I'm not from the US so I'm genuinely curious because I see everyone saying it's just the rich spending more. If you're a normal middle class household, are you buying less, the same, or more than what you would have done two years ago?
I’ll tell you what’s really insane is when you calculate the purchasing power of a salary compared to say 1995
If you earned $35,000 a year back in 1995, that salary would have the equivalent buying power of earning $76,825 a year today (that is what I made in 1995 including commission - as a system admin in 2018 I made 80k)
It's chugging along "for now", because eventually people not being able to afford a home, healthcare, transportation and food will lead to a structural collapse.
The simplest explanation is K shaped economy. Those who are able to participate in the stock market and have assets are doing fairly well. Those who have most of their expenses going to cost of living are struggling.
You can downvote me if you want but I don't think this is true. Look around everything is packed. Spiderman and The Odyssey have sold record numbers this year. Costcos and Targets are packed. Homes are still flying off the shelves in most places. This is not all rich people but regular people who refuse to stop spending no matter how much they complain about price.
I really don’t think this is true. Will have to do some research to confirm but if it’s only cash buyers, total pool of buyers would be much smaller and homes wouldn’t sell as fast.
I kinda wish movies were ticket numbers and not prices. Went to see Odyssey and I can say I wont be going back to the movie for a long long time. It was like 60 bucks for 2 people. Of which people will go (go at noon on a weekday and dont buy drink or anything to eat and sneak candy in) which ultimately kinda proves the point of yeah... everything looks like its going up because its fucking expensive.
No need to downvote, I definitely admit it's way more complicated than what I say and don't care to argue that I am right. It's just a simple explanation I have heard that may not apply.
I know for me personally I live in a very high growth and low cost of living area and people are definitely out spending
Are the high prices discouraging people from going to the movies, or is it a sign that Americans have more money after paying their bills for entertainment?
A K- shaped economy doesn’t mean “ten people have money and every other human is in abject poverty,” it means “you’re either doing really well (see homes flying off the shelf or going to Target or Costco (the store famous for its high prices?)) or you’re broke as hell.”
Surprise surprise, the latter one is what’s happening.
Absolutely have curbed spending. Eating out less, saying “no” more. Buying the store brand more often. I’ve been very acutely feeling the impact over the past few months specifically.
The same. I don’t buy much anything that’s non essential. Cutting subscriptions to streaming except Spotify for my commute. I buy lunch maybe once a week. But I’m poor and always have been so ain’t no thing
These metrics are pure propaganda and purposefully hiding the real issues. Costs of everything is rising and wages are stagnant. We have to spend more just to get by and the wealthy prop up the economy and hide the real pain.
In this case, over half of GDP growth is investments in AI related things. The rich are keeping the economy afloat by investing money and staying steady/increasing spending, but ~~if~~ when the AI bubble pops, it’s going to be the dot-com downturn all over again. Not quite the housing market collapse of 2008-2009, but it was devastating in its own right.
Saving/investing more. Also spending more, but less often after making concerted efforts to minimize wasteful spending. Going out to eat a lot less, but somewhat larger spend on groceries. Christmas is secret Santa, not gifts for everybody. Phone calls with family are longer, not planning as many family based vacations.
Do not trust American Redditors, they always complained on how poor they are. Been for more than a decade here and they make it sound like they live in some third world country and are starving. Meanwhile they're mostly overweight and consume per capita much more than the rest of the world. One thing I've learned is that is never enough for them, that's why they complain.
It’s dollar spent not items purchased. The every man is still spending a lot of their money they have so consumer spending
Also, tech companies have been trading billions back and forth.
Amazon buys $1B from Microsoft in server capacity. Who buys $1B in chips from Nvidia who buys $1B of customer data from Meta. Who buys $1B of AWS to run the back of Facebook.
$4B in economic activity though $1B is actually moving.
Something the surface level discourse online consistently misses on is that for all its endless, destructive and self destructive insanity, the US economy remains frankly unparalleled.
3.4% for a developed economy is massive and that's with the currently most deranged leader in the world doing everything in its power to tank it. Every other major, developed country not called South Korea or Taiwan would kill for that number.
Imagine if the US just decides to start electing... Not even good presidents, just conventionally, regular, bad ones.
This is true in every country but as a % of GDP, the US isn't even remotely close to the top in terms of government spending.
The US only spends about 50% of the top nation (even smaller, if you could get an accurate figure from China who should be #1 but doesn't report enough info), the large majority of EU members all spend more than it.
The economy was ready to go on an absolute tear at the end of Bidens term. Inflation was down, infrastructure investment was up, and of course the AI build out was going to happen regardless. With a Democratic President, I have no doubt we'd be seeing historic economic growth.
Whether it would've been felt by every day people, that's open for debate ...
Sure, but large swaths of the stock market are divorced from the economy and 38% of Americans do not own stocks. And for what it's worth, the market has been on the same trajectory since 2022.
There were hundreds of infrastructure, research, and energy-related projects that were funded by the BIL and IRA and set to kickoff in late 2024/early 2025 that were terminated by DOGE. Only a fraction of them have been clawed back after 2+ years of appeal.
Source: I'm the PI of one of those projects...awarded in 2023, terminated in 2024 during negotiations, immediately appealed, and only just reinstated 10 days ago. Yay! Now we can finally kickoff our project on a 3.5 year-old budget.
Yep, as a guy who's fully invested all his money in the USA this is what makes me keep investing.
The US economy has structural advantages so ingrained that even Trump being a complete monkey on a keyboard cannot hope to tank it all in one term. Of course he needs to be gone asap though, hopefully the midterms don't disappoint.
But these figures keep me sane for now. My retirement depends on the US economy producing returns for at least 20-30 more years lol, then y'all can elect more trumps afterwards if y'all haven't learnt till then.
There are also ample resources to fund at least a basic social safety net that would subsidize future economic growth. But I guess thinking long term is woke or whatever.
A good chunk of that GDP is from AI investment and exploding government spending, which are contributing unfortunately little to the real wellbeing of the nation.
>If you need a strong stimulus package, reaction to a housing market collapse, pandemic, jobs package
Congress and the Federal Reserve play significant roles in addressing every crisis you just named. A jobs package is literally created and authored by Congress
Neither answers directly to the President. I'd even argue that they have more direct power than the President to address those problems.
I see you have never heard of things like the New deal so there is no point having this conversation with you.
Literally the largest legislation overhaul in history was pushed through by a President to combat the great depression (and yes Congress does have to vote on it).
Some president do actually do more than host rallies for themselves and golf.
