MIG Reports analysis found the public reaction to the recent jobs report largely conveys skepticism and criticism, with some undertones of frustration and disappointment. This is a stark contrast from what Joe Biden has determined as, “A milestone in America’s comeback.”

The March jobs report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics claimed 303,000 jobs added and a lower unemployment rate of 3.8%. Federal Reserve Employment Data, however, reveals that 100,000 of those jobs belong to foreign-born workers.

Many criticisms also point out that full-time employment is at its lowest since October of 2020, while part-time is the category that is increasing. This is less optimistic since many workers need full-time work to make ends meet. The report also doesn’t fully consider those not seeking employment.

Americans are questioning the reliability of positive job reports, expressing doubts about the reality of these statistics. They voice concerns that these positive reports do not accurately reflect the struggle of many individuals who are unable to secure jobs. There is also an implication of mistrust towards government and authorities, suggesting a perceived disconnect between them and the average American.

The two general themes that emerge from the discourse are:

Discrepancy between job reports and reality

Voters express skepticism about the accuracy of positive job reports, highlighting the struggle of many who are unable to secure jobs despite applying for hundreds. The sentiment suggests the positive statistics do not match the reality on the ground, painting a picture of an economy in distress, despite official reports.

Mistrust towards authorities

There is a recurring theme of mistrust towards government, the media, and financial authorities. American suggest the ruling class is out of touch with the reality most of the population faces daily. By blaming economic woes on the general public, these authorities are seen as failing to address the root causes of job scarcity and economic distress.

Among other demographics, there is a sentiment of dissatisfaction for those who belong to the lower economic classes. They feel ignored by the positive job reports and express their struggle with finding jobs. Their perception is that the distress they experience is not reflected in the data.

American voters remain unconvinced of the Biden administration’s jobs reports. Fueling this distrust are real-world factors such as increased competitiveness from migrants receiving federal employment benefits and other economic factors such as high inflation. With many previous jobs reports being ‘adjusted’ weeks after their respective initial release, it is possible the current report may have to be adjusted as well, giving further justification to the distrust from Americans.

Economic Issues

The concept of Universal Basic Income (UBI) has been increasingly popular in recent years as the world grapples with rising living costs, the potential displacement of workers due to automation, and objections to income inequality. UBI is a government program providing every adult citizen with a set amount of money regularly. This stipend is given regardless of a person’s income or employment status. The goal is to provide a basic safety net, reducing poverty and providing financial security.

MIG Reports analysis of online commentary shows people's concerns about taxes, the perception of government misuse of tax money, and the struggle of ordinary citizens to meet their obligations. Many voters are raising questions about the fairness of tax systems, with some claiming they are being “taxed to death.” Many also assert that wealthy Americans are able to evade taxes through loopholes or illegal means.

There is a sense of disillusionment with the government as people complain, "What are you people in government doing with our money?" This signifies a lack of transparency and trust in how tax money is being used. It also suggests a disconnect between the government and the people, with the latter feeling overburdened and underrepresented.

Conversations also touch on the complexities of the current tax system. Some voters find it difficult to navigate, potentially falling into debt as a result. There are also concerns about changes to the tax system during an election year, suggesting a link between politics and financial policies.

Interestingly, some are advocating for illegal activities such as tax evasion and hacking as a form of resistance to unfair treatment. This indicates a level of frustration and distrust, as well as a willingness to resort to breaking the law to alleviate financial burdens.

Overall, American voters are grappling with financial pressures and a mistrust of government handling of taxes. It suggests people are in favor of reforms – whether UBI is a good solution in people’s minds is less clear.

• MIG Reports data indicates sentiment about Economic and Banking Issues is relatively stable.
• However, discussions around more nuanced topics like Monetary Policies and Minimum Wage are more likely to swing.
• This is likely due to lower volume and potentially heated, emotional topics along with newer instruments, such as UBI.

