year ago, yet it is not helping Biden — at least yet.
“I think some of it is, there’s just so much built up on how bad the economy was, the struggle the economy was in, are recessions coming? I think that’s a hard bell to unring,” Carville said.
Bruce Mehlman, former assistant secretary at the Commerce Department under President George W. Bush, said the economy seems less of a factor today than it once did.
“Over the past two decades, traditional economic metrics have increasingly detached from presidential approval numbers and right-track or wrong-track sentiment, with the 2022 midterms the ultimate example,” said Mehlman, a founding partner at Mehlman Consulting. “The data screamed ‘giant wave,’ but many anxious voters preferred known incumbents over frightening disruptors.”
Josh Bivens, research director at the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute, said his “gut” tells him Biden may eventually benefit from the economy.
He predicted that with 3 to 4 percent inflation or lower and consistent low unemployment for another year could lead to higher ratings for Biden. Unemployment currently sits at just 3.6 percent.
“The ratchet-up of inflation in 2021 and early 2022 very much unsettled people, and they are only now really recognizing that the ratchet has started to reverse pretty decisively,” Bivens said.
Republicans have shifted their messaging to a degree.
While they still argue the economy is struggling under Biden, they are focusing their political attacks on Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, and corruption. Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) has indicated that House Republicans may move forward with an impeachment inquiry based on the president and his family’s business dealings.
The White House, for its part, has stepped up its arguments for Biden’s economic stewardship, arguing that Bidenomics is showing its effectiveness.
They’ve also lambasted Republicans for their focus on other issues.
“Instead of pursuing this shameless and baseless impeachment stunt, House Republicans and Speaker McCarthy should join the President to work on continuing to bring down inflation and lower costs, create jobs, and grow the economy,” Ian Sams, a spokesperson for the White House Counsel’s Office, said Tuesday. “That is, after all, what the American people sent their leaders to Washington to do.”
Biden is traveling to Arizona, New Mexico and Utah this week to discuss his economic agenda and the Inflation Reduction Act, which is the Democrats’ major climate and tax bill. Republicans bashed the trip to Arizona on Tuesday as a stop on “Biden’s Bankrupting America Tour.”
“Americans aren’t buying the lies Biden tells about Bidenomics – they can’t afford it,” RNC chairwoman Ronna McDaniel said in a statement.
Polls show the public has doubts about Biden on the economy.
Only 34 percent of Americans in a Monmouth University poll last month said they approve of his handling of inflation, and Biden received a split rating on his handling of jobs and unemployment, with 47 percent approving and 48 percent disapproving of it.
Carville remains a loyal Democrat and said he’s hopeful the White House is right that public sentiment will catch up to what he views as a strong economy.
“They project a lot of confidence,” Carville said. “For the sake of a lot of things, I hope they’re right.”
Administration, Business It’s the economy, stupid. For decades, that’s been seen as a sound political strategy behind every effective presidential campaign. Focus on the economy and people’s pocketbooks — and get some good luck in terms of how the economy is actually running when you run for office — and voila: You get elected to the White…
Business
Google Accused Of Favoring White, Asian Staff As It Reaches $28 Million Deal That Excludes Black Workers
Google has tentatively agreed to a $28 million settlement in a California class‑action lawsuit alleging that white and Asian employees were routinely paid more and placed on faster career tracks than colleagues from other racial and ethnic backgrounds.
- A Santa Clara County Superior Court judge has granted preliminary approval, calling the deal “fair” and noting that it could cover more than 6,600 current and former Google workers employed in the state between 2018 and 2024.
How The Discrimination Claims Emerged
The lawsuit was brought by former Google employee Ana Cantu, who identifies as Mexican and racially Indigenous and worked in people operations and cloud departments for about seven years. Cantu alleges that despite strong performance, she remained stuck at the same level while white and Asian colleagues doing similar work received higher pay, higher “levels,” and more frequent promotions.
Cantu’s complaint claims that Latino, Indigenous, Native American, Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, and Alaska Native employees were systematically underpaid compared with white and Asian coworkers performing substantially similar roles. The suit also says employees who raised concerns about pay and leveling saw raises and promotions withheld, reinforcing what plaintiffs describe as a two‑tiered system inside the company.
Why Black Employees Were Left Out
Cantu’s legal team ultimately agreed to narrow the class to employees whose race and ethnicity were “most closely aligned” with hers, a condition that cleared the path to the current settlement.