They have plenty of power and influence, if the current occupant wanted to he could spend the hundreds of billions of dollars we will have wasted in Iran on a comprehensive jobs and infrastructure package with congressional support.
Instead we get endless wars and massive cuts to most US agencies that actually help people like Medicare, the VA and the National Parks.
That isn’t a fabrication and holds true for other major economies. Frankly, there isn’t much signs that U.S consumers aren’t spending considering the fact that the trend was still occurring during the peak of COVID inflation and other periods of financial instability - AI investments while unprofitable has seen enormous revenue growth in recent earnings report with no signs of it stopping just yet.
Why are you talking about planned GDP estimate revisions (the revisions are published on a schedule as the data is collated) as if they are proof the numbers are manipulated?
You know the inputs to estimates are published right? You, if you had any knowledge of economics at all, could recreate the calculations. Thousands of people who would love to call it out for being manipulated do recalculate the estimates. Why do you think they’re not calling it out? Are they in on it too?
They’re estimates published with confidence intervals, the revisions are expected.
You just have no idea what you are talking about. It’s crazy, people on Reddit have no problem popping into economics or law or medical subreddits and just spouting off as if they have any idea.
but isn't "advance estimates " of GDP done on incomplete data thus are more likely to be incorrect due to the fact it uses only 75% of actual data and the other 25% is based on projections?
I cant access the article because of pop-ups. Does the article breakdown the different in spending between AI and consumer spending? I haven't seen many metrics reflecting strong consumer spending, more so a pullback for the lower income brackets, but AI has been said to propping up the US economy as a whole.
“Consumer spending, which accounts for more than two-thirds of the economy, increased at a 3.8% rate in the July-September period, matching the second quarter's pace. It was largely driven by services, including healthcare, visits to restaurants and bars as well as hotel and motel stays.
There was a pullback in spending on goods like motor vehicles and household furniture. Higher-income households, whose wealth has been boosted by AI-related strength in the stock market, are driving much of the spending.”
So no, AI is not “propping up the economy” no matter how many headlines or Reddit posts claim otherwise. Spending in higher income brackets on the other hand is driving an increasing amount of consumer demand.
Edit: Wealth gains (derived from AI related/adjacent industries) for high earners aren’t being liquidated for increased consumer spending. They are simply more confident in the economy in which they are participating/invested in and are willing to spend more (and therefore save less) of their income. There is a very fine line between correlation and causation.
Doesn’t this feel like a bad sign if top 10% accounts got 50%? This seems to indicate to me that companies will only care about wealthy and same for gov, though I get they already do. Seems like we would want a more diverse economy no?
Seriously, can we stop fucking parroting the garbage Moody’s model on a subreddit called r/Economics? The BLS and every regional Reserve Bank have thoroughly disproven Moody’s conclusions time and time again.
Sure, if you ignore every ecological/climate/natural metric and only focus on anthropocentric ones. Whether they like it or not, the top Nth percent is still just as reliant on the biosphere as everyone else, and as such are just as much on the hook as those metrics continue to decline, ironically overwhelmingly because of the lifestyles they enjoy.
Ah, okay, so when I'm at the mall and it is shoulder to shoulder in the Lego store, those are AI investors? The Reddit bubble simply doesn't get outside enough because every single area in which I interact with the economy is crowded with people spending money, especially anything to do with travel and recreation.
Goes out to spend money, sees other people spending money, doesn't see people not spending money (cuz they're not out, duh), thinks everyone is spending money.
Increased consumer spending is not a diagnostic for confidence. People will spend more if they are confident, but also if they anticipate price increases in the future. We are in a period of stubborn and palpable inflation right now, so the increase in consumer spending doesn't really tell us how people feel on its own.
No it means those people probably have most of their money in indicies that track tech/ai and not sitting around in their checking accounts, and have seen significant gains in their portfolios. I mean qqq alone is up 16% ytd, so yea they're probably feeling pretty comfortable spending money.
Meanwhile the rest of us look at Legos as a luxury lol
Median household income in the US is nearly ~$90k. No matter what your social (or social media) bubble is experiencing/telling you, the data is clear. Legos are not a “luxury” for the median American household by any stretch. They are dime-a-dozen in playrooms across the country.
Just because you are struggling doesn’t mean (for example) the iPhone Duo isn’t sold out through January. Or countless other consumer goods. There is a crap ton of money floating around the economy even at the median level. Just because you aren’t experiencing that doesn’t mean it isn’t the “norm”. And that certainly isn’t all, or even mostly, “AI money”.
The Reddit bubble of unemployed gender studies grads isn't any reflection of those who graduated from nursing school, engineering, business, etc. who are employed are spending their income.
I fear knowing what the actual numbers are like if they didn't include forced spending like healthcare. Didn't the feds cut funding to a bunch of public programs, forcing the private sector to bear the brunt?
That’s the conclusion you drew from this article? That “AI” isn’t driving the economy?
My goodness.
The consumer beneficiaries of this economy are asset holders. Stocks. And AI stocks have been boosted by their speculatoryive spending on infrastructure.
So, you see, companies spending on AI infrastructure are driving the economy now, some directly, and some as a result of asset appreciation to the shareholders, due to that spending.
>It was largely driven by services, including healthcare, visits to restaurants and bars as well as hotel and motel stays.
I would be interested to know the breakdown in "healthcare" as a spending category. Is that elective treatements or the kind of healthcare that's increasing medical debt? I guess "spending" doesn't necessarily mean it's fully paid for yet.
It also shouldn't be a surprise to see hotel visits increasing over the summer when everyone takes their vacation and has time off.
But according to the very quote you post, the higher income brackets have had their wealth boosted by AI, which is allowing them to increase their consumer spending.
AI investment was 52.4% of that 3.4% GDP growth. Growth being so heavily concentrated in a single sector like that isn’t good, especially when cracks are beginning to show in the AI investment world.
Most consumer spending is being driven by wealthy households. I believe the top 10% wealthiest households are responsible for over 50% of consumer spending. Historically, I believe middle class was largely responsible for most consumer spending.
While gasoline sales are counted in consumer spending, the Business at Gas Stations report from the Commerce Dept doesn't have any evidence for this theory of yours.
Credit card defaults are also down significantly YoY
That 50% figure is nowhere near as definitive as you're suggesting. It comes from Moody's Analytics estimating consumption indirectly through income and savings data, not actually measuring household purchases.
The Federal Reserve's October 2026 research, using direct spending data from its 2025 Survey of Consumer Finances, found that the wealthiest 10% accounted for approximately 28% of measured household spending, not 50%.