Minimum Wage

Recent discussions of a $20 minimum wage for fast-food workers in California also highly polarizing., There are strong opinions emerging from both supporters and detractors of a higher minimum wage. The situation is further complicated by broader conversations about UBI and the affordability of living, particularly in high-cost areas like California.

Proponents seek to debunk arguments against raising the minimum wage, asserting concerns about businesses being unable to afford the increase are unfounded. This group often frames the increase as a matter of fairness and social justice. They say large corporations can afford to pay their employees more.

Opponents of the wage increase believe it will lead to job losses and business closures. They argue small businesses will struggle the most to afford increased payroll costs. This, they say, will lead to layoffs or even bankruptcy. Critics also suggest the cost of wage increases would be passed on to consumers, leading to higher prices and negating any benefits for workers.

There’s also discussion of the impact of wage increases on poverty levels. Some argue that even with a $20 minimum wage, many workers will still struggle to make ends meet, particularly in areas with a high cost of living. They believe that a more comprehensive solution, like a UBI, may be necessary to truly address poverty and income inequality.

Lastly, there is a narrative of anticipation and observation. Some are keenly watching to see the real-world impacts of the wage increase on employment rates, business performance, and workers' quality of life.

Monetary Policy

The role of the Federal Reserve, interest rates, and the economic impact of UBI also factors into the discussion. This conversation emerges against the backdrop of Fed Chair Jerome Powell's announcement that interest rate cuts are not imminent. The announcement sparked various reactions across the financial and political spectrum.

Some voters express skepticism and frustration towards the Federal Reserve's actions, questioning its ability to manage the national debt. They speculate it could potentially reach a staggering $50 trillion by 2024. However, Powell's stance also raises questions about the feasibility and implications of UBI.

Some argue implementing UBI would require borrowing more federal dollars, inevitably exacerbating the national debt. This is a contentious issue, as many struggling Americans desire immediate financial support, which hampers managing the long-term economic health of the country.

Because UBI is deeply intertwined with broader economic policies and politics writ large, particularly those concerning the Federal Reserve and interest rates, it is likely UBI will remain a divisive topic, especially given previous government aid during COVID.

MIG Reports analysis of online discussions about increasing gas prices reveals people attribute this economic issue to political leadership. Under President Joe Biden people are noting the rise in fuel prices. Some attribute the increase in fuel prices to Biden's policies, while others defend Biden's administration, suggesting that other economic factors are at play.

Another theme that arises is the impact of rising fuel prices on other sectors, such as food and housing. Some users express concern that the rise in fuel prices is causing a concurrent increase in food prices and housing costs. Conversely, others argue that overall economic conditions have improved under Biden's administration, with lower interest rates and home prices than the previous year.

In terms of demographic patterns, there is a clear political divide. Those criticizing the rise in gas prices and its impact on the economy generally lean towards the right, while those defending Biden's administration lean left. Views on the issue do not appear to be deeply influenced by economic class, race, or geography, but rather by political affiliation.

It seems most people understand that fuel prices are rising, but there is disagreement over what is causing this increase. Some blame political policies, while others suggest that broader economic factors are responsible. With petroleum reserves likely unable to reduce prices as previously utilized by Biden administration, consumer worries about future prices will likely persist. 

Top Discussion Trends of Increasing Fuel Prices

Economic Impact

Many people express concern about the impact of rising gas prices on the cost of living, particularly food and housing. There is a general understanding that higher fuel prices contribute to increased costs for essential goods, which can put a strain on individuals and families, especially those in the middle and lower economic classes.

Climate Change

Some people connect rising fuel prices to climate change, suggesting global warming could exacerbate economic inflation. There is a growing view that environmental factors can influence the economy, although this understanding may be more prevalent among left-leaning voters with a higher level of education or interest in environmental issues.

Political Influence

There is also a belief that political decisions can influence gas prices. Some people accuse politicians of either causing or failing to prevent rising costs. This perception appears to be more common among those who identify with a particular political party or ideology, suggesting a possible political divide in understanding and responses to fuel price changes.

