If you have ever felt like your paycheck isn’t keeping pace with the broader economy, official data confirms that intuition. Here is a breakdown of why this shift happened and what it means for the modern workforce.

Understanding the Decline in Labor Share

To comprehend how national income is distributed, economists track two distinct metrics: wages and salaries versus total labor compensation.

• Wages and Salaries Only: Isolating direct cash compensation reveals a dramatic slide. Historically, direct pay accounted for well over 50% of national income through the mid-20th century, but it has now dropped toward the low 40s.

• Total Labor Compensation: This broader measure includes non-wage benefits like employer-sponsored health insurance and retirement contributions. While sitting noticeably higher (around 54% as of early 2026), it still represents a substantial contraction from historical peaks above 65%.

Why Are Wages Shrinking Relative to National Income?

Economic research points to a few powerful structural drivers behind the divergence between national wealth and worker pay:

• Globalization: The opening of international trade and global supply chains allowed companies to source labor internationally, increasing competition and exerting downward pressure on domestic wage growth.

• Automation and Technology: Advances in software, robotics, and artificial intelligence have made capital investment far more efficient than expanding headcount, shifting a larger share of financial returns toward investors and business owners.

• Declined Collective Bargaining: A steep structural drop in private-sector unionization over the last 50 years has significantly reduced the bargaining leverage workers traditionally used to secure a larger cut of productivity gains.

• The Productivity-Pay Divergence: Since the late 1970s, worker productivity has skyrocketed, yet median hourly compensation has stagnated by comparison. Employees are generating more value per hour than ever, but less of that economic output translates into take-home pay.

What This Means Moving Forward

The long-term erosion of labor’s share of national income highlights a profound structural challenge in modern economics: overall GDP can grow while the average worker’s slice of the pie shrinks. As automation reshapes industries and labor markets continue to evolve, policymakers and economists face ongoing debates over how to realign productivity gains with equitable wage growth.

The post American Wages Drop to 43% of National Income: What It Means appeared first on USA Network Daily.

Here is everything you need to know about what happened what products are affected and what you should do if you have them at home.

What Caused the Recall

The recall stems from consumer complaints regarding product packaging that appeared bloated leaked or showed signs of premature spoiling. According to Horizon Organic the issue is strictly related to a packaging seal defect rather than any dangerous pathogens allergens or harmful bacterial contamination.

Because the containers fail to maintain their airtight seal the milk inside can spoil long before its printed expiration date resulting in an unpleasant taste odor or texture.

The Affected Products

The nationwide recall impacts specific configurations of the Horizon Organic Shelf Stable Aseptic 1 Percent Chocolate Milk 8 fluid ounce cartons.

12 Pack Cartons

• UPC Code 742365002700

• Case Count 34524 cases

• Best By Dates Early 2027 January 28 January 30 January 31 February 1 February 2 and February 3

18 Pack Cartons

• UPC Code 742365208867

• Case Count 19236 cases

• Best By Dates Early 2027 January 31 February 1 and February 2

No other Horizon Organic products or product lines are impacted by this recall.

What Should You Do

• Check Your Pantry Look through your inventory for any 12 packs or 18 packs matching the UPC numbers and best by dates listed above.

• Inspect for Damage If you notice any cartons that appear bloated swollen or leaking do not consume them.

• Contact for Refunds Consumers who bought the affected milk are advised to stop drinking it discard the product and contact Horizon Organic consumer relations at 1 888 494 3020 to secure a refund or learn more about proof of purchase options.

While pantry staple conveniences are built to sit quietly on shelves for months this recall is a stark reminder to inspect your groceries before pouring especially if packaging looks out of the ordinary.

The post Pantry Check Horizon Organic Recalls Nearly 54000 Cases of Chocolate Milk appeared first on USA Network Daily.

A new survey found that 14% of employers have already dropped GLP-1 coverage or plan to soon, according to reporting via KCAU9. The share of employers covering weight-loss drugs has fallen from 72% in 2025 to 60% in 2026. That’s a steep drop in just one year.