You're also conflating wealth with income. Moody's original estimate concerns the highest-income households, not necessarily the wealthiest.
And your historical comparison is equally questionable. Even accepting Moody's historical estimates, the fact that the bottom 90% collectively accounted for most spending doesn't establish that the middle class specifically drove the economy.
There’s plenty of data here building on these points from the Minneapolis Fed, touching on some of the measurement discrepancies cited https://www.minneapolisfed.org/article/2026/have-us-consumers-gone-k-shaped-a-review-of-the-data
It shows how ridiculous and confusing modern economics has become. Some people still believe the core consumer price index is a reliable way of measuring inflation.
Yes, that's the whole reason why it's "core". Food and energy prices are extremely volatile for reasons that don't necessarily represent the overall level of inflation, so stripping them out gives you a better idea of the underlying level of inflation in the whole economy in the long run. The headline CPI numbers do include food and energy
It’s why I prefer the headline consumer price index since to me it’s more accurate. Food is a necessity of life and removing it because it’s “volatile” sounds like a fancy way of saying it’s too inconvenient and makes the government look bad. If food prices increase by 20%, then for the average person inflation has increased but the core index says everything is fine.
It has nothing to do with making the government look good. It's mostly a matter of monetary policy. If a spike in energy prices due to, say, some jackass starting a bad war happens, that will spike CPI, rightfully, but it doesn't necessarily have to concern central banks. The reason for the rise isn't that there's too much money in circulation, it's just that some random bullshit happened, and they don't need to raise rates as aggressively as if core CPI reached those levels.
CPI reached as high as 4.2% after the start of the Iran War. Normally that would be an "hey do something right the hell now" at the Fed, but they've been more cautious about raising rates because core CPI (actually Core PCE, which the Fed prefers) hasn't been as elevated, though it is still higher than they'd like and they've raised rates to bring it down
Tbh ... I am starting to grow skeptical of the data releases. Everyone who isn't fu rich is miserable due to the economy and this is being borne out in political polling. How are these economic numbers reflecting a completely different economic reality. The only thing I can think is inflation is being masqueraded as real growth.
The share of GDP coming from income is at near historic lows, so in a way, that data does reflect our reality at least a little bit. There's a lot of growth and money out there, it's just not going to workers who, y'know, do everything.
Workers don’t “do everything.” They largely have jobs because entrepreneurs were willing to take risks, deploy capital (their own or were dynamic enough to raise it), identify opportunities, and build businesses that produce goods and services people actually want.
Labor is obviously essential, but so is capital, management, innovation, and risk-taking. Employees generally get paid regardless of whether the business turns a profit, while owners and investors bear the financial downside.
You can certainly argue that workers deserve a larger share of economic growth, but pretending that business owners are simply passive beneficiaries of other people’s labor fundamentally misunderstands how wealth is created.
The only reason Americans can still spend money is because of credit. If Americans had to use actual money the spending would drop by 70%. You guys are using credit to buy pizza. Nothing says last breath of a dying country more than that.
This has a certain smell of manipulation, all of a sudden the economic indicators are just right, it's like there's no wars or anything making people worry about the future.
This is not reflective of the reality people are feeling. Many people are unemployed, and more are coming. Can’t wait to see the real numbers, not these biased ones from the Trump govt.
Many people are not unemployed the US is at a historically low level of around 4%. You might not like your job but people are spending and paying there bills.
You under represent inflation and all of a sudden real GDP is higher. Diesel is way higher in Q3 than Q2 but none of that seemed to translate into higher prices
Awesome. A strong quarter, and another quarter of robust consumer spending. Robust investment in AI. On track for 3% or more for the year I'd say. Definitely in excess of 2.5% for the year.
For one I don’t trust these numbers they released. I think your highness has a say in what it SHOULD be based off delusional bubble he’s in surrounded by yes men. But if this is accurate, 3.4% is likely consumers using more of their credits cards going into debt. Credit card is almost at an ATM high and feels like the only thing actually going well in the economy is the AI bubble and of course billionaires making deals with their buddies to make more money
Credit cards defaults are way down from where they were a year ago or especially during COVID. Strong consumer spending contributed a large degree to this, with strong growth in the lower and middle income cohorts.
Also these are Fed numbers, they aren't from Trump.
I consider myself fortunate because the life I live and the people around me, we all feel tremendous prosperity right now and in the future. I know that some people don't feel that way but I suspect they are in the minority.
You think a minority don’t feel tremendous prosperity? All the evidence points to the opposite of this. The group of people you interact with may feel prosperity, but the majority absolutely don’t. A 1/4 share your opinion.
Whatever that website is it sucks and the pops make it unviewable. I wonder how much of the increased spending is just the result of higher prices. If everything costs 10% more will that manifest itself as 10% higher GDP? How well does GDP account for inflation?
Reminder, these numbers are likely inflated by Trump Admin and will be revised downward (or upwards wrt inflation) just like all other economic metrics have been since Jan 2025.
Trump Admin lies about everything.
I guess the 1% can spend enough to put up these “brisk” numbers. If that’s really true, and if these aren’t just typical lies and inflated numbers that will be obviously revised in the future as everything has been so far…we might be really fucked! Because main street America isn’t spending briskly, in fact, we’re eating less meals everyday because we’re so fucking poor! It’s like taking crazy pills everyday living in this country right now
Taitertottot | 10 hours ago
I'm not from the US so I'm genuinely curious because I see everyone saying it's just the rich spending more. If you're a normal middle class household, are you buying less, the same, or more than what you would have done two years ago?
KalAtharEQ | 5 hours ago
It’s literally the increase in costs for basic necessities, this garbage is literally just propaganda.
chrisbru | 3 hours ago
Isn’t GDP growth inflation adjusted?
kaminaripancake | 3 hours ago
Wouldn’t that be real gdp growth?
The_Real_Billy_Walsh | 5 hours ago
I’m buying less but spending more
FJ-creek-7381 | 5 hours ago
I’ll tell you what’s really insane is when you calculate the purchasing power of a salary compared to say 1995
If you earned $35,000 a year back in 1995, that salary would have the equivalent buying power of earning $76,825 a year today (that is what I made in 1995 including commission - as a system admin in 2018 I made 80k)
Crazy right!

ILIKESTUFF8989 | 6 hours ago
People are spending more on fuel and food. The basics. Sure the economy grew, we are being forced to spend more
Beneficial-Arugula54 | an hour ago
Lol you think 3.4%GDP growth comes from higher energy prices? Its the semiconductor/data center built out that has propped up the economy.
corva96 | 9 hours ago
When groceries and gas go up, that contributes to higher consumer spending. Wage growth however has stagnated
CanApart1420 | 9 hours ago
Kinda of a disregarded take honestly. The economy is chugging along, but that's because we are all forced to spend far more for our daily existence.
