Most new jobs are going to women — and 1 in 3 men have given up



President Donald Trump celebrated the jobs report published on Friday by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, which shows that American employers added jobs for the third consecutive month.

The report, which Trump called "great," says the U.S. economy added 172,000 jobs last month; the unemployment rate remained unchanged at 4.3%; the number of unemployed people, 7.3 million, "changed little over the month"; and the labor force participation rate held at 61.8%.

'Bodes ill for the country.'

Total employment growth for the months of March and April were revised up by 29,000 and 64,000, respectively.

"This is a labor market that is stronger than it was last year and is looking pretty darn solid, despite high energy prices and higher inflation generally," Gus Faucher, chief economist at PNC, told CNBC. "There's no indication that the labor market needs support."

While the labor market is purportedly healthy, there are a pair of potentially destabilizing trends under way behind the scenes: the overwhelming majority of new payroll jobs are going to women, and a staggering number of men have given up on finding a job.

Jason Riley, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, recently highlighted that "the share of American men in the labor force has dipped to record lows." Labor Department data revealed last month that one in three men were neither working nor looking for a job.

RELATED: Steelworkers need a future, not another merger war

Keystone-France/Gamma-Keystone/Getty Images

The male labor-force participation rate has declined significantly in recent years, to say nothing of the precipitous decline that has taken place over the past century. The male LFP rate was 87% in 1948, 75% in 2000, and — according to the latest jobs report — 67.2% in May.

"The premature absence of millions of able-bodied men from our workforce, combined with the continuing retirement of the Baby Boomers and significant reductions in immigration, bodes ill for the country," wrote Riley.

While there are multiple factors at play — Baby Boomers are, for instance, retiring en masse; young men are dropping off to study; there is diminished demand for non-college male labor; and prime-age men are falling to the wayside because of illness and disabilities — the Washington Post recently pointed out that:

the labor market has weakened since early 2025, with most job opportunities concentrated in areas typically dominated by women, including health care and private education. At the same time, several male-dominated industries, including manufacturing, transportation, and mining have shed jobs, leaving a mismatch between typical skill sets and job opportunities for men.

It's evidently a new day for female labor.

Whereas in the mid-1970s, women held roughly 40% of jobs in the U.S. — not including agricultural work or self-employment — they now hold the majority of jobs in the country.

NPR's "Morning Edition" reported that of the roughly 369,000 jobs created between the beginning of Trump's second term and April, 348,000 jobs went to women and 21,000 jobs went to men. In other words, 94% of the jobs went to women and only 6% to men.

Courtney Parella, a spokeswoman for the Labor Department, stressed to "Morning Edition" that raw job counts provided a "misleading snapshot" of the labor market, adding that "both men and women are benefiting from a strong economy."

Women have picked up the supermajority of net new payroll jobs in part because of the growth in female-dominated sectors, namely health care — where women hold roughly 80% of the jobs — and social assistance.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Steelworkers need a future, not another merger war



Roxanne Brown, the head of the United Steelworkers, must recognize the reality of her members and consider the recent history of the steel industry. If she remembers what happened when steel mills closed and factory towns devolved into ghost towns, she must distinguish herself from her predecessor, David McCall, whose intransigence during his tenure was neither shrewd nor productive. To set her union on a renewed path forward, Brown must distance herself from McCall’s troubling legacy and avoid jeopardizing the very workers she claims to represent.

Brown has reportedly rejected U.S. Steel’s initial contract offer, setting the stage for the next round of negotiations beginning July. If talks go south again this summer, workers could face lost wages, disrupted health benefits, and uncertainty over retirement security. Their families would feel the pressure through tighter household budgets, delayed bills, strained child care and health care decisions, and the emotional toll that comes with prolonged economic uncertainty.

Steelworkers deserve leadership focused on jobs, wages, benefits, and retirement security — not reputation management or corporate alliances.

In steel towns and surrounding communities, the impact would ripple through local businesses, schools, churches, charities, and public services that depend on steady paychecks and a stable industrial base. A lockout would not just pause production; it would threaten livelihoods, family stability, and the economic backbone of communities built around American steel.

McCall's reckless efforts to tank the Nippon-U.S. Steel merger led to a revolt among steelworkers, and his alliance with competitor Cleveland-Cliffs’ CEO Lourenco Goncalves showed he prioritizes his own reputation and corporate alliances over his members. In the next round of contract talks, McCall should not be allowed anywhere near the negotiating table from the union side.