The numbers behind the squeeze

Pharmacy costs are expected to rise 12% for employers next year. Prescription drugs now account for roughly 25% of overall health care spending, and GLP-1s are a huge part of why.

Employer-sponsored health insurance is projected to surpass $18,500 per worker in 2026. That’s a 6.7% jump from 2025, according to Mercer’s data reported by SHRM, and it’s the largest year-over-year increase in 15 years.

If employers make no changes to their current plans at all, that overall increase would climb closer to 9%. GLP-1s alone are now estimated to account for 14% of all prescription drug spending in 2026, and that’s before counting direct-to-consumer sales that bypass insurance entirely.

The drugs themselves aren’t cheap to begin with. Brand-name injectables typically run $1,000 to $1,500 a month per patient, and employers often cover 70% to 100% of that cost.

Real employers, real sticker shock

The Peterson-KFF Health System Tracker interviewed employers directly, and the quotes say more than any statistic could.

One benefits administrator put it simply: GLP-1s went from the 32nd highest pharmacy expense one year to the single highest the very next year. A compensation manager at a large retail firm said their company spent half a million dollars on the drugs, then projected that number would balloon to $1.2 million the following year.

That kind of jump forces hard conversations. Some employers have raised co-pays for the first time in years. Others are adding stricter case management requirements or reconsidering coverage altogether.

It’s not all bad news, though

Here’s where the story gets more complicated than “drugs bad, costs up.” Aon analyzed claims data from 192,000 GLP-1 users and found something worth noting: users saw medical cost growth slow to just 3% over 18 months, compared to 9% for a control group not on the drugs, according to HFMA’s coverage of the findings.

Obesity contributes to more than 60 chronic conditions and drives 66% higher annual health care costs for people affected by it. It also costs the broader U.S. economy up to $1.72 trillion a year. So there’s a real argument that covering these drugs now could save money down the road, especially on cancer and other major cost drivers employers already worry about.

The catch is that “down the road” doesn’t help a CFO looking at next year’s budget. Long-term savings are a bet. This year’s premium increase is a certainty.

Why employers feel stuck either way

Cutting GLP-1 coverage isn’t a simple fix either. Benefits packages have become one of the main ways companies compete for talent, especially in a tight labor market. Stripping a benefit that employees have started to expect risks hurting retention and recruiting, even if it helps the budget in the short term.

And GLP-1s aren’t happening in a vacuum. They’re part of a broader wave of expensive specialty drugs, including cancer treatments, autoimmune therapies, and gene therapies that can cost over $500,000 per treatment. Employers are getting squeezed from multiple directions at once, and GLP-1s just happen to be the most visible, most talked-about piece of it.

There’s also a persistence problem worth mentioning. Data from Prime Therapeutics shows only 1 in 12 patients remain on GLP-1 treatment after three years. Employers are paying a premium for a drug that a lot of patients don’t end up sticking with long term, which makes the return on that investment even harder to predict.

What this means going forward

Expect this tug-of-war to keep playing out through 2026 and beyond. Some employers will keep cutting or restricting coverage. Others will hold the line, betting that long-term health savings and employee retention are worth the short-term cost.

Either way, if you get health insurance through your job and you’re on or considering a GLP-1 medication, it’s worth checking your plan’s coverage details now rather than waiting for open enrollment to surprise you. For more coverage on how health care costs are shifting in 2026, visit our health section.

The post GLP-1 Drugs Are Working. That’s Exactly Why They’re Becoming a Problem for Employers appeared first on USA Network Daily.

This is the fourth product added to the recall since it started. And it’s not slowing down.

What’s actually being recalled

The affected product is Robust Radish Mix, sold in 5oz cups. Here’s exactly what to check in your fridge:

• Barcode: 087906000075
• Lot numbers: 223, 226, 230, and 233
• Distributed: August 13 to August 26, 2026
• Where: Wholesale distributors and grocery stores in Minnesota and Wisconsin

If your sprout mix matches any of that, don’t eat it. Toss it or return it to where you bought it.

