Connect with us

Business

The K-shaped economy means inflation hurts at the bottom and swells the assets at the top

Published

on



From corporate executives to Wall Street analysts to Federal Reserve officials, references to the “K-shaped economy” are rapidly proliferating.

So what does it mean? Simply put, the upper part of the K refers to higher-income Americans seeing their incomes and wealth rise while the bottom part points to lower-income households struggling with weaker income gains and steep prices.

A big reason the term is popping up so often is that it helps explain an unusually muddy and convoluted period for the U.S. economy. Growth appears solid, yet hiring is sluggish and the unemployment rate has ticked up. Overall consumer spending is still rising, but Americans are less confident. AI-related data center construction is soaring while factories are laying off workers and home sales are weak. And the stock market still hovers near record highs even as wage growth is slowing.

It also captures ongoing concerns around affordability, which is much more of a concern for middle and lower-income households. Persistent inflation has received renewed political attention after voter anger over costly rents, groceries, and imported goods helped Democrats win several high-profile elections last month.

“Those at the bottom are living with the cumulative impacts of price inflation,” said Peter Atwater, an economics professor at William & Mary in Virginia. “At the same time, those at the top are benefiting from the cumulative impact of asset inflation.”

Here are some things to know about the K-shaped economy:

Not an L, U or V

Atwater actually popularized the label “K-shaped economy” during the pandemic after seeing it crop up on social media. Other economists were discussing different letters to describe how the COVID recession in 2020 could play out: Would it be a V-shaped recovery, meaning a sharp decline and then rapid bounce-back? Or would it be U-shaped, meaning a more gradual rebound? Or, worse, L-shaped: A recession followed by extended stagnation.

“There was sort of this land-grab for letters,” Atwater said. “To me the letter that made the most sense was K.”

Back then, it captured the differing fortunes between white-collar professionals still employed and working at home while stock prices rose, even as massive layoffs at factories, restaurants, and entertainment venues pushed unemployment to nearly 15%.

Inequality persists

Inequality was somewhat reversed in the aftermath of the pandemic, when businesses offered large raises for blue collar workers as the economy reopened and demand surged. Many companies — restaurants, hotels, entertainment venues — were caught short-staffed and sought to rapidly increase hiring. Lower-income workers saw larger pay gains than higher-paid ones.

In 2023 and 2024, inflation-adjusted wages for the bottom quarter of workers rose at a yearly rate of 3.9%, outpacing the 3.1% gains for the top quarter, according to research by the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.

“We had that kind of two-year period where the bottom was catching up and that talk of the K-shape went away,” Dario Perkins, an economist at TSLombard, said. “And since then, the economy’s cooled down again,” he added, bringing back K-shape references.

This year, however, inflation-adjusted wage growth has weakened as hiring has fallen, with the drop more pronounced for lower-income Americans. Their wage growth has plunged to an annual rate of just 1.5%, the Minneapolis Fed found, below that of the highest earning quarter of workers at 2.4%.

Slower income growth has left many lower-income workers less able to spend. Based on data from its credit card and debit card customers, Bank of America found that spending among higher-income households rose 2.7% in October compared with a year ago, while lower-income groups lagged at just 0.7%.

And a Federal Reserve Bank of Boston study in August found that consumer spending in recent years has been driven by richer households, while lower- and middle-income Americans have piled up more credit card debt even as they’ve spent less.

Businesses take note

Corporate executives are paying attention and in some cases explicitly adjusting their businesses to account for it. They are seeking ways to sell more high-priced items to the wealthy while also reducing package sizes and taking other steps to target struggling consumers.

Henrique Braun, chief operating officer at Coca-Cola, for example, said in late October that the company is pursuing both “affordability” and “premiumization.” It is generating more of its earnings from higher-end products such as its Smartwater and Fairlife filtered milk brands, while at the same time introducing mini cans for those looking to spend less.

“We continue to see divergency in spending between the income groups,” Braun said in a conference call with analysts last month. “The pressure on middle and low-end income consumers is still there.”

Sales of first- and business-class tickets have been fueling revenue and profit for Delta Air Lines, its CEO Ed Bastian said in October, while lower-end consumers have been “clearly struggling.”

And Best Buy CEO Corie Barry on Tuesday said that the top 40% of all U.S. consumers are driving two-thirds of all consumption.

The remaining 60% are focused on getting the best deals and are more dependent on a healthy job market, she said.

“One of the things we’re watching closely is how does employment continue to evolve for particularly that cohort of people who are living more paycheck to paycheck,” she added.

AI plays a role

The massive investment in data centers and computing power has also contributed to the K-shaped economy, by lifting share prices for the so-called “Magnificent 7” companies competing to build out AI Infrastructure. Yet so far it’s not creating many jobs or lifting incomes for those who don’t own stocks.