Cold_Pumpkin5449 | 6 hours ago
It's chugging along "for now", because eventually people not being able to afford a home, healthcare, transportation and food will lead to a structural collapse.
DwarfFart | 6 hours ago
I mean haven’t they been stagnant for 40 years or so?
DaNibbles | 9 hours ago
The simplest explanation is K shaped economy. Those who are able to participate in the stock market and have assets are doing fairly well. Those who have most of their expenses going to cost of living are struggling.
Representative-Rip90 | 8 hours ago
You can downvote me if you want but I don't think this is true. Look around everything is packed. Spiderman and The Odyssey have sold record numbers this year. Costcos and Targets are packed. Homes are still flying off the shelves in most places. This is not all rich people but regular people who refuse to stop spending no matter how much they complain about price.
cyrusm_az | 4 hours ago
Homes are not flying off the shelves. Rates are so high nobody who has to get a loan is buying. It’s all cash buying right now.
Massive-Vacation5119 | 3 hours ago
I really don’t think this is true. Will have to do some research to confirm but if it’s only cash buyers, total pool of buyers would be much smaller and homes wouldn’t sell as fast.
Misfiring | 7 hours ago
The US has lots of rich people and lots of poor people.
The bottom 50% only pays 3% of income tax, which gives you an idea of their spending power.
Ok_Drummer6282 | 8 hours ago
I kinda wish movies were ticket numbers and not prices. Went to see Odyssey and I can say I wont be going back to the movie for a long long time. It was like 60 bucks for 2 people. Of which people will go (go at noon on a weekday and dont buy drink or anything to eat and sneak candy in) which ultimately kinda proves the point of yeah... everything looks like its going up because its fucking expensive.
DaNibbles | 8 hours ago
No need to downvote, I definitely admit it's way more complicated than what I say and don't care to argue that I am right. It's just a simple explanation I have heard that may not apply.
I know for me personally I live in a very high growth and low cost of living area and people are definitely out spending
DueCash8471 | 7 hours ago
It's not true lol
thiscantbit | 8 hours ago
Two movies, two movies.
mistletoe9 | 8 hours ago
Two movies, he says, as the entire box office is headed for a record year since 2019
Past_Celebration861 | 7 hours ago
sales revenue is at a high point, but that’s driven by increased prices and premium format popularity rather than attendance/ticket volume
TooBusySaltMining | 6 hours ago
Are the high prices discouraging people from going to the movies, or is it a sign that Americans have more money after paying their bills for entertainment?
thiscantbit | 6 hours ago
No.
taylordabrat | 6 hours ago
That doesn’t change the fact that people are spending more money on these things.
AlcibiadesTheCat | 8 hours ago
A K- shaped economy doesn’t mean “ten people have money and every other human is in abject poverty,” it means “you’re either doing really well (see homes flying off the shelf or going to Target or Costco (the store famous for its high prices?)) or you’re broke as hell.”
Surprise surprise, the latter one is what’s happening.
SomeNeighborhood7126 | 9 hours ago
You are correct, its the rich spending more.
dickwheat | 7 hours ago
We just aren’t buying anything that’s not necessary anymore. Our groceries, utilities and gas have basically doubled in the last couple years.
FeloniousDrunk101 | 6 hours ago
Absolutely have curbed spending. Eating out less, saying “no” more. Buying the store brand more often. I’ve been very acutely feeling the impact over the past few months specifically.
DwarfFart | 6 hours ago
The same. I don’t buy much anything that’s non essential. Cutting subscriptions to streaming except Spotify for my commute. I buy lunch maybe once a week. But I’m poor and always have been so ain’t no thing
gonzo3625 | 6 hours ago
I'm buying the exact same but it all cost way more, so technically I'm spending more dollars.
FreshStar7 | 4 hours ago
These metrics are pure propaganda and purposefully hiding the real issues. Costs of everything is rising and wages are stagnant. We have to spend more just to get by and the wealthy prop up the economy and hide the real pain.
Zeddo52SD | 4 hours ago
In this case, over half of GDP growth is investments in AI related things. The rich are keeping the economy afloat by investing money and staying steady/increasing spending, but ~~if~~ when the AI bubble pops, it’s going to be the dot-com downturn all over again. Not quite the housing market collapse of 2008-2009, but it was devastating in its own right.
Flimsy_Meal_4199 | 4 hours ago
People on reddit are out of touch
Short_Past_468 | 4 hours ago
Saving/investing more. Also spending more, but less often after making concerted efforts to minimize wasteful spending. Going out to eat a lot less, but somewhat larger spend on groceries. Christmas is secret Santa, not gifts for everybody. Phone calls with family are longer, not planning as many family based vacations.
SaturdaysAFTBs | an hour ago
Because Reddit skews liberal and lower income so they tend to complain about the economy, while the middle and upper middle classes do decently well.
GiveMeSandwich2 | an hour ago
Big growth driver is AI capex spending. It’s basically all the mega big corporations driving the spending and GDP.
TheButtDog | 9 hours ago
Reddit isn’t real life. It has a higher proportion of people who come here to complain about how broke they feel
RoliePolieOlie__ | 9 hours ago
America is doing great
EdliA | 2 hours ago
Do not trust American Redditors, they always complained on how poor they are. Been for more than a decade here and they make it sound like they live in some third world country and are starving. Meanwhile they're mostly overweight and consume per capita much more than the rest of the world. One thing I've learned is that is never enough for them, that's why they complain.
[OP] Individual_Fox_2950 | 9 hours ago
More than!
ernyc3777 | 3 hours ago
It’s dollar spent not items purchased. The every man is still spending a lot of their money they have so consumer spending
Also, tech companies have been trading billions back and forth.
Amazon buys $1B from Microsoft in server capacity. Who buys $1B in chips from Nvidia who buys $1B of customer data from Meta. Who buys $1B of AWS to run the back of Facebook.
$4B in economic activity though $1B is actually moving.
Usual_Indication9106 | 14 hours ago
Something the surface level discourse online consistently misses on is that for all its endless, destructive and self destructive insanity, the US economy remains frankly unparalleled.
3.4% for a developed economy is massive and that's with the currently most deranged leader in the world doing everything in its power to tank it. Every other major, developed country not called South Korea or Taiwan would kill for that number.