Geographic Differences

The conversation around fuel prices also varies geographically. For example, in Japan, the narrative focuses on changes in the Consumer Price Index and the impact of energy prices on inflation. In contrast, in the United States, the discussion often revolves around political and economic issues.

Misunderstanding and Misinformation

There is also some misunderstanding and misinformation about the causes and effects of rising fuel prices. Some people incorrectly believe that the government directly sets food and fuel prices, while others seem to underestimate the complex factors that contribute to economic inflation.

The public perception of Tyson Foods' hiring practices is becoming quite negative among many Americans. Discussions are particularly negative regarding news that Tyson Foods will shut down its Iowa pork factory, which broke alongside reports the company has hired 42,000 migrant workers and would like to hire that many more.

Some people are criticizing the company for prioritizing profits and open border policies over American employees. Many also accuse Tyson Foods of poor working conditions and unfair labor practices, including the alleged wrongful termination of workers.

Many Americans accuse Tyson Foods of being too liberal or woke, implying the company is overly concerned with diversity, equality, and inclusion (DEI) at the expense of other factors.

Some, however, support for Tyson Foods, acknowledging the company provides job opportunities in regions where employment opportunities may be scarce. These users argue that despite the criticisms, Tyson Foods plays a crucial role in the local economies where they operate – and especially for migrants looking for work.

Border and Jobs Sentiment Among Iowa Voters

In Iowa, voters seem dissatisfied with loss of American jobs while migrants seem to receive preferential treatment. Sentiment towards border security and jobs among Iowa voters has been particularly low in recent days.

• In the last 14 days, sentiment on jobs in Iowa sank to a low of 30% and reaching a high of 51%. Jobs sentiment averaged 40%.
• Sentiment about the border in Iowa sank as low as 29% in the last two weeks, with a high of 46%. Border sentiment averaged 38%.

• The border and the economy are among the top three issues Iowa voter are discussing, indicating their importance.

Some Iowans are criticizing Tyson Foods, alleging they will pay migrant workers less than minimum wage. They are calling for boycotts against Tyson Foods and advising others to buy local instead. Many voice concern about the impact on American workers and call for penalties for companies that hire illegal immigrants.

Others in Iowa question the legality and ethics of Tyson Foods’ practices, calling for stricter regulations and enforcement.

American Views of Corporate Hiring and Job Prospects

The discussion also touches on broader themes related to business ethics, freedom of speech, and the role of corporations in society. Many American workers express the belief that businesses should be held accountable for their actions and should not exploit their power or influence for profit.

More Americans seem disgruntled by news that more domestic jobs have been going to foreign-born workers than native citizens. Among other complaints about the economy, American voters express discontent at the Biden administration’s claims about increasing jobs. Many believe that employment numbers are skewed because of America’s open border.

Another point of contention involving Tyson Foods is the company's use of temporary or contract workers. Some argue this practice allows Tyson to avoid providing benefits and other protections to its employees. Others, however, feel it's a necessary business strategy in a highly competitive industry.

Another common theme, according to MIG Reports data, is the company's alleged lack of transparency. There is a sense of frustration with what workers perceive as Tyson's unwillingness to openly discuss its hiring and firing practices.

Online discussions about food price increases since Joe Biden took office are heavily influenced by political affiliation, socioeconomic status, and geographical location.

• Discussion volume regarding inflation has increased in the past few days, suggesting high costs are on Americans’ minds.
• Average sentiment on inflation since the beginning of 2024 has averaged 47% but has dropped around 1% in the last week.
• MIG Reports data shows a trend of increased discussion coupled with decreased sentiment.

