The weakest job market since 2011 is increasingly being framed not as a glitch, but as the new normal—one where growth roars and jobs barely move, leaving a generation asking, “Dude, where’s my job?”
Bank of America Research’s “Situation Room” note warned in mid-December that markets are priced for a robust 2026 even as hiring stalls and unemployment rises and recalled a now 25-year-old cult classic stoner comedy starring Ashton Kutcher and Seann William Scott to make its point.
The entry-level worker would be forgiven, in other words, for feeling about the job search the way Kutcher and Scott feel about their stolen wheels. (The screenwriter feels similarly about the show-business labor market, telling The Hollywood Reporter several weeks ago that he’d quit to become a therapist.)
”The job market has been weak this year,” wrote BofA’s Yuri Seliger and Sohyun Marie Lee, commenting on the double payrolls report showing weak job growth in October and November. “A lack of recovery in the jobs market and a slower U.S. economy are key risks to watch for 2026.”
Seliger and Lee flagged what it called the weakest U.S. job market since at least 2011 (with the notable exception of the mass layoff wave from Covid), with monthly payrolls averaging just 17,000 over the past six months—by far the slowest pace of job creation since the global financial crisis. Private payrolls are only modestly stronger at 44,000 on a six‑month average basis, still at their weakest level in well over a decade, while broader U‑6 underemployment has climbed to 8.7% and job openings per unemployed worker have slumped to 1.0, both the softest since 2017.
Yet the Situation Room team also noted that credit spreads remain near cyclical tights and stocks near record highs, signaling that investors are still betting on a strong expansion in 2026. “A strong U.S. economy is likely not compatible with the absence of job growth,” they caution, warning that the lack of a labor‑market recovery is now one of the central risks to that bullish market narrative. The surprisingly strong GDP number for the third quarter, revealed after the BofA note was written, added new fuel to the fires of this argument.
K‑shaped growth with missing jobs
The headline growth number was eye‑catching: in the third quarter, U.S. GDP grew at a 4.3% annual rate, powered by a consumer spending surge and a $166 billion jump in corporate profits. But real disposable income was flat—literally 0% growth—meaning households did not gain purchasing power and instead relied on savings, credit, and cost‑cutting to keep spending, especially on unavoidable items like healthcare and childcare.
KPMG Chief Economist Diane Swonk previously described this to Fortune as a fully matured K‑shaped economy, where affluent households ride surging equity markets, elevated home values, and AI‑boosted corporate earnings, while lower‑ and middle‑income families are squeezed by affordability pressures and stagnant real income.
Businesses, she argued, have learned how to grow without hiring, squeezing more output from lean teams rather than expanding payrolls to meet demand—a pattern that aligns with BofA’s evidence of historically weak payroll gains in an otherwise solid macro backdrop. “We are seeing most of the productivity gains we’re seeing right now as really just the residual of companies being hesitant to hire and doing more with less,” Swonk told Fortune. “Not necessarily AI yet.”
Her analysis aligned with what BofA’s Savita Subramanian told Fortune in August about a “sea change” in worker productivity, as companies replaced people with process. Companies had learned how to “to do more with fewer people” after the inflation that followed the pandemic, and she predicted this will be a positive for stocks: “A process is almost free and it’s replicable for eternity.”
Goldman’s ‘jobless growth’ and Gen Z
More darkly, Goldman Sachs economists warned about the prospect of “jobless growth.” In an October note, Goldman economists David Mericle and Pierfrancesco Mei found that outside of healthcare, net job creation turned weak, zero, or negative in many sectors even as output keeps rising, with executives increasingly focused on using AI to reduce labor costs—a “potentially long‑lasting headwind to labor demand.”
They argued that the modest job gains alongside robust GDP seen recently are “likely to be normal to some degree in the years ahead,” with most growth coming from productivity—especially AI—while aging demographics and lower immigration limit labor‑supply contributions.