“What we see at the very top is an economy that is sort of self-contained … between AI, the stock market, the experiences of the wealthy,” Atwater said. “And it’s largely contained. It doesn’t flow through to the bottom.”

Driven by big gains for companies like Google, Amazon, Nvidia, and Microsoft, the stock market has risen nearly 15% this year. But the wealthiest 10% of Americans own roughly 87% of the stock market, according to Federal Reserve data. The poorest 50% own just 1.1%.

K-shape comes with concerns

Many economists worry that an economy propelled mostly by the wealthiest isn’t sustainable. Perkins notes that should layoffs worsen and unemployment rise, middle- and lower-income Americans could pull back sharply on spending. Revenue for companies like Apple and Amazon would fall. Advertising revenue, which is fueling companies such as Google and Facebook parent Meta, typically plunges in downturns.

Such a cycle could even force the “Mag 7” to pull back on their AI investments and send the economy into recession, he said.

“Then you’re talking about the bottom of the K essentially pulling down the top,” he added.

Perkins, however, sees a different path as more likely: Many U.S. households will receive larger tax refunds early next year under the Trump administration’s budget law. And Trump will likely appoint a new Federal Reserve chair by next May who will be more inclined to cut interest rates. Lower borrowing costs could accelerate growth and wages, though it could also worsen inflation.

___

AP Retail Writer Anne D’Innocenzio in New York contributed to this report.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

‘This species is recovering’: Jaguar spotted in Arizona, far from Central and South American core

Published

on



The spots gave it away. Just like a human fingerprint, the rosette pattern on each jaguar is unique so researchers knew they had a new animal on their hands after reviewing images captured by a remote camera in southern Arizona.

The University of Arizona Wild Cat Research and Conservation Center says it’s the fifth big cat over the last 15 years to be spotted in the area after crossing the U.S.-Mexico border. The animal was captured by the camera as it visited a watering hole in November, its distinctive spots setting it apart from previous sightings.

“We’re very excited. It signifies this edge population of jaguars continues to come here because they’re finding what they need,” Susan Malusa, director of the center’s jaguar and ocelot project, said during an interview Thursday.

The team is now working to collect scat samples to conduct genetic analysis and determine the sex and other details about the new jaguar, including what it likes to eat. The menu can include everything from skunks and javelina to small deer.

As an indicator species, Malusa said the continued presence of big cats in the region suggests a healthy landscape but that climate change and border barriers can threaten migratory corridors. She explained that warming temperatures and significant drought increase the urgency to ensure connectivity for jaguars with their historic range in Arizona.

More than 99% of the jaguar’s range is found in Central and South America, and the few male jaguars that have been spotted in the U.S. are believed to have dispersed from core populations in Mexico, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Officials have said that jaguar breeding in the U.S. has not been documented in more than 100 years.

Federal biologists have listed primary threats to the endangered species as habitat loss and fragmentation along with the animals being targeted for trophies and illegal trade.

The Fish and Wildlife Service issued a final rule in 2024, revising the habitat set aside for jaguars in response to a legal challenge. The area was reduced to about 1,000 square miles (2,590 square kilometers) in Arizona’s Pima, Santa Cruz and Cochise counties.

Recent detection data supports findings that a jaguar appears every few years, Malusa said, with movement often tied to the availability of water. When food and water are plentiful, there’s less movement.

In the case of Jaguar #5, she said it was remarkable that the cat kept returning to the area over a 10-day period. Otherwise, she described the animals as quite elusive.

“That’s the message — that this species is recovering,” Malusa said. “We want people to know that and that we still do have a chance to get it right and keep these corridors open.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

MacKenzie Scott tries to close the higher ed DEI gap, giving away $155 million this week alone

Published

on



MacKenzie Scott has arguably been the biggest name in philanthropy this year—and has nonstop been making major gifts to organizations focused on education, DEI, disaster recovery, and many other causes.

This week alone, several higher education institutions announced major gifts from the billionaire philanthropist and ex-wife of Amazon founder Jeff Bezos—donations totaling well over $100 million. In true Scott fashion, many of these donations are the largest single donations these schools have ever received.

The donations announced this week include: 

  • $50 million to California State University-East Bay
  • $50 million to Lehman College (part of the City University of New York system)
  • $38 million to Texas A&M University-Kingsville
  • $17 million to Seminole State College

All four institutions are public, access-oriented colleges that enroll large shares of low‑income, first‑generation, and racially diverse students and function as minority‑serving institutions or similar engines of social mobility. They fit MacKenzie Scott’s broader pattern of directing large, unrestricted gifts to colleges that serve “chronically underserved” communities rather than already wealthy, highly selective universities.