At-home food prices increased 5% from 2022 to 2023. They’re up 25% overall since 2019, severely impacting American families’ food prices and their views on inflation. Some of the influencing factors on prices include:

• Supply chain disruptions, weather events, energy costs, trade policies, currency exchange rates, subsidies, and demand-side factors.
• Political policies such as trade agreements, tariffs, energy policies, and agricultural subsidies.
• Government decisions regarding international trade, energy regulation, agricultural support, and currency management can contribute to price volatility and impact the affordability of food for consumers.
  

How Voter Groups and Demographics View Food Inflation

Many Republicans, according to online discussion, opinion pieces, and televised interviews, are attributing the rise in food prices to President Biden's policy changes. They cite the administration's increased spending, supply chain disruptions, and inflation as key reasons for the escalating costs. This group often uses the term "Bidenflation" or "Bidenomics" to describe this phenomenon, emphasizing their belief that Biden's economic policies are directly responsible for the increased prices.

Democrats generally defend Biden, asserting that the food price increases are a result of global factors beyond the control of any one administration. They point to what they believe is an ongoing COVID pandemic, global supply chain issues, and climate change impacting agricultural yields as major contributors. They argue that these problems were inherited from previous administrations. They assert it will take time for Biden's policies to take effect and alleviate these issues.

Independents seem to be of mixed opinion. Some align with Republicans in blaming Biden's policies, while others agree with Democrats that the rising prices are due to more global and systemic issues. Regardless of what they believe is the cause, most people express frustration with the situation and increasingly high costs.

Various demographic groups have varying views. Lower-income individuals and families, who are most impacted by rising food prices, express concern and frustration. But there's no clear consensus on who they believe is to blame. Some point to the Biden administration, while others blame systemic issues or corporate greed.

Geographically, individuals in high cost-of-living urban areas are expressing more concern about the rising food prices. Rural areas, especially farming communities, are also voicing concerns, as the price increases are impacting their livelihood.

Overall, every Americans seem concerned about the economy and their financial survival. Differences become apparent only in various views about what’s causing higher prices.

Former President Trump made comments over the weekend about China attempting to bring car manufacturing to Mexico. He said they must be stopped from importing cars into the U.S. and that, if he is not elected, the economic result for American car manufacturing will be a “bloodbath.” The media’s interpretation of Trump’s comments has generated debate, with people interpreting the comments largely through their political lens.

Democrats generally view the comments as threatening and indicative of Trump's refusal to accept potential election losses. They argue that such language is dangerous and could incite violence among Trump's supporters. Some Democrats, however, say they understand Trump's comments were taken out of context and that he was not referring to potential violence, but rather the impact on the automotive industry if he were not elected.

Republicans are largely defending Trump, arguing that his comments were intentionally misrepresented by the media. They assert that Trump was talking about the economic consequences for industries like automotive manufacturing if he is not elected. They accuse the media of manipulating Trump's words to fit a negative narrative and fuel political tensions. However, some Republicans also perceive the comments as a warning of potential unrest or violence.

Independents are split in their interpretations of Trump's comments. Some agree with Democrats that the comments are a threat and could incite violence. Others side with Republicans, criticizing the media for taking Trump's words out of context.

Independents criticize Trump's choice of words and question his suitability for the presidency, but they also argue the media and certain political factions may be overblowing the remark.

Talking About - Donald Trump

Approval - Donald Trump

There seems to be an overall sentiment that the media sensationalizes Trump's comments. Both Republicans and some Independents are disillusioned with the media and argue that its portrayal of Trump's comments as a threat of violence is a clear distortion of his actual words. They believe that the media is disingenuous about their interpretation of the comment, furthering a negative narrative about Trump.

Some say the media puts Trump’s words in the worst possible light to generate controversy and boost ratings, taking every opportunity to attack Trump and those who do not condemn him. However, many Democrats and some Independents disagree, asserting that the media is accurately reporting Trump's threatening rhetoric.

The overall sentiment towards Bernie Sanders' proposed Thirty-Two Hour Work Week Act is largely negative. A significant majority of responses criticize the potential for increased taxes, along with Sanders' personal wealth and perceived tax avoidance.