Apollo’s Torsten Slok pointed out in a December note that demographic change is now becoming visible: the number of families with children under 18 peaked at around 37 million in 2007 and has declined to approximately 33 million as of 2024, reflecting lower birth rates and an aging population, despite overall population growth continuing.
A fragile equilibrium
Both BofA and Goldman stop short of predicting mass unemployment, but neither sees an easy path back to the old playbook where strong GDP reliably meant plentiful new jobs. Still, Goldman sees a larger shakeout for the economy: “History also suggests that the full consequences of AI for the labor market might not become apparent until a recession hits,” Mericle and Mei wrote in October.
In the meantime, the mid‑2020s labor market may remain defined less by layoffs than by scarcity of opportunity—especially for Gen Z—an era of job hugging at the top and job hunting in vain at the bottom. Seen in light of the GDP figures and the prospect of jobless growth over the horizon, BofA’s glib, throwback question may only become more pressing in the new year: where are the jobs?
The American media landscape has officially crossed the Rubicon, according to S&P Global Market Intelligence’s annual Economics of Basic Cable report from its Kagan research unit. It’s a grim read.
The U.S. cable network industry has formally entered the “decline stage of its life cycle,” a transition defined by falling revenues, shrinking viewership, and an unprecedented restructuring of legacy assets. While the sector faces a tough financial trajectory, the defining event is the high-stakes bidding war for Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD), where streaming giant Netflix. and traditional powerhouse Paramount Skydance present two starkly different paths for the future of cable television.
The inflection point identified in the 2025 report is not a sudden crash, but rather a structural dismantling of the cable bundle that dominated entertainment for decades. The WBD negotiations encapsulate this shift. While Paramount Skydance aims to acquire the company in its entirety, Netflix is bidding solely for WBD’s film studio and streaming assets. Should Netflix prevail, WBD’s cable assets would be split off, effectively stranding the linear networks as the industry leader cannibalizes the content engine for its digital platform.
“These decisions signify a shift in the media industry as companies abandon cable networks in favor of streaming services,” wrote S&P’s Scott Robson, who also noted that the “burgeoning free ad-supported television (FAST) industry also continues to evolve as owners of library video content increasingly look for monetization outlets outside of basic cable syndication.”
Since the “cord-cutting” movement ushered in by Netflix gathered steam, Robson noted that linear network TV has been under pressure—subscriptions peaked all the way back in 2012. Looking back at 2025 now, he concluded, there’s no comeback in sight.
Mapping out the decline ahead
This potential fracturing of WBD mirrors broader industry movements. Comcast is set to finalize the spinoff of its cable networks—excluding Bravo—into a standalone entity named “Versant” on January 2, 2026. These strategic exits signal that major media conglomerates are now willing to “abandon cable networks in favor of streaming services,” a trend accelerated by the August 2025 launches of the ESPN Unlimited and FOX One streaming platforms, according to S&P.
The financial data underpinning this migration is stark. In 2024, gross advertising revenue for cable networks fell 5.9% to $20.2 billion, the lowest level recorded since 2007. Robson’s team also estimated that affiliate fee revenue, or what TV operators pay to carry cable operators, fell nearly 3% to roughly $38.7 billion. Perhaps most telling is the subscriber metric: the average cable network saw its subscriber base erode by 7.1% to 31.4 million homes.
However, S&P emphasized that this “decline stage” forecasts a long, slow bleedout rather than a precipitous fall. “After digesting all the major events that took place in 2025, it is clear that the industry has reached a turning point,” Robson wrote. “That being said, our outlook does not call for a major collapse but rather a continued slow decline as the transition to streaming develops.”
S&P noted that despite the overarching downward trend, the rate of pay TV subscription decline appeared to slow in 2025, with the industry actually registering slight subscriber growth in the third quarter.
Operators are attempting to manage this descent by clinging to the industry’s last reliable life raft: live sports. The year 2026 looms large, featuring both the Winter Olympics and the FIFA World Cup. Comcast has even relaunched NBCSN, packaging it into a sports-centric bundle on YouTube TV to capture viewers who haven’t yet migrated to its Peacock streaming service.