Imagine if the US just decides to start electing... Not even good presidents, just conventionally, regular, bad ones.
TaxGuy_021 | 13 hours ago
What people dont realize is that the U.S. economy is built to work despite the federal and state governments, not because of them.
With respect to your point on what might happen if we had conventional presidents; look at the period between 1980 to 2000.
None of those guys were good, but they were all conventional politicians.
Citizen_of_Danksburg | 10 hours ago
Clinton was pretty sick mate idk on that one
Interesting_Total_98 | 11 hours ago
>built to work despite the federal and state governments
The government is responsible for massive subsidies, infrastructure, policing crime, etc.
The reason the economy is doing so well in spite of Trump in particular is because the overall government is far larger than the presidency.
scrandlle | 10 hours ago
This is true in every country but as a % of GDP, the US isn't even remotely close to the top in terms of government spending.
The US only spends about 50% of the top nation (even smaller, if you could get an accurate figure from China who should be #1 but doesn't report enough info), the large majority of EU members all spend more than it.
Interesting_Total_98 | an hour ago
The U.S. doesn't need as much influence to be on top due to a massive amount of luck, particularly when it comes to population and resources.
TaxGuy_021 | 11 hours ago
You misunderstand.
It's built to work despite the administrations in place. Not the entire concept of government.
AntonioH02 | 11 hours ago
Yep. You can realize this simply by looking how big the share of GDP in the USA is Consumption (and exports/imports)rather than Government Expenditure
Interesting_Total_98 | an hour ago
One being larger isn't the same as one working in spite of the other.
Interesting_Total_98 | 11 hours ago
That depends on the admistration.
Thadlust | 11 hours ago
GHWB was elite don’t @ me
Late_Stage_Exception | 11 hours ago
Probably one of the few people in modern history whose career path was aimed directly at the presidency.
TaxGuy_021 | 11 hours ago
I don't necessarily disagree with you.
Dry_Try_6047 | 12 hours ago
The economy was ready to go on an absolute tear at the end of Bidens term. Inflation was down, infrastructure investment was up, and of course the AI build out was going to happen regardless. With a Democratic President, I have no doubt we'd be seeing historic economic growth.
Whether it would've been felt by every day people, that's open for debate ...
Few-Lengthiness-2286 | 7 hours ago
Stock market wise it has been historic growth…..
1900grs | 6 hours ago
Sure, but large swaths of the stock market are divorced from the economy and 38% of Americans do not own stocks. And for what it's worth, the market has been on the same trajectory since 2022.
Few-Lengthiness-2286 | 5 hours ago
It’s been on the same “trajectory” since it started lol
That means 62% own stocks. Pretty good imo
Rough_Company_6607 | 10 hours ago
[Citations needed]
bean930 | 7 hours ago
There were hundreds of infrastructure, research, and energy-related projects that were funded by the BIL and IRA and set to kickoff in late 2024/early 2025 that were terminated by DOGE. Only a fraction of them have been clawed back after 2+ years of appeal.
Source: I'm the PI of one of those projects...awarded in 2023, terminated in 2024 during negotiations, immediately appealed, and only just reinstated 10 days ago. Yay! Now we can finally kickoff our project on a 3.5 year-old budget.
Thadlust | 11 hours ago
Not really. If Biden regulated AI, it’s possible we wouldn’t see this much investment.
Interesting_Total_98 | 11 hours ago
There was nothing in his platform that would've lowered the amount of investment.
End3rWi99in | 6 hours ago
He wouldn't have, though. We know that. That hypothetical is sort of pointless then.
gamelover99 | 12 hours ago
Yep, as a guy who's fully invested all his money in the USA this is what makes me keep investing.
The US economy has structural advantages so ingrained that even Trump being a complete monkey on a keyboard cannot hope to tank it all in one term. Of course he needs to be gone asap though, hopefully the midterms don't disappoint.
But these figures keep me sane for now. My retirement depends on the US economy producing returns for at least 20-30 more years lol, then y'all can elect more trumps afterwards if y'all haven't learnt till then.
ICLazeru | 4 hours ago
Don't challenge him. If he had his way in all things, he'd already have us ruined.
MC_Fap_Commander | 5 hours ago
There are also ample resources to fund at least a basic social safety net that would subsidize future economic growth. But I guess thinking long term is woke or whatever.
semisolidwhale | 3 hours ago
> But I guess thinking ~~long term~~ is woke or whatever.
ICLazeru | 4 hours ago
A good chunk of that GDP is from AI investment and exploding government spending, which are contributing unfortunately little to the real wellbeing of the nation.
natursekte | 8 hours ago
It's because the US understands to run a deficit to be economically successful.
DICKPICDOUG | 5 hours ago
Deficit spending is always wildly successful until it suddenly, spectacularly, is not.
TheButtDog | 9 hours ago
Yea it’s almost as if the President doesn’t actually have all that much leverage over the economy most of the time
ICLazeru | 4 hours ago
Presidents have limited ability to improve the economy most of the time. They have plenty of power to harm it.
MediocreAssociate466 | 9 hours ago
This is famously not true in times of crisis. Trump covid response , bush housing crisis, Herbert hoover.
If you need a strong stimulus package, reaction to a housing market collapse, pandemic, jobs package you definitely can't have some cartoon in charge.
Also a lot of "consumer spending is up" could literally just be we pay more now for groceries fuel and electric than we did pre Iran war.
TheButtDog | 7 hours ago
>If you need a strong stimulus package, reaction to a housing market collapse, pandemic, jobs package
Congress and the Federal Reserve play significant roles in addressing every crisis you just named. A jobs package is literally created and authored by Congress
Neither answers directly to the President. I'd even argue that they have more direct power than the President to address those problems.
MediocreAssociate466 | 6 hours ago
I see you have never heard of things like the New deal so there is no point having this conversation with you.
Literally the largest legislation overhaul in history was pushed through by a President to combat the great depression (and yes Congress does have to vote on it).
Some president do actually do more than host rallies for themselves and golf.
TheButtDog | 6 hours ago
You’re cherry picking a unique power dynamic.
FDR was easily the strongest President of the past 100 years. Modern Presidents don’t have his level of power and influence
MediocreAssociate466 | 6 hours ago
They have plenty of power and influence, if the current occupant wanted to he could spend the hundreds of billions of dollars we will have wasted in Iran on a comprehensive jobs and infrastructure package with congressional support.
Instead we get endless wars and massive cuts to most US agencies that actually help people like Medicare, the VA and the National Parks.