How we got here

This recall didn’t start with radishes. Everything Sprouts, based in Minneapolis, first recalled its alfalfa sprouts on August 22, sold under both the Everything Sprouts and Calco brands. Two mixed cups made with that same alfalfa were included too.

That original recall is tied to a real outbreak, not just a precaution. According to Food Poison Journal’s reporting, the alfalfa sprouts have been linked to 55 illnesses across 15 states. Four people have been hospitalized. No deaths have been reported.

Newsweek’s coverage breaks down the case counts further. Of those 55 illnesses, 46 involved E. coli, 7 involved Salmonella, and 2 people had both. Illness onset dates range from May 31 through August 8, so this outbreak has been quietly building for months.

Now the recall has grown to cover four products and six lot codes total. And here’s an important distinction worth repeating exactly: no illnesses have been reported in connection with the radish sprout mix specifically. The expansion is a precaution based on shared production or supply lines, not a sign that radish mix has already made someone sick.

Why STEC and Salmonella are worth taking seriously

Both of these bacteria can cause real harm, especially in certain groups. STEC infections typically cause diarrhea, sometimes bloody, within a few days of eating contaminated food. Most healthy adults recover within a week.

But a subset of people don’t get off that easy. Children under 5, older adults, and anyone with a weakened immune system face a higher risk of hemolytic uremic syndrome, a severe complication that can cause kidney failure. It’s rare, but it’s serious enough that the FDA flags it directly in every STEC recall notice.

Salmonella typically causes nausea, vomiting, and cramping, usually showing up within a day or two of exposure. It’s often self-limiting in healthy people, but again, infants, seniors, and immunocompromised individuals face a higher risk of the infection spreading beyond the gut.

Sprouts specifically are a repeat offender in the food safety world. Their warm, humid growing conditions are exactly the environment bacteria like E. coli and Salmonella thrive in, which is part of why the FDA has issued warnings about raw sprouts for high-risk groups for years. If you’ve followed our coverage of the jalapeño-linked salmonella outbreak from earlier this year, the pattern here will look familiar.

What to do if you bought this

Check your fridge for the barcode and lot numbers listed above. If you’re in Minnesota or Wisconsin and buy sprouts regularly, it’s worth double-checking any recent purchases even if you don’t remember the specific brand.

If you’ve eaten any of the recalled products and are experiencing symptoms like diarrhea, fever, or stomach cramps, contact your doctor. Mention the recall specifically, since it can help guide testing and treatment.

For the full, continuously updated list of what’s been recalled in 2026 so far, check out our running list of FDA food recalls. And for more food safety coverage as this story develops, visit our health section.

This is still an active investigation. Expect updates as the FDA and CDC continue tracing the source.

The post Everything Sprouts Expands Recall Again, This Time Over Radish Sprout Mix appeared first on USA Network Daily.

The company just filed another round of layoff notices. This time, 77 jobs in Washington state are on the chopping block, hitting retail locations, headquarters staff, and even remote employees.

What’s actually being cut

The layoffs will happen in phases between September 21 and November 18, 2026. T-Mobile says the cuts come down to “changing business needs.”

The roles being eliminated span a wide range. Frontline retail workers are losing their jobs right alongside senior corporate directors and system architects. A corporate office in Bothell, Washington, called Canyon Pointe, is closing entirely.

Seven Washington stores are shutting their doors too, stretching from Bellingham to Yakima. Some employees may be offered the chance to relocate, but many won’t have that option.

This is part of something much bigger

These 77 jobs are a small piece of a much larger picture. T-Mobile’s total U.S. headcount dropped by 4,671 employees between December 2025 and June 2026 alone. That’s a 6.7% reduction, according to Fierce Network’s reporting on Deutsche Telekom’s earnings filing.

To put that in perspective, T-Mobile had 70,036 U.S. employees at the end of 2025. By mid-2026, that number had fallen to 65,365.