For decades, steelworkers have been heavily affected by market swings and fluctuating steel production demands. 2026 has been a welcome relief of slow but steady growth, aided by investments like those from Nippon, shifts toward modernization, and economic tailwinds, but history shows this tide can turn anytime.

When the steel industry turns down, it faces facility idling, facility closures, layoffs, and industry upheaval. Despite recent upturn, this volatility has contributed to a public perception that blue-collar jobs like those of steelworkers are unstable, making the upcoming contract negotiations in July that much more significant.

The past tells us quite a bit about what could be ahead for steelworkers. Last year’s high-profile Nippon-U.S. Steel merger carried major consequences for American steel production and steelworkers’ jobs. Yet as the deal progressed through the approval process, McCall chose to advance his own interests rather than champion union members’ security and prosperity, revealing deeply troubling behavior.

In 2023, when the merger was proposed, U.S. mills produced about 89.7 million net tons of raw steel, supporting 70,000 workers in iron and steel manufacturing. The deal promised substantial benefits to American steelworkers, including: $2.7 billion in capital investments exclusively dedicated to USW facilities; a 10-year commitment to maintain steel production levels at existing facilities, protecting union jobs; a $5,000 signing bonus for union workers and eligible nonunion employees below the senior-manager level upon deal closure; and written, enforceable commitments to honor existing union contracts and labor agreements.

RELATED: The AI bubble is about to pop. Here’s how to prepare yourself.

Just_Super/Getty Images

Despite clear support among many rank-and-file members for the merger’s approval, McCall staked out firm personal opposition that did not reflect union workers’ input. In a February 2024 phone interview, McCall stated bluntly: “I want to kill this deal.”

McCall also took advantage of the Biden administration’s likely politically partisan, election-driven opposition to the merger. A lawsuit alleged that Biden sought to kill the deal to “curry favor with the USW leadership in [Pennsylvania] in his bid for re-election ... motivated by ‘purely political reasons.’”

Perhaps most damning is that McCall’s opposition clashed with the interests of steelworkers.

This is a pivotal time for the future of the American steel industry. The industry can only thrive if USW and the companies that employ its members can reach a commonsense agreement that both protects workers and allows companies to continue operating.

Brown must capitalize on this unique opportunity to move the union past the destructiveness of McCall’s leadership by participating in good faith in the upcoming negotiations and avoiding prolonging the contract talks at the expense of her members’ well-being. America’s steelworkers deserve better than their fate still being in the shadows of David McCall.

Trump’s Top Economic Advisor Touts Growing Wages — But There’s A Problem

'Inflation is now outpacing wage growth'

America’s fiscal fire will not put itself out



There is an old admonition, courtesy of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, that no one has the right to falsely shout “fire” in a crowded theater and cause a panic. The abused part of that line is obvious. The neglected part is just as important: When the danger is real, responsible people do not stay silent. They sound the alarm before the smoke fills the room and the flames become impossible to ignore.

That is where the United States is today.

The fire may not yet be visible to everyone, but it is already burning. Recognizing it is the first step. Acting on it is the next.

Our nation’s fiscal condition poses a real and growing threat, and pretending otherwise will only make the consequences more severe.

And I am shouting fire.

Washington’s overspending has produced a federal debt that is plainly unsustainable. Interest-bearing debt alone now exceeds $39 trillion and climbs higher each year by trillions of dollars. Add unfunded commitments for Social Security and Medicare, and the total burden rises to more than $136 trillion, a number so large that it barely registers. Spread across the population, the liability amounts to hundreds of thousands of dollars for every American.

According to projections from the Congressional Budget Office, the debt will exceed $63 trillion within 10 years. In less than a decade, the trust funds supporting major entitlement programs are expected to be depleted, requiring by law major cuts in benefits. The federal government can continue on this path only by borrowing more, which compounds the problem, or by printing money, which courts hyperinflation. That cycle cannot continue indefinitely.

The government itself acknowledges this reality in plain language. Its own financial reports describe the current fiscal path as “unsustainable.” That word means the system, as currently constructed, will not endure. At some point, the burden becomes too great and the consequences grow severe. It will make the Great Depression seem mild. That is the future awaiting a nation that continues to spend far beyond its means.

This situation did not arise overnight, nor can it be blamed on one party or one generation. It is the product of years of decisions in which immediate political gain took precedence over long-term stability.