One recurring theme in the reactions is concern over potential tax increases. Voters repeatedly express the belief that Sanders' proposal would lead to higher taxes, with some suggesting that this would be a direct result of businesses being expected to pay their workers more while also reducing their prices.

Another consistent theme is criticism of Sanders' personal wealth. Many express frustrations with Sanders, himself a millionaire like many in the political class, advocating for policies that they believe would place a heavier tax burden on the average citizen. There is repeated mention of Sanders' lake house in New Hampshire and the perception that he does not pay taxes to support education in the state.

Many people also consider Sanders' proposal impractical. They fear reducing the work week to 32 hours would result in lower productivity and necessitate overtime work, which would be taxed at a higher rate. Some argue that businesses would not be able to survive and pay their bills working only 32 hours per week.

Talking About - Bernie Sanders

Sentiment - Bernie Sanders

Critics also argue that Sanders has not done enough to help the working class during his time in Congress. They express skepticism about the effectiveness of the alleged goal of the legislation.

There are several references to the effects of illegal immigration on the job market. Some see the influx of illegal immigrants as a threat to American workers, particularly in industries like meatpacking. They argue that Sanders' proposal does not address this issue.

The narrative also reflects a broader discussion about the state of the working class in America. There is a sense of frustration about perceived inequality, exploitation, and wasted tax dollars. There are calls for greater unionization and demands for respect for blue collar workers.

In general, the reception of Sander’s proposal is negative. However, it also generated an underlying debate about wider issues like immigration and the distribution of wealth. This suggests that reactions are influenced by broader socio-economic factors.

Americans seem doubtful that February’s CPI report claiming 3.2% inflation accurately captures the rising costs they face day-to-day. Many voters say the real cost of living is much higher than what the CPI suggests. They cite increasing prices in housing, healthcare, food, and education, which they feel aren't accurately reflected in the index.

Pain Points for Everyday Citizens

Despite Democrats historically being vocal against the wealthy class gaining unfair advantages, this sentiment is now growing among all Americans. More voters identify the political class as among the “wealthy” and see elites as the primary beneficiaries of the current tax system.

• Republicans tend to be very negative on the current state of the economy, pointing to life during the Trump era as more affordable.
• Sentiment towards Trump on inflation is slightly higher than sentiment towards Biden among all voters.
• Trump averaged 47% support on inflation over the last week compared to Biden’s average of 44%.

• In swing states, Trump also maintained a 47% average approval on inflation to Biden’s 44% and an overall sentiment of 43%.

While most voters admit that costs have increased across the board, there are particular areas they say they’re feeling economic pain.

The cost of housing is a common complaint for all Americans – gaining bipartisan discontent. People would like to return to pre-COVID housing affordability. They point to the idea that there should be a 41% drop in home prices and a 69% increase in incomes to reach previous affordability levels.

Food prices are another subject of concern. Many online are skeptical of Biden administration promises to lower them. For both food and housing, there seems to be a common perception that times were “better” or “easier” during the Trump administration.

• U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data shows that inflation has risen significantly in the last four years, still not coming down to the target rate of 2%.
• The cost of cars, housing, and food are also shockingly high in the last several years.

What Americans Say is Causing Inflation

A common sentiment among left-leaning voters is that corporations and the wealthy are not paying their fair share of taxes. The Biden administration has recently been claiming that “shrinkflation” unfairly perpetrated by corporations is to blame for American dollars barely putting food on the table. Many Democrat voters seems to sympathize with this explanation – although most are still extremely unhappy with the reality of rising costs.

Biden supporters tend to argue that tax burdens are shifted onto the middle and lower classes, thereby increasing their cost of living. Some are also vocal in the belief that immigrants contribute significantly to the economy through taxes, contradicting the stereotype that they're a drain on resources.

Right-leaning voters frequently criticize the government for excessive spending. They argue spending is a bigger cause of higher taxes and increased cost of living for citizens. They believe taxes should be cut and government spending should be severely curbed.