The company calls this its “Workforce Transformation.” In plain terms, it means centralizing leadership, cutting management layers, and eliminating roles that overlap across departments. T-Mobile recorded $141 million in restructuring charges just in the first half of 2026, plus another $108 million in the second quarter tied specifically to retail changes.

Why this is happening

T-Mobile is betting big on its T-Life app. More customers are handling their accounts, upgrades, and bill payments digitally, so the company sees less need for as many physical stores as it used to run.

CEO Srini Gopalan, who took over the role in November, is leading the restructuring push. It’s a strategy shift that started building in late 2025 and has continued rolling out in waves ever since.

Despite the cuts, T-Mobile isn’t struggling financially. The company repurchased $7.1 billion of its own stock in just the first six months of 2026. That’s a detail worth sitting with. The layoffs aren’t happening because T-Mobile is in trouble. They’re happening because the company is reshaping what it wants to look like going forward, and physical stores and a bigger headcount aren’t part of that plan the way they used to be.

A trend bigger than just T-Mobile

T-Mobile isn’t alone here. Layoffs tied to automation, AI, and cost-cutting have been climbing across corporate America this year, according to tracking from Challenger, Gray & Christmas. Retailers and telecom companies in particular have been shrinking their physical footprints as more business shifts online.

For now, T-Mobile says it’s still evaluating whether more restructuring is coming. That means more store closures and job cuts down the line aren’t off the table.

If you shop at a T-Mobile store regularly, it may be worth checking whether your local location is one of the ones affected before you plan your next visit.

The post T-Mobile Keeps Closing Stores and Cutting Jobs. Here’s What’s Behind It appeared first on USA Network Daily.

What the new study actually found

Researchers followed 95 women diagnosed with breast cancer for an average of 11.5 years. That’s a long follow up period for a nutrition study, which matters. They tracked how much of a plant compound called polyphenols each woman consumed, according to Medical News Today’s coverage.

Polyphenols are the antioxidant compounds found in coffee, tea, berries, and a bunch of other plant foods. The women who consumed more of them, specifically two types called phenolic acids and lignans, had lower rates of breast cancer recurrence and death.

The numbers are notable. According to a breakdown from Tea & Coffee Trade Journal, higher phenolic acid intake was linked to a 65% lower recurrence rate. Total polyphenol intake was also tied to longer survival overall.

So where does coffee fit in? Coffee turned out to be one of the biggest dietary sources of these compounds for the women in the study. That’s the real headline here. Not “coffee cures cancer,” but “coffee is a major delivery vehicle for a compound that seems to matter.”

Before you get too excited

Here’s where I have to be the annoying one. This study had 95 people in it. That’s a small sample. And it’s observational, meaning researchers watched what people already ate and drank, they didn’t run a controlled experiment where one group got extra polyphenols and another didn’t.

That distinction matters a lot. Observational studies are great at spotting patterns, but they’re bad at proving cause and effect. Women who drink more coffee and eat more polyphenol rich foods might also exercise more, smoke less, or have other habits that explain the lower risk, not the coffee itself.

And this isn’t the only recent word on the subject. A much larger European study, the EPIC cohort, looked at polyphenol intake and breast cancer risk and found no clear association at all. Different outcome (that study looked at getting cancer in the first place, not recurrence after diagnosis), but it’s a reminder that this research area is still genuinely mixed.

Other long running research adds more nuance. A separate analysis of the EPIC cohort focused specifically on coffee found that higher caffeinated coffee intake was linked to a modest drop in postmenopausal breast cancer risk, but only for one specific hormone receptor subtype. Decaf showed no such link. In other words, even within “coffee and breast cancer” as a topic, the effect seems to depend heavily on the type of cancer, the type of coffee, and who’s drinking it.

So should you drink more coffee?

I’m not going to tell you to change your coffee habits based on one 95 person study, and honestly, neither should any responsible health researcher. But I also don’t think this is nothing.

What it does support is something doctors have been saying for years without needing a headline to back it up. A diet rich in polyphenols, found in coffee, tea, berries, olive oil, and vegetables like broccoli and onions, is consistently linked to better health outcomes across a bunch of different studies. Coffee just happens to be one of the easiest ways most people already get a dose of it.