Voters were promised benefits, often framed as cost-free, while the real price was pushed into the future. Little by little, we have been mortgaging tomorrow until soon there may be nothing left to mortgage.

The good news is that the method of putting out this fire is no mystery. The principles required to restore stability are well understood and have repeatedly proven themselves in practice. Limited government, restrained spending, and less federal intrusion into our lives remain the foundation of long-term prosperity.

RELATED: Jerome Powell is out — for good reason. Here are 4 of his top blunders.

Samuel Corum/Bloomberg/Getty Images

Reform must begin with the biggest drivers of future debt. Entitlement programs must be strengthened for the long term, not ignored for short-term political convenience. That does not require cutting benefits for current recipients, but it does require thoughtful reforms to keep those programs viable for future generations.

At the same time, the scope of the federal government should be reconsidered with renewed respect for constitutional limits.

America’s founders envisioned a system of limited federal powers and reinforced that design in the 10th Amendment, which reserves powers not specifically granted to the national government to the states or the people. A more disciplined understanding of federal responsibility would not only reduce costs, but also strengthen accountability and preserve liberty.

Examples around the world show that nations can confront fiscal crisis and begin to recover through disciplined economic policy. Each country’s circumstances differ, but the lesson is consistent: When governments commit to sound principles and follow through, better outcomes follow.

The United States still possesses enormous strengths, including a dynamic economy, innovative capacity, and a resilient people. Those advantages give us a window to address this problem before it reaches the breaking point. But that window will not remain open forever.

Ultimately, the responsibility does not rest only with elected officials. It rests with the public that sends them to Washington. An informed electorate that understands the stakes and demands accountability can still change the country’s course. The challenge is serious, but it is not beyond our ability to meet.

The fire may not yet be visible to everyone, but it is already burning. Recognizing it is the first step. Acting on it is the next. The future will be shaped by whether we confront this danger now or keep looking away until the consequences can no longer be avoided.

Mamdani Turns Famous Ronald Reagan Quote On Its Head To Push City-Run Grocery Stores
play icon

Mamdani Turns Famous Ronald Reagan Quote On Its Head To Push City-Run Grocery Stores

'Our government will help'

Trump Doubles Down On Prioritizing Iran War Over Americans’ Financial Pains

'a perfect statement'

How the Union Pacific merger could revitalize America's rail industry



The debate over the proposed Union Pacific-Norfolk Southern merger has the competition question backward. Critics in Washington are asking whether the two railroads are too big to combine, fearing a monopoly.

However, if we are serious about rebuilding American industry, strengthening the middle class, and winning on the global stage, this merger deserves to be judged by what it actually delivers for workers, consumers, and the economy.

Competition in the modern economy means ensuring that American industries have the scale and integration needed to compete where it matters

Freight rail is one of the last sectors in America that consistently delivers high-quality, middle-class jobs without requiring a four-year degree. Rail workers earn up to 40% more than the national average. These are real careers that actually create things.

Union Pacific has already signed a jobs-for-life agreement with SMART-TD, the nation’s largest railroad union, which has endorsed the deal. The companies’ amended filing also projects that 1,200 net new union jobs will be added by year three of the combined company, on top of those existing protections.

Then there is industrial capacity. Politicians on both sides of the aisle have sought to bolster America's production capacity. A better-connected freight rail system does a lot to further this goal. It means more goods moving across the country, more demand for domestic production, and steadier employment for the workers who keep that system running.

The consumer case for this merger is straightforward. Rail shipping costs less than trucking, and those savings work their way through the supply chain. The company's amended Surface Transportation Board application projects $3.5 billion in annual savings for shippers, driven largely by diverting more than 2 million truckloads of long-haul freight to rail.

Critics will say the merger is anti-competitive. That argument misreads the competition. U.S. freight rail does not run in a closed market. This is an end-to-end combination of two railroads that currently operate on opposite sides of the Mississippi.

Combining them would let the new company compete against heavily subsidized trucking and global logistics companies at a scale no individual railroad can match on its own.

Trucking, for example, relies on publicly funded highways, while railroads maintain their own infrastructure at private expense. Meanwhile, China is building integrated national logistics systems designed to dominate global trade flows.

Competition in the modern economy means ensuring that American industries have the scale and integration needed to compete where it matters: across continents and against state-backed rivals.

RELATED: The potential Union Pacific merger risks upsetting America's rail industry

Brandon Bell/Getty Images

A transcontinental rail network strengthens that position by expanding reach, improving efficiency, and connecting American producers to broader markets.