A separate S&P analysis concluded that sports may no longer be a moat for the declining linear TV business. “Live sports may not be the anchor that once kept consumers from cutting the video cord,” S&P’s Keith Nissen wrote.
Nissen cited an S&P survey that found 90% of households dropping traditional pay TV for sports over the past year were sports fans, and nearly two-thirds of them spent five or more hours per week watching sports. “This serves as evidence that access to live sports is no longer a differentiator between traditional and virtual multichannel services.”
Robson warned that the friction between rising costs and falling value has intensified, with 2025 marred by carriage disputes, including blackouts of Walt Disney and TelevisaUnivision networks on YouTube TV, as distributors pushed back against rising rates for diminishing audiences.
As 2026 approaches, the industry outlook is one where underperforming networks face relegation to expensive tiers or outright closure.
The situation is akin to an estate sale for a once-grand mansion. The owners (media conglomerates) are systematically selling off the furniture (cable networks) and moving the most valuable heirlooms (premium content and sports rights) into a modern apartment across town (streaming), leaving the old house to slowly empty out, room by room.
Editor’s note: The author worked for Netflix from June 2024 through July 2025.
If you have dreams of joining the billionaire’s club one day, the best place to start might not be business school—it might be your local book club.
Reading is the most commonly cited habit tied to the success of some of the world’s wealthiest families, according to a new JPMorgan report that surveyed more than 100 billionaire principals whose collective net worth exceeds $500 billion.
The wealth management firm found that exercise, consistency, and waking up early are also top contributors to long-term success. But across interviews, one theme dominated: extreme intentionality about how time is spent.
“The currency of life is time,” wrote one anonymous billionaire family leader in the report. “It is not money. You think carefully about how you spend one dollar. You should think just as carefully as how you spend one hour.”
Forget an MBA—dust off a book if you want to become a billionaire
In a technology-driven era where tools like ChatGPT can summarize hundreds of pages in seconds, sitting down with a book may feel inefficient. But many of the world’s most successful business leaders have long argued the opposite: deep reading remains one of the fastest ways to build durable knowledge.
Microsoft cofounder Bill Gates has credited reading as the backbone of his learning routine. At one point, Gates said he read about 50 books a year to stay intellectually sharp.
“It is one of the chief ways that I learn, and has been since I was a kid,” Gates told The New York Timesin 2016. “These days, I also get to visit interesting places, meet with scientists and watch a lot of lectures online. But reading is still the main way that I both learn new things and test my understanding.”
The best book he had ever read at the time was Business Adventures by John Brooks, the first book Warren Buffett ever recommended to him after they met.
Buffett, for his part, is also an avid reader.
“I just read and read and read,” Buffett said when asked how he keeps up with what’s going on in the world. “I probably read five to six hours a day. I don’t read as fast now as when I was younger, but I read five daily newspapers, I read a fair number of magazines, I read 10Ks, I read annual reports, and I read a lot of other things.”
His advice for aspiring business leaders is ambitious: read 500 pages each day.
“That’s how knowledge works. It builds up, like compound interest. All of you can do it, but I guarantee not many of you will do it.”
The top 7 habits attributing to success of the world’s wealthiest families
Reading
Exercise
Consistency
Waking up early
Prioritizing tasks
Goal setting
Deep thinking time
According to JPMorgan’s latest Principal Discussions report.
How the ultra-wealthy spend their free time
Even though reading is cited as a major driver of long-term success, it isn’t how most ultra-wealthy families prefer to spend all their downtime.
In the JPMorgan report, reading ranked No. 7 among hobbits and interests principals said they were most passionate about—trailing outdoor activities, time with family and friends, and even work itself.
The top 10 hobbies or interests wealthy families are passionate about
Outdoors and nature
Work
Time with family and friends
Tennis
Snow sports
Golf
Reading
Gym and working out
Fishing
Cycling and biking
That gap highlights a key distinction: while reading may not be the top pastime, its value means it’s treated as a strategic discipline—a pattern that’s likely to become even more notable as AI reshapes how information is consumed.