If you already drink coffee and enjoy it, this is a reason to feel a little better about the habit, not a reason to suddenly triple your intake. If you don’t drink coffee, this study alone isn’t a strong enough reason to start.

For more research backed health stories like this one, you can check out our full health coverage.

The bigger picture

Nutrition science moves slowly and rarely gives us a clean, single answer. This study adds a genuinely interesting data point to a much larger, messier picture. Other researchers have found the opposite in bigger populations. That’s not a contradiction, it’s just how science actually works. One study is a clue, not a verdict.

So drink your coffee if you like it. Just don’t expect it to do the heavy lifting on its own.

The post Can Your Morning Coffee Actually Lower Breast Cancer Risk? Here’s What the Research Really Says appeared first on USA Network Daily.

Petting zoos are supposed to be the easy, feel good part of childhood. You hold something small and fuzzy. You laugh. You move on. This story is a reminder of how quickly that can flip.

What actually happened

Here’s the short version. Farm Adventures is a mobile petting zoo out of Harmony, North Carolina. The zoo kept its youngest goats in their own pen. That was a smart move, since the goats were too young to be vaccinated.

But sometime in late July, a skunk got into that pen. Nobody saw it happen. Nobody knew. The goats acted totally normal.

So the zoo kept doing what mobile petting zoos do. It loaded up, drove to the next event, and let kids and grandparents bottle feed and cuddle these animals like nothing was wrong.

It wasn’t until one of the goats died that anyone found out. A necropsy came back positive for rabies. Three more goats turned out to be infected too, according to the official NCDHHS press release.

The part that actually bothers me

It’s the timeline. For a full month, from July 28 to August 27, these goats were potentially contagious. They were still out working the circuit. Fairs. Private events. Getting handed to strangers’ kids.

Officials keep stressing there’s no broad public risk. Statistically, that’s probably true. But try telling that to a family whose toddler spent ten minutes cuddling one of those goats in mid August.

For them, “no broad risk” doesn’t land. They’re the small, specific group now stuck calling a health department. Some may need a round of preventive shots, all because an animal that looked completely fine wasn’t.

And that’s the real takeaway. Sick doesn’t always look sick. Rabies can sit quietly for weeks before anything visible shows up, and in a baby goat, the early signs are even easier to miss than in a dog.

It’s the same unsettling logic behind stories like the salmonella outbreak linked to jalapeños in meat products. The danger stays invisible until someone actually gets sick. The zoo did the responsible thing by separating the unvaccinated goats from the herd. It didn’t matter. A skunk still got in, still bit them, and nobody knew for a month.

Do we need to rethink how these operations are run?

I’m not saying shut petting zoos down. I’m not saying treat every farm visit like a hazmat situation. Most of these events go fine, year after year. There’s real value in letting a kid hold a baby goat instead of just seeing one in a picture book.

But this case is a fair argument for change. Traveling operations need better enclosure standards on the road. They need more regular wildlife checks. And they need a clear plan for what happens when an unvaccinated animal might have been exposed to something dangerous.

A skunk sneaking into a pen isn’t some bizarre fluke in rural North Carolina. Skunks are one of the most common rabies carriers around. That’s a known, predictable risk, and mobile operations have far less control over their surroundings than a fixed location does.

This also raises a bigger question about the whole “cute animal encounter” industry. Petting zoos, animal cafes, farm tourism, all of it. The appeal is physical closeness. That’s literally the product.

But that same closeness is what turns one sick animal into a public health scramble. It’s not unlike how fast a contamination issue can spiral, and this year alone has shown how often FDA food recalls have been happening. As these encounters have become a go to for fairs, festivals, and kids’ birthday parties, it’s fair to ask whether the safety rules have kept up. For more stories like this, check out our full health coverage.