Verumsemper | 11 hours ago
Do you believe the number from this administration around election season??
scrandlle | 10 hours ago
The number comes from a Fed report, not the Trump administration
poseidonsharp | 11 hours ago
This is “the election was rigged” territory.
People should read this comment and see it as the flip side of a maga extremist.
There is no evidence that the numbers are being fabricated.
Verumsemper | 11 hours ago
Are you claiming that GPD numbers have never been wrong and then revised upwards or downwards after the initial reporting?
Hamiltonblewit | 11 hours ago
That isn’t a fabrication and holds true for other major economies. Frankly, there isn’t much signs that U.S consumers aren’t spending considering the fact that the trend was still occurring during the peak of COVID inflation and other periods of financial instability - AI investments while unprofitable has seen enormous revenue growth in recent earnings report with no signs of it stopping just yet.
Verumsemper | 11 hours ago
Are you claiming that these initial reports have never been wrong and needed significant adjustments after the fact?
cxavierc21 | 10 hours ago
Why are you talking about planned GDP estimate revisions (the revisions are published on a schedule as the data is collated) as if they are proof the numbers are manipulated?
You know the inputs to estimates are published right? You, if you had any knowledge of economics at all, could recreate the calculations. Thousands of people who would love to call it out for being manipulated do recalculate the estimates. Why do you think they’re not calling it out? Are they in on it too?
Verumsemper | 10 hours ago
So what happened with all the previous revisions of these estimates, didn't all the people looking at the data realize something was off?
cxavierc21 | 10 hours ago
They’re estimates published with confidence intervals, the revisions are expected.
You just have no idea what you are talking about. It’s crazy, people on Reddit have no problem popping into economics or law or medical subreddits and just spouting off as if they have any idea.
Verumsemper | 10 hours ago
but isn't "advance estimates " of GDP done on incomplete data thus are more likely to be incorrect due to the fact it uses only 75% of actual data and the other 25% is based on projections?
AcanthaceaeJumpy697 | 11 hours ago
How could you think it works like that.. why are you here?
AmericaVotedTrump | 14 hours ago
I cant access the article because of pop-ups. Does the article breakdown the different in spending between AI and consumer spending? I haven't seen many metrics reflecting strong consumer spending, more so a pullback for the lower income brackets, but AI has been said to propping up the US economy as a whole.
Seagull84 | 4 hours ago
The bottom 50% decreased spending substantially, and the top 10% increased it at a rate that more than made up the difference.
Everything has become more expensive, so the top 10% had to spend more to keep up with inflation without changing their lifestyles.
I know because I'm in the top 1%. None of our habits have changed, everything just costs us more.
Various-Gazelle4713 | 14 hours ago
From a different non paywall reporting:
“Consumer spending, which accounts for more than two-thirds of the economy, increased at a 3.8% rate in the July-September period, matching the second quarter's pace. It was largely driven by services, including healthcare, visits to restaurants and bars as well as hotel and motel stays.
There was a pullback in spending on goods like motor vehicles and household furniture. Higher-income households, whose wealth has been boosted by AI-related strength in the stock market, are driving much of the spending.”
So no, AI is not “propping up the economy” no matter how many headlines or Reddit posts claim otherwise. Spending in higher income brackets on the other hand is driving an increasing amount of consumer demand.
Edit: Wealth gains (derived from AI related/adjacent industries) for high earners aren’t being liquidated for increased consumer spending. They are simply more confident in the economy in which they are participating/invested in and are willing to spend more (and therefore save less) of their income. There is a very fine line between correlation and causation.
Albertuscamus12 | 14 hours ago
The article literally says higher income households are spending more because their wealth is boosted by AI driven stock market tho...
jackanape7 | 14 hours ago
Yes. The top 10% account for 50% of consumer spending. They're doing just fine apparently.
Material_Policy6327 | 13 hours ago
Doesn’t this feel like a bad sign if top 10% accounts got 50%? This seems to indicate to me that companies will only care about wealthy and same for gov, though I get they already do. Seems like we would want a more diverse economy no?
firejuggler74 | 13 hours ago
It's always like that, has been for awhile now.
JRoxas | 13 hours ago
Good thing that stat is not true.
Leoraig | 11 hours ago
Your source is a reddit comment that links to a twitter post and another reddit comment? Really?
AlexanderNigma | 9 hours ago
There is a link to a government paper in the linked reddit comment
Leoraig | 8 hours ago
A government paper from 2019 that does not really say that the stat is not true.
BlurryEcho | 12 hours ago
Seriously, can we stop fucking parroting the garbage Moody’s model on a subreddit called r/Economics? The BLS and every regional Reserve Bank have thoroughly disproven Moody’s conclusions time and time again.
thehourglasses | 13 hours ago
Sure, if you ignore every ecological/climate/natural metric and only focus on anthropocentric ones. Whether they like it or not, the top Nth percent is still just as reliant on the biosphere as everyone else, and as such are just as much on the hook as those metrics continue to decline, ironically overwhelmingly because of the lifestyles they enjoy.
ResearcherSad9357 | 6 minutes ago
And the market just went up and up forever so spending will never end! Oh wait...
jeffwulf | 13 hours ago
This is not true per good quality data on spending by quintile.
TheHomersapien | 13 hours ago
Ah, okay, so when I'm at the mall and it is shoulder to shoulder in the Lego store, those are AI investors? The Reddit bubble simply doesn't get outside enough because every single area in which I interact with the economy is crowded with people spending money, especially anything to do with travel and recreation.
Albertuscamus12 | 13 hours ago
Also you're heavily blinded by survivorship bias:
Goes out to spend money, sees other people spending money, doesn't see people not spending money (cuz they're not out, duh), thinks everyone is spending money.
ICLazeru | 3 hours ago
Increased consumer spending is not a diagnostic for confidence. People will spend more if they are confident, but also if they anticipate price increases in the future. We are in a period of stubborn and palpable inflation right now, so the increase in consumer spending doesn't really tell us how people feel on its own.
Albertuscamus12 | 13 hours ago
No it means those people probably have most of their money in indicies that track tech/ai and not sitting around in their checking accounts, and have seen significant gains in their portfolios. I mean qqq alone is up 16% ytd, so yea they're probably feeling pretty comfortable spending money.
Meanwhile the rest of us look at Legos as a luxury lol
Various-Gazelle4713 | 13 hours ago
Median household income in the US is nearly ~$90k. No matter what your social (or social media) bubble is experiencing/telling you, the data is clear. Legos are not a “luxury” for the median American household by any stretch. They are dime-a-dozen in playrooms across the country.