Washington has spent years promising to reshore manufacturing, secure supply chains, and cut dependence on foreign adversaries. Delivering on those promises requires infrastructure that is capable of supporting domestic production at scale.

You cannot rebuild American industry without the ability to move raw materials to factories and finished goods to markets quickly and cheaply. Freight rail is central to that goal. It is more fuel-efficient than trucking and more cost-effective for bulk commodities. Shifting long-haul freight from highway to rail also reduces accidents.

Rail accounts for a fraction of the fatalities and injuries per ton-mile that trucking does, and fewer heavy semis on interstates mean safer roads for everyone.

A stronger rail network is not a threat to workers or to competition. It is what both of those things depend on. Judge this merger by whether it makes the American economy stronger. Judge it by whether working people get something out of it. On both counts, the answer is yes.

Guaranteed union jobs, lower costs for shippers, and a supply chain that finally runs coast to coast on American rails. That is the kind of industrial investment this country keeps saying it wants. Policymakers who care about the future of the country should support it.

How Our National Debt Jeopardizes Families’ Futures

Lawmakers focused on their reelection in a few months or years care little about whether the United States faces economic stagnation decades from now.

Tucker Carlson Reveals Main Issue He Feels Is On Young Voter’s Minds. It’s Not What You Think.

'economic system guaranteed to radicalize young people'

Glenn Beck: The real reason you can’t afford a home (it’s not what you think)



Many Americans today feel as if home ownership is a pipe dream. The prices, even for modest homes, are just too steep.

But why? What’s the real reason homes have become so unaffordable?

The answer is multifaceted, says Glenn Beck.

No doubt the broken economy is part of the problem. “We have to fix the fraud,” he urges. “The latest numbers from the GAO, the Government Accounting Office, is that they estimate that our government loses between $233 billion and $521 billion every year based on fraud between 2018 through 2022.”

However, there’s another factor most are unwilling to grapple with: Our expectations have increased.

In the 1950s — “the golden era of America,” says Glenn — the average size home for a family of four was “983 square feet.” Today, it’s “2,500 square feet.”

“If I told you you could afford a modest home of that size (under 1,000 square feet) and raise your family in it, would you take it?” he asks.

But the main driver behind the skyrocketing price of homes, he says, is the increase in land prices.

“Why is land so expensive?” Glenn asks. “Because our government made it that way” through “zoning laws, permits, restrictions, [and] endless layers of EPA approval.”

“We didn't run out of land. We restricted the access to the land,” he emphasizes.

Add to that the immigration boom, which led to “an overwhelming demand for homes,” and you get the situation we’re in today.

But America has been in a similar predicament before and survived it, says Glenn. After WWII, millions of soldiers returned home eager to buy homes and start families, resulting in a housing shortage “far, far worse in many ways than what we're facing today.”

Our answer back then was simply to build faster.

“Homes were built in days, not months — days,” says Glenn, noting that “the GI Bill,” “the interstate highway system [opening] up the land that had never been reachable before,” and “the government [getting] out of the way” are what allowed this to happen.

“Prices rose at first because everybody needed a home, and then they stabilized because supply caught up with demand,” he continues.

But today, things are different.

Instead of “unleashing builders,” we’re “restraining them”; instead of “expanding supply,” we’re “constraining it,” says Glenn.

“This is why the most important number is not the price of a home. It is the ratio between a home price and income,” he explains. “In 1960, the average cost was two times the average annual income. Today it's over five times.”

“That's the difference between opportunity and exclusion; that's the difference between a young family starting a life and one stuck renting indefinitely.”

Today, we’re a nation that believes more in “obstruction” than “building” — a nation that cares more about the “planet” than “people.”

Once upon a time, “the country believed that growth was good, expansion was good, opportunity was something that you created, not something that you rationed,” says Glenn, “and somewhere along the way, that whole mindset of America changed.”

“We didn't lose the land. We didn't lose the resources. We've lost the will. And until that changes, this doesn't get fixed,” he warns.

Contrary to popular belief, the American dream isn’t dead, he insists. It’s simply on pause until we can fix the long list of issues barring many Americans from buying homes.

While we have little control over fraud, government regulation, and land prices, we do have control over our own mindsets. Glenn urges his listeners to remember that the American dream isn’t about status — “it’s about freedom and opportunity and hard work and faith and building a life with the people that you love.”

“Let's remember what it means to actually be happy,” he pleads.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.