If this applies to you, just make the call

If you or your kid touched, held, or bottle fed a baby goat from Farm Adventures, here’s what to do:

• Figure out if you had contact at their Harmony location or at an off-site fair or event between July 28 and August 27.
• Call your local health department. The Iredell County Health Department’s alert has details and contact info.
• Tell them exactly what happened and let them walk you through next steps.
• Call ahead before heading to an ER or urgent care, so staff can point you the right way.

Rabies is almost always fatal once symptoms show up. But preventive treatment works great if you get it in time. So don’t wait around.

I know this feels like an overreaction after what was probably a nice afternoon at a fair. It’s not. Make the call.

The post A Skunk, Four Dead Goats, and a Wake Up Call for “Cute Animal” Tourism appeared first on USA Network Daily.

It sounds alarming, and it has caused plenty of panic online. But before you look at the ground beef in your fridge with suspicion, let’s clear the air.

Federal officials and food safety watchdogs confirm that these rumors are entirely false. There is zero truth to the idea that horse meat is being imported and sold as beef in American supermarkets.

Where Did the Rumor Start?

Like most viral internet panics, this story mixes two completely unrelated headlines:

• The Temporary Beef Import Policy: With U.S. cattle inventory low and grocery prices high, a temporary trade policy opened a window for foreign beef imports to help stabilize supply. Social media commentators baselessly linked this to alternative animals.

• Wild Horse Reports: Around the same time, news reports highlighted debates over how public lands handle wild horse populations. Online creators stitched these two stories together, spinning a false narrative that incoming imported meat was actually processed mustangs.

The Facts: Why the Conspiracy Is False

• Strict USDA Oversight: The U.S. Department of Agriculture (FSIS) maintains rigid security protocols for everything entering the food supply.

• Rigorous Laboratory Testing: Authorities routinely perform laboratory checks, including species-sampling and DNA verification, to ensure package labels are accurate.

• It Is Illegal: Importing horse meat for human consumption is banned under U.S. law. Federal spokespeople have explicitly confirmed that claims of horse meat substitution are completely baseless.

Why Food Scares Spread Online

It is easy to understand why people worry about food fraud. Historical events—such as Europe’s 2013 horsemeat scandal—left a lasting psychological mark on consumers. Pair that memory with high grocery bills, and sensationalized theories catch on quickly.

While agricultural economists continue to debate the market impacts of importing foreign beef, everyday shoppers can rest easy. The meat in your local supermarket is heavily regulated, legally compliant, and precisely what the label says it is.

More Health related blogs 

The post Horse Meat in Supermarkets: The Truth Behind the Viral Rumor appeared first on USA Network Daily.

But lately, scientists have been taking a hard look at one of the most common sugar substitutes out there: xylitol. And the news isn’t great.

Recent large-scale studies are linking high levels of xylitol to a seriously increased risk of heart attacks and strokes. Let’s break down what researchers found, why it happens, and what it actually means for your daily grocery run.

What Did the Research Actually Find?

Researchers tracking thousands of patients over several years wanted to see how popular sugar alcohols affected long-term health. The results caught a lot of experts by surprise:

• The Risk Factor: People who had the highest levels of xylitol circulating in their blood were up to 57% more likely to suffer a major heart event—like a heart attack or stroke—over a multi-year period compared to those with little to no xylitol in their system.

• It Adds Up: The studies showed a clear dose-dependent pattern. Basically, the more xylitol floating around, the higher the risk.

• Standing on Its Own: Even when researchers adjusted for things like age, high blood pressure, diabetes, and smoking, the link between xylitol and heart trouble still stood strong.

Why Does a Sugar Substitute Affect Your Heart?

It sounds weird, right? How could something meant for your teeth or your waistline hurt your heart?

It all comes down to blood clotting. When you consume high amounts of xylitol, it can actually make your blood platelets much more “sticky” and reactive. If platelets clump together too easily inside your blood vessels, they can form a clot. If that clot breaks loose and travels to your heart or brain, it spells trouble.

Sure, our bodies naturally make tiny amounts of xylitol on their own, and you can find trace amounts in some fruits and veggies. But the stuff pumped into commercial “diet” foods? That can be up to 1,000 times higher than what nature intended.