Just because you are struggling doesn’t mean (for example) the iPhone Duo isn’t sold out through January. Or countless other consumer goods. There is a crap ton of money floating around the economy even at the median level. Just because you aren’t experiencing that doesn’t mean it isn’t the “norm”. And that certainly isn’t all, or even mostly, “AI money”.
Appropriate-Bid8671 | 14 hours ago
All those poors complaining about high prices can just get all the way fucked.
CautiousOptimism09 | 14 hours ago
As is tradition
TaylorSwiftian | 10 hours ago
The Reddit bubble of unemployed gender studies grads isn't any reflection of those who graduated from nursing school, engineering, business, etc. who are employed are spending their income.
espressocycle | 9 hours ago
I'm quite employed and I'm spending all my damned income and not by choice.
UncleGreenwood | 14 hours ago
Healthcare costs are counted as consumer spending? That seems insane to me, anyone know the justification there?
jeffwulf | 13 hours ago
Consuming healthcare services is consumers spending on healthcare services.
Geoffboyardee | 14 hours ago
I fear knowing what the actual numbers are like if they didn't include forced spending like healthcare. Didn't the feds cut funding to a bunch of public programs, forcing the private sector to bear the brunt?
082426grateful | 13 hours ago
That’s the conclusion you drew from this article? That “AI” isn’t driving the economy?
My goodness.
The consumer beneficiaries of this economy are asset holders. Stocks. And AI stocks have been boosted by their speculatoryive spending on infrastructure.
So, you see, companies spending on AI infrastructure are driving the economy now, some directly, and some as a result of asset appreciation to the shareholders, due to that spending.
It’s all computer now.
tMoneyMoney | 13 hours ago
>It was largely driven by services, including healthcare, visits to restaurants and bars as well as hotel and motel stays.
I would be interested to know the breakdown in "healthcare" as a spending category. Is that elective treatements or the kind of healthcare that's increasing medical debt? I guess "spending" doesn't necessarily mean it's fully paid for yet.
It also shouldn't be a surprise to see hotel visits increasing over the summer when everyone takes their vacation and has time off.
AmericaVotedTrump | 14 hours ago
Thank you
CurzesTeddybear | 13 hours ago
But according to the very quote you post, the higher income brackets have had their wealth boosted by AI, which is allowing them to increase their consumer spending.
Did you not read what you posted?
thrashalj | 14 hours ago
Yes the circlej***s passing money around these companies is market manipulation full stop.
Tierbook96 | 14 hours ago
Even if i agree what's that got to do with GDP?
one-won-juan | 14 hours ago
nothing, the report doesn’t fit that person’s narrative or personal experience so they are just dismissing it entirely
eptesicusfuscus | 14 hours ago
By that definition, I'm manipulating the economy by buying food. Get out of here with these ridiculous statements.
Zeddo52SD | 4 hours ago
AI investment was 52.4% of that 3.4% GDP growth. Growth being so heavily concentrated in a single sector like that isn’t good, especially when cracks are beginning to show in the AI investment world.
Business-Lab8650 | 11 hours ago
Most consumer spending is being driven by wealthy households. I believe the top 10% wealthiest households are responsible for over 50% of consumer spending. Historically, I believe middle class was largely responsible for most consumer spending.
AntonioH02 | 11 hours ago
Not saying I don’t believe but it would be nice if you provided a source.
Business-Lab8650 | 7 hours ago
This was the source I used. If it’s incorrect please provide context
https://www.marketplace.org/story/2025/09/17/top-10-of-earners-make-up-half-of-us-retail-spending
scrandlle | 10 hours ago
This is actually not true, low and middle income spending has been driving consumer spending as per this Fed report the article is based on.
Business-Lab8650 | 7 hours ago
This was the source I used. Please provide context
https://www.marketplace.org/story/2025/09/17/top-10-of-earners-make-up-half-of-us-retail-spending
espressocycle | 9 hours ago
Yeah, they're running up their credit cards buying gas.
scrandlle | 9 hours ago
While gasoline sales are counted in consumer spending, the Business at Gas Stations report from the Commerce Dept doesn't have any evidence for this theory of yours.
Credit card defaults are also down significantly YoY
iCarlysTeats | 8 hours ago
CC delinquencies are down, but defaults are at their highest since 2011
plebbut | 11 hours ago
That 50% figure is nowhere near as definitive as you're suggesting. It comes from Moody's Analytics estimating consumption indirectly through income and savings data, not actually measuring household purchases.
The Federal Reserve's October 2026 research, using direct spending data from its 2025 Survey of Consumer Finances, found that the wealthiest 10% accounted for approximately 28% of measured household spending, not 50%.
You're also conflating wealth with income. Moody's original estimate concerns the highest-income households, not necessarily the wealthiest.
And your historical comparison is equally questionable. Even accepting Moody's historical estimates, the fact that the bottom 90% collectively accounted for most spending doesn't establish that the middle class specifically drove the economy.
Clean_Kangaroo_5547 | 11 hours ago
How do you know all this stuff?
plebbut | 11 hours ago
My BA is in Economics
Clean_Kangaroo_5547 | 11 hours ago
I see, nice.
spaghettiking216 | 9 hours ago
There’s plenty of data here building on these points from the Minneapolis Fed, touching on some of the measurement discrepancies cited https://www.minneapolisfed.org/article/2026/have-us-consumers-gone-k-shaped-a-review-of-the-data
Business-Lab8650 | 6 hours ago
It shows how ridiculous and confusing modern economics has become. Some people still believe the core consumer price index is a reliable way of measuring inflation.
Stormtemplar | 6 hours ago
Yeah, people who are correct
Business-Lab8650 | 6 hours ago
Doesn’t the core consumer price index not include the price of food?
Stormtemplar | 6 hours ago
Yes, that's the whole reason why it's "core". Food and energy prices are extremely volatile for reasons that don't necessarily represent the overall level of inflation, so stripping them out gives you a better idea of the underlying level of inflation in the whole economy in the long run. The headline CPI numbers do include food and energy
Business-Lab8650 | 6 hours ago
It’s why I prefer the headline consumer price index since to me it’s more accurate. Food is a necessity of life and removing it because it’s “volatile” sounds like a fancy way of saying it’s too inconvenient and makes the government look bad. If food prices increase by 20%, then for the average person inflation has increased but the core index says everything is fine.
Stormtemplar | 6 hours ago
It has nothing to do with making the government look good. It's mostly a matter of monetary policy. If a spike in energy prices due to, say, some jackass starting a bad war happens, that will spike CPI, rightfully, but it doesn't necessarily have to concern central banks. The reason for the rise isn't that there's too much money in circulation, it's just that some random bullshit happened, and they don't need to raise rates as aggressively as if core CPI reached those levels.