AI use is already widespread among the ultra-wealthy. Nearly 8 in 10 principals said they use AI in their personal lives, and 69% reported using it in business. In a world where information is easier than ever to access, being intentional about how you learn—and how you spend your time—may matter more than ever.
JPMorgan’s own 2026 book list “to inspire big thinking and bold exploration” reflects that focus. Recommendations include Bobbi Brown’s memoir, Still Bobbi, Andrew Ross Sorkin’s history of the 1929 Wall Street crash, and Air Jordan, a look at Michael Jordan’s successes in the business world.
Former Russian banking tycoon Oleg Tinkov says a single Instagram post condemning the war in Ukraine cost him nearly $9 billion, after he was forced to sell his stake in his bank for a fraction of its real value. He described the episode as a “hostage” situation that shows how dissenting billionaires are brought to heel in Vladimir Putin’s Russia.
Tinkov, the founder of Tinkoff Bank, was once celebrated as one of Russia’s wealthiest bankers. That status changed dramatically in April 2022, when he used Instagram to denounce the war as “insane” and to criticize Russia’s military as poorly prepared and riddled with corruption. As CNBC reported at the time, Tinkov claimed 90% of Russians opposed the war, and the remaining 10% were “morons.” He urged an immediate and “face-saving” end to the war.
Tinkov told the BBC recently that within a day of that post, senior executives at his bank received a call from officials linked to the Kremlin, delivering a stark ultimatum. Either Tinkov’s stake would be sold and his name scrubbed from the brand, or the bank—then one of Russia’s largest lenders—would be nationalized.
A forced fire sale
Tinkov said that what followed was not a negotiation but coercion under threat. He claimed he was told to accept whatever price was offered for his roughly 35% stake in TCS Group, the owner of Tinkoff Bank, or risk losing everything. “I couldn’t negotiate the price. I was like a hostage,” he told The New York Times. He ultimately sold the stake in April 2022, shortly after his Instagram post.
Within a week of this conversation, Tinkov said, a firm linked to metals magnate Vladimir Potanin, one of Russia’s richest men and a key supplier of nickel used in military hardware, stepped in to buy the stake. Tinkov told the BBC that the deal valued his holding at just about 3% of its true market worth, wiping out almost $9 billion of the wealth he had built over decades in business.
Exile and erasure
After the sale, Tinkov left Russia, eventually renouncing his Russian citizenship and becoming one of the few high-profile businessmen to publicly break with the Kremlin over the war. He alleged that the campaign against him extended beyond the balance sheet, including pressure to remove his name from the bank brand and efforts to erase his role in building the institution that once carried it.
In his telling, the episode shows how quickly loyalty is enforced when oligarchs step out of line. Public criticism of the invasion, even from a figure whose bank helped power Russia’s consumer boom, was treated as a direct challenge to the state in wartime. There are numerous examples from the recent past, including the erstwhile oil tycoon Mikhail Khodorkovsky, formerly Russia’s richest man, who spent 10 years in jail after launching a pro-democracy organization in 2001. Like Tinkov, he has since become an exile, residing in London.
For his part, Tinkov has taken a few years to retrench and is newly visible in 2025, recently emerging as a backer of Plata, a Mexican fintech led by former Tinkoff Bank executives.
But the former oligarch’s experience sits within a wider pattern described by analysts who say the Kremlin now relies on a mix of fear and opportunity to keep Russia’s wealthy elite compliant. Sanctions, war-time controls and the threat of asset seizures have made fortunes inside Russia highly contingent on political loyalty, while the departure of Western firms has opened up bargain acquisitions for trusted allies.
The war in Ukraine, meanwhile, has rumbled on, with President Trump holding meetings and calls with both Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. After the 2025 Christmas holiday, Trump met with Zelensky at his Mar-A-Lago resort in Florida while fielding phone calls with Putin, claiming a peace deal is “closer than ever,” more than three years after Tinkov made his fateful Instagram post.