Where Is Xylitol Hiding?

You probably know it’s in sugar-free gum and mints, but xylitol sneaks into a lot of other everyday items marketed as healthy:

• Sugar-free or low-calorie jams and jellies

• “Keto” and diabetic-friendly baked goods and protein bars

• Cough drops and chewable vitamins

• Certain brands of toothpaste and mouthwash

Should You Throw Everything Out?

Before you completely panic and clear out your pantry, take a breath. Here is a realistic way to look at it:

1. Don’t Swap Back to Heavy Sugar: Refined sugar and high-fructose corn syrup come with their own massive list of health problems, including obesity, type 2 diabetes, and heart disease. Trading xylitol for mountains of regular sugar isn’t the fix.

2. Check Your Labels: If you chew a piece of gum once in a while or use xylitol toothpaste, you’re likely fine. The real concern points to heavy, daily consumption of ultra-processed “diet” foods loaded with sugar alcohols.

3. Keep It Balanced: At the end of the day, the safest bet is always leaning toward whole, minimally processed foods rather than relying on heavily engineered packaged snacks.

Have you started noticing more sugar substitutes on ingredient labels lately, or are you trying to cut back on them? Let’s talk about it in the comments!https://usanetworkdaily.com/category/health/

.At the end of the day, making smarter swaps goes beyond just cutting out artificial additives. Check out our guide on simple daily habits for a healthier heart and lifestyle to learn more about keeping your wellness routine balanced.”

The post That “Sugar-Free” Gum or Jam Might Be Hitting Your Heart Harder Than You Think appeared first on USA Network Daily.

What the Data Actually Shows

The Commerce Department’s Personal Income and Outlays report landed this week, and it tells a story of a consumer economy running out of patience. The Personal Consumption Expenditures price index — the Federal Reserve’s preferred inflation yardstick — climbed 0.2% from June, holding the annual rate at 3.7%. That’s not the direction the Fed wants to see. Economists polled by FactSet had penciled in a smaller 0.1% monthly gain and expected the yearly rate to ease to 3.6%.

Strip out the swings in food and energy prices, and “core” PCE tells the same story: up 0.2% for the month and 3.3% higher than a year ago.

Here’s the twist, though. Even as spending cooled, saving picked up. The personal saving rate rose to 3% in July, bouncing back from a four-year low of 2.6% in June. Solid income growth gave households a little breathing room to set money aside instead of spending it — a sign people are getting more defensive about their finances, not just running out of cash.

It Follows an Even Sharper Retail Warning

This isn’t an isolated data point. It lines up with the retail sales report that came out earlier in the month, which showed a steeper pullback than economists expected. Retail sales fell 0.6% in July from June — the biggest monthly drop since May 2025 — and consumer sentiment from the University of Michigan survey slid about 8% over the same stretch.

Heather Long, chief economist at Navy Federal Credit Union, put it bluntly: American consumers are showing signs of fatigue. Some of July’s slowdown reflects a hangover from June’s big sales events — Amazon Prime Day, Walmart+, Target Circle deals — pulling spending forward. But even accounting for that, and even with gas prices falling, shoppers just weren’t opening their wallets elsewhere.

Why This Matters

Consumer spending drives roughly two-thirds of US economic growth, so when households pull back at the same time inflation stays stuck above target, it puts the Fed in an awkward spot. Cooling demand would normally argue for interest rate cuts. But inflation running hotter than expected argues for caution. The central bank is left threading a needle between supporting a weakening consumer and not letting price growth reaccelerate.

For everyday households, the message from the University of Michigan survey is the clearest part of the picture: there’s a widespread belief that high prices are here to stay for a while. That mindset alone can become self-fulfilling, as people cut back further and businesses feel it in their bottom lines.

Read more of our finance coverage: State Farm’s $5 Billion Cash-Back Payout

Source: CNN Business

The post Consumers pulled back on spending in July in the face of continuing price pressures appeared first on USA Network Daily.