Unlike some vocal progressive voters, most Republicans and some moderates believe that illegal immigrants are an unacceptable cost to the U.S. economy and the average taxpayer. They point to housing, food, and other services provided to illegal immigrants as unwanted and unauthorized by voters.

Taxes and inflation are among the top issues Democrats and Republicans discuss as important. Sentiment on the economy is slightly higher among democrats, but they discuss it more, with Republicans placing more emphasis on border security.

Regardless of political affiliation, voters seem to agree the cost of living has noticeably risen and many struggle to make ends meet. There’s a general sentiment often attributing financial difficulties to low wages and high taxes.

Americans Blame the Government for These Difficult Times

Many voters reiterate their belief that spending money on people who don't generate income or pay taxes – like illegal immigrants – is not a feasible solution to American economic pain. They argue for a system where people who make money and employ others keep more of their earnings, allowing them to invest, hire, and thereby stimulate the economy. These voters blame rampant spending on the government, resisting calls for higher tax revenue to ease economic burdens.

There is a recurring belief that the government's actions, such as printing money, are contributing to the devaluation of the currency, which in turn leads to inflation. Many voters also attribute high inflation to President Biden's policies and actions.

Societal decline in America seems to be a growing sentiment among many demographics, albeit distinct in the reasoning. These discussions are often heated and divisive, reflecting the polarized state of American politics. Fracturing of political leadership, societal norms, economic stability, and the justice system all contribute to a perception that society is decaying.

While many agree that America may be declining, Republicans, Democrats, and Independents, as well as other demographic groups such as race, age, and economic class, attribute different causes.

Political Viewpoints

Republicans are generally more concerned about societal decline, often attributing it to what they perceive as a breakdown in traditional values and an erosion of law and order. They tend to view societal problems such as crime, drug abuse, and family breakdown as symptoms of moral decay. Some Republicans also blame societal decline on liberal policies like welfare programs and lenient immigration laws, which they believe incentivize dependency and discourage individual responsibility.

Democrats often argue that societal decline is due to systemic problems such as inequality, discrimination, and a lack of access to quality education and healthcare. They tend to focus on societal structures and institutions, arguing that changes in these areas can help alleviate societal decline. Some Democrats also point to the influence of big corporations and the wealthy, arguing that they have too much power and that this contributes to societal decline. There are mixed views about President Joe Biden's impact on these systemic problems. Some Democrats believe he has initiated improvements, while others feel he has not done enough.

Independents express frustration with the polarized state of politics and the inability of politicians to work together to solve societal problems. They often call for pragmatic solutions and a focus on common ground. Their views on societal decline are often shaped by specific issues of personal importance, such as the economy, social justice, or immigration.

Cultural and Economic Influences

Economic class is a crucial factor. Those in lower economic classes often attribute societal decline to economic inequality and lack of opportunity. Lower-income individuals express frustration towards the wealthy and corporations, believing they do not pay their fair share of taxes.

Middle-class individuals also express concerns about how their taxes are being used, with some feeling they are shouldering an unfair burden. Meanwhile, those in higher economic classes tend to be more optimistic about the state of society, although they also express concern about societal problems such as crime and drug abuse. Some higher-income individuals express dissatisfaction, often aimed at perceived government misuse of their taxes.

• Older individuals express concern about retirement funds and social security
• Younger individuals are more likely to discuss student loans and job prospects
• People of all races discuss instances of perceived unfairness in taxation and societal structure

When considering race, people of color are more likely to attribute societal decline to systemic racism and discrimination. Meanwhile, white Americans, particularly those in lower economic classes, often attribute societal decline to economic insecurity and cultural displacement.

Age also plays a role in these discussions. Older Americans, who have witnessed significant societal changes over their lifetimes, are often more concerned about societal decline. Younger Americans tend to be more optimistic about the future of society, although they often express frustration with current societal problems.