The judge noted that Black employees were explicitly excluded from the settlement class after negotiations, meaning they will not share in the $28 million payout even though they were named in earlier versions of the case. Separate litigation on behalf of Black Google employees alleging racial bias in pay and promotions remains pending, leaving their claims to be resolved in a different forum.
What The Settlement Provides
Of the $28 million total, about $20.4 million is expected to be distributed to eligible class members after legal fees and penalties are deducted. Eligible workers include those in California who self‑identified as Hispanic, Latinx, Indigenous, Native American, American Indian, Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, and/or Alaska Native during the covered period.
Beyond cash payments, Google has also agreed to take steps aimed at addressing the alleged disparities, including reviewing pay and leveling practices for racial and ethnic gaps. The settlement still needs final court approval at a hearing scheduled for later this year, and affected employees will have a chance to opt out or object before any money is distributed.
H2: Google’s Response And The Broader Stakes
A Google spokesperson has said the company disputes the allegations but chose to settle in order to move forward, while reiterating its public commitment to fair pay, hiring, and advancement for all employees. The company has emphasized ongoing internal audits and equity initiatives, though plaintiffs argue those efforts did not prevent or correct the disparities outlined in the lawsuit.
For many observers, the exclusion of Black workers from the settlement highlights the legal and strategic complexities of class‑action discrimination cases, especially in large, diverse workplaces. The outcome of the remaining lawsuit brought on behalf of Black employees, alongside this $28 million deal, will help define how one of the world’s most powerful tech companies is held accountable for alleged racial inequities in pay and promotion.
At just 29, Luana Lopes Lara has taken a title that usually belongs to pop stars and consumer‑app founders.
Multiple business outlets now recognize her as the world’s youngest self‑made woman billionaire, after her company Kalshi hit an 11 billion dollar valuation in a new funding round.
That round, a 1 billion dollar Series E led by Paradigm with Sequoia Capital, Andreessen Horowitz, CapitalG and others participating, instantly pushed both co‑founders into the three‑comma club. Estimates place Luana’s personal stake at roughly 12 percent of Kalshi, valuing her net worth at about 1.3 billion dollars—wealth tied directly to equity she helped create rather than inheritance.
Kalshi itself is a big part of why her ascent matters.
Founded in 2019, the New York–based company runs a federally regulated prediction‑market exchange where users trade yes‑or‑no contracts on real‑world events, from inflation reports to elections and sports outcomes.
As of late 2025, the platform has reached around 50 billion dollars in annualized trading volume, a thousand‑fold jump from roughly 300 million the year before, according to figures cited in TechCrunch and other financial press. That hyper‑growth convinced investors that event contracts are more than a niche curiosity, and it is this conviction—expressed in billions of dollars of new capital—that turned Luana’s share of Kalshi into a billion‑dollar fortune almost overnight.
Her path to that point is unusually demanding even by founder standards. Luana grew up in Brazil and trained at the Bolshoi Theater School’s Brazilian campus, where reports say she spent up to 13 hours a day in class and rehearsal, competing for places in a program that accepts fewer than 3 percent of applicants. After a stint dancing professionally in Austria, she pivoted into academics, enrolling at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology to study computer science and mathematics and later completing a master’s in engineering.
During summers she interned at major firms including Bridgewater Associates and Citadel, gaining a front‑row view of how global macro traders constantly bet on future events—but without a simple, regulated way for ordinary people to do the same.
That realization shaped Kalshi’s founding thesis and ultimately her billionaire status. Together with co‑founder Tarek Mansour, whom she met at MIT, Luana spent years persuading lawyers and U.S. regulators that a fully legal event‑trading exchange could exist under commodities law. Reports say more than 60 law firms turned them down before one agreed to help, and the company then spent roughly three years in licensing discussions with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission before gaining approval. The payoff is visible in 2025’s numbers: an 11‑billion‑dollar valuation, a 1‑billion‑dollar fresh capital injection, and a founder’s stake that makes Luana Lopes Lara not just a compelling story but a data point in how fast wealth can now be created at the intersection of finance, regulation, and software.