CPI reached as high as 4.2% after the start of the Iran War. Normally that would be an "hey do something right the hell now" at the Fed, but they've been more cautious about raising rates because core CPI (actually Core PCE, which the Fed prefers) hasn't been as elevated, though it is still higher than they'd like and they've raised rates to bring it down
UnidentifiedTomato | 11 hours ago
How can anyone even read that and think 10% of the population is spending 50%?
plebbut | 11 hours ago
Unfortunately, a lot of these subs are overrun with slacktivists, especially law, investing, and economics.
maikuxblade | 9 hours ago
Its a direct consequence of a K-shaped economy
abasoglu | 13 hours ago
Tbh ... I am starting to grow skeptical of the data releases. Everyone who isn't fu rich is miserable due to the economy and this is being borne out in political polling. How are these economic numbers reflecting a completely different economic reality. The only thing I can think is inflation is being masqueraded as real growth.
noveler7 | 12 hours ago
The share of GDP coming from income is at near historic lows, so in a way, that data does reflect our reality at least a little bit. There's a lot of growth and money out there, it's just not going to workers who, y'know, do everything.
kicksnspliffs | 6 hours ago
Workers don’t “do everything.” They largely have jobs because entrepreneurs were willing to take risks, deploy capital (their own or were dynamic enough to raise it), identify opportunities, and build businesses that produce goods and services people actually want.
Labor is obviously essential, but so is capital, management, innovation, and risk-taking. Employees generally get paid regardless of whether the business turns a profit, while owners and investors bear the financial downside.
You can certainly argue that workers deserve a larger share of economic growth, but pretending that business owners are simply passive beneficiaries of other people’s labor fundamentally misunderstands how wealth is created.
dirtylilscot | 9 hours ago
Have you considered the fact that people just like to complain about everything?
Naw, the data is falsified. Gotcha
Striking_Assist_7715 | 2 hours ago
The only reason Americans can still spend money is because of credit. If Americans had to use actual money the spending would drop by 70%. You guys are using credit to buy pizza. Nothing says last breath of a dying country more than that.
Necessary-Road-2397 | 13 hours ago
This has a certain smell of manipulation, all of a sudden the economic indicators are just right, it's like there's no wars or anything making people worry about the future.
carlos_the_dwarf_ | 9 hours ago
You gotta wonder why, if they could just cook the books, there have been lousy ones in the run up to the midterms.
bacon-squared | 12 hours ago
This is not reflective of the reality people are feeling. Many people are unemployed, and more are coming. Can’t wait to see the real numbers, not these biased ones from the Trump govt.
carlos_the_dwarf_ | 9 hours ago
What are you comparing them to to decide if they’re real or not?
zachxyz | 8 hours ago
Vibes
bacon-squared | 4 hours ago
https://www.bea.gov/news/blog/2016-06-29/why-do-old-gdp-numbers-keep-changing
carlos_the_dwarf_ | 4 hours ago
I…don’t think this is an answer to my question.
taylordabrat | 6 hours ago
~Reddit vibes~
AndrewMcIlroy | 7 hours ago
Many people are not unemployed the US is at a historically low level of around 4%. You might not like your job but people are spending and paying there bills.
alaphamale | 6 hours ago
Their.
Long-Emu-7870 | 13 hours ago
It grew only a 'sluggish' 1.5% last quarter,so maybe this is a measurement issue. Also I think real earnings were down.
Very interesting.
US economy grows at brisk 3.4% pace in third quarter on strong consumer spending and AI investment
Whaddduptho | 13 hours ago
Umm, no. Your information is out of date. Last quarter was 2.2%.
Tenth_avenuefrezeout | 11 hours ago
“ I think real earnings were down. “ Reddit Moment.
coryscandy | 11 hours ago
Pakistani moment *
Broken-Sarcasm-Meter | 10 hours ago
You under represent inflation and all of a sudden real GDP is higher. Diesel is way higher in Q3 than Q2 but none of that seemed to translate into higher prices
Whaddduptho | 13 hours ago
Awesome. A strong quarter, and another quarter of robust consumer spending. Robust investment in AI. On track for 3% or more for the year I'd say. Definitely in excess of 2.5% for the year.
lawn_furniture | 12 hours ago
For one I don’t trust these numbers they released. I think your highness has a say in what it SHOULD be based off delusional bubble he’s in surrounded by yes men. But if this is accurate, 3.4% is likely consumers using more of their credits cards going into debt. Credit card is almost at an ATM high and feels like the only thing actually going well in the economy is the AI bubble and of course billionaires making deals with their buddies to make more money
scrandlle | 10 hours ago
Credit cards defaults are way down from where they were a year ago or especially during COVID. Strong consumer spending contributed a large degree to this, with strong growth in the lower and middle income cohorts.
Also these are Fed numbers, they aren't from Trump.
CastleSF | 7 hours ago
I consider myself fortunate because the life I live and the people around me, we all feel tremendous prosperity right now and in the future. I know that some people don't feel that way but I suspect they are in the minority.
alaphamale | 6 hours ago
You think a minority don’t feel tremendous prosperity? All the evidence points to the opposite of this. The group of people you interact with may feel prosperity, but the majority absolutely don’t. A 1/4 share your opinion.
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2026/07/23/americans-evaluations-of-the-economy-remain-negative/
TheActuaryist | 13 hours ago
Whatever that website is it sucks and the pops make it unviewable. I wonder how much of the increased spending is just the result of higher prices. If everything costs 10% more will that manifest itself as 10% higher GDP? How well does GDP account for inflation?
Careless-Internet-63 | 13 hours ago
Reported GDP growth numbers typically are adjusted for inflation
Curmudgeonadjacent | 12 hours ago
Reminder, these numbers are likely inflated by Trump Admin and will be revised downward (or upwards wrt inflation) just like all other economic metrics have been since Jan 2025.
Trump Admin lies about everything.
scrandlle | 10 hours ago
These are from the Fed, not Trump.
cyberdude419 | 12 hours ago
I guess the 1% can spend enough to put up these “brisk” numbers. If that’s really true, and if these aren’t just typical lies and inflated numbers that will be obviously revised in the future as everything has been so far…we might be really fucked! Because main street America isn’t spending briskly, in fact, we’re eating less meals everyday because we’re so fucking poor! It’s like taking crazy pills everyday living in this country right now
espressocycle | 9 hours ago
It's really the top 10% that are doing great.