America’s job market is facing an unprecedented crisis—and nowhere is this more painfully obvious than at Harvard, the world’s gold standard for elite education. A stunning 25% of Harvard’s MBA class of 2025 remains unemployed months after graduation, the highest rate recorded in university history. The Ivy League dream has become a harsh wakeup call, and it’s sending shockwaves across the professional landscape.
Jobless at the Top: Why Graduates Can’t Find Work
For decades, a Harvard diploma was considered a golden ticket. Now, graduates send out hundreds of résumés, often from their parents’ homes, only to get ghosted or auto-rejected by machines. Only 30% of all 2025 graduates nationally have found full-time work in their field, and nearly half feel unprepared for the workforce. “Go to college, get a good job“—that promise is slipping away, even for the smartest and most driven.
Tech’s Iron Grip: ATS and AI Gatekeepers
Applicant tracking systems (ATS) and AI algorithms have become ruthless gatekeepers. If a résumé doesn’t perfectly match the keywords or formatting demanded by the bots, it never reaches human eyes. The age of human connection is gone—now, you’re just a data point to be sorted and discarded.
AI screening has gone beyond basic qualifications. New tools “read” for inferred personality and tone, rejecting candidates for reasons they never see. Worse, up to half of online job listings may be fake—created simply to collect résumés, pad company metrics, or fulfill compliance without ever intending to fill the role.
The Experience Trap: Entry-Level Jobs Require Years
It’s not just Harvard grads who are hurting. Entry-level roles demand years of experience, unpaid internships, and portfolios that resemble a seasoned professional, not a fresh graduate. A bachelor’s degree, once the key to entry, is now just the price of admission. Overqualified candidates compete for underpaid jobs, often just to survive.
One Harvard MBA described applying to 1,000 jobs with no results. Companies, inundated by applications, are now so selective that only those who precisely “game the system” have a shot. This has fundamentally flipped the hiring pyramid: enormous demand for experience, shrinking chances for new entrants, and a brutal gauntlet for anyone not perfectly groomed by internships and coaching.
Burnout Before Day One
The cost is more than financial—mental health and optimism are collapsing among the newest generation of workers. Many come out of elite programs and immediately end up in jobs that don’t require degrees, or take positions far below their qualifications just to pay the bills. There’s a sense of burnout before careers even begin, trapping talent in a cycle of exhaustion, frustration, and disillusionment.
Cultural Collapse: From Relationships to Algorithms
What’s really broken? The culture of hiring itself. Companies have traded trust, mentorship, and relationships for metrics, optimizations, and cost-cutting. Managers no longer hire on potential—they rely on machines, rankings, and personality tests that filter out individuality and reward those who play the algorithmic game best.
AI has automated the very entry-level work that used to build careers—research, drafting, and analysis—and erased the first rung of the professional ladder for thousands of new graduates. The result is a workforce filled with people who know how to pass tests, not necessarily solve problems or drive innovation.
The Ghost Job Phenomenon
Up to half of all listings for entry-level jobs may be “ghost jobs”—positions posted online for optics, compliance, or future needs, but never intended for real hiring. This means millions of job seekers spend hours on applications destined for digital purgatory, further fueling exhaustion and cynicism.
Not Lazy—Just Locked Out
Despite the headlines, the new class of unemployed graduates is not lazy or entitled—they are overqualified, underleveraged, and battered by a broken process. Harvard’s brand means less to AI and ATS systems than the right keyword or résumé format. Human judgment has been sidelined; individuality is filtered out.
What’s Next? Back to Human Connection
Unless companies rediscover the value of human potential, mentorship, and relationships, the job search will remain a brutal numbers game—one that even the “best and brightest” struggle to win. The current system doesn’t just hurt workers—it holds companies back from hiring bold, creative talent who don’t fit perfect digital boxes.
Key Facts:
- 25% of Harvard MBAs unemployed, highest on record
- Only 30% of 2025 grads nationwide have jobs in their field
- Nearly half of grads feel unprepared for real work
- Up to 50% of entry-level listings are “ghost jobs”
- AI and ATS have replaced human judgment at most companies
If you’ve felt this struggle—or see it happening around you—share your story in the comments. And make sure to subscribe for more deep dives on the reality of today’s economy and job market.
This is not just a Harvard problem. It’s a sign that America’s job engine is running on empty, and it’s time to reboot—before another generation is locked out.
Turning One Short Film into 12 Months of Content
10 Ways Filmmakers Are Building Careers Without Waiting for Distributors