Scott, who is worth about $40 billion and has donated over $20 billion in the past five years, has doubled down this year on causes that the Trump administration has cut deeply, such as education, DEI, and disaster recovery.

“As higher education, in general, works to find its way in an uncertain environment, this gift is a major source of encouragement that we are on the right path,” Lehman College President Fernando Delgado said in a statement. 

Scott also made one of the largest donations in HBCU Howard University’s 158-year history with an $80 million gift earlier this fall, and a $60 million donation to the Center for Disaster Philanthropy after Trump administration’s cuts to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)—an organization Americans rely on for help during and after hurricanes, wildfires, tornadoes, and floods.

“All sectors of society—public, private, and social—share responsibility for helping communities thrive after a disaster,” CDP president and CEO Patricia McIlreavy previously told Fortune. “Philanthropy plays a critical role in providing communities with resources to rebuild stronger, but it cannot—and should not—replace government and its essential responsibilities.”

Trust-based philanthropy

Scott accumulated the vast majority of her wealth from her 2019 divorce from Bezos, but is dedicated to giving away most of her fortune. She’s considered a unique philanthropist in today’s environment because her gifts are typically unrestricted, meaning the organizations can use the funding however they choose. 

“She practices trust-based philanthropy,” Anne Marie Dougherty, CEO of the Bob Woodruff Foundation previously told Fortune. Scott has donated $15 million to the veteran-focused nonprofit organization in 2022, and made a subsequent $20 million donation this fall.

Scott is also considered one of the most generous philanthropists, and credits acts of kindness for inspiring her to give back.

“It was the local dentist who offered me free dental work when he saw me securing a broken tooth with denture glue in college,” Scott wrote of her inspiration for philanthropy in an Oct. 15 essay published to her Yield Giving site. “It was the college roommate who found me crying, and acted on her urge to loan me a thousand dollars to keep me from having to drop out in my sophomore year.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Netflix’s bombshell deal to buy Warner Bros. brings Batman and Harry Potter to the streamer, infuriates theater owners and the Ellisons

Published

on


Netflix’s agreement to buy Warner Bros. in a $72 billion deal marks a seismic shift in Hollywood, handing the streaming giant control of iconic franchises such as Batman and Harry Potter and triggering an immediate backlash from theater owners and the jilted Ellison family behind Paramount. The bombshell transaction, struck after a bidding war that ensued after David Ellison’sunsolicited bids several months ago, positions Netflix ever more at the center of the Southern California entertainment business that the Northern California company disrupted so famously decades ago.

The deal will see Netflix acquire Warner Bros. Discovery’s film and TV studios and its streaming operations, including HBO Max, in a deal with an equity value of roughly $72 billion, or about $27.75 per share in cash and stock, valuing Warner Bros. at $82.7 billion. The agreement followed a heated auction in which Netflix’s bid edged out offers from Paramount Skydance and Comcast, both of which had pushed to keep the storied Warner assets in more traditional hands.

Two days before Netflix won the bidding, Paramount hinted at its fury with a strongly worded letter to WBD CEO David Zaslav, arguing the process was “tainted” and Warner Bros. was favoring a single bidder: Netflix. Paramount called it a “myopic process with a predetermined outcome that favors a single bidder,” Bloomberg reported, although Netflix’s bid is understood to be the highest of the three.

Another angry group is theater owners, who have famously warred with Netflix for years over the big red streamer’s reluctance, even refusal to follow traditional theatrical-release practices. Netflix Co-CEO Ted Sarandos has adamantly defended Netflix’s streaming-forward distribution, saying it’s what consumers really want. At the Time 100 event in April of this year, Sarandos called theatrical release “an outmoded idea for most people” and said Netflix was “saving Hollywood” by giving people what they want: streaming at home.

Cinema United, the trade association which represents over 30,000 movie screens in the U.S. and 26,000 internationally, immediately announced its opposition to Netflix acquiring a legacy Hollywood studio. The organization’s chief, Michael O’Leary, said it “poses an unprecedented threat to the global exhibition business” as Netflix’s states business model simply does not support theatrical exhibition. He urged regulators to look closely at the acquisition.

Deadline reported that other producers are warning of “the death of Hollywood” as a result of this deal. Several days earlier, Bank of America Research’s analysts had surveyed the landscape and concluded that as a defensive move, Netflix would be “killing three birds with one stone,” as its ownership of Warner Bros’ would be a daunting blow to Paramount and Comcast, while taking the Warner legacy studio out of the running. The bank calculated that a combined Netflix and Warner Bros. would comprise roughly 21% of total streaming time—still shy of YouTube’s 28% hold on the market, but far greater than Paramount’s 5% and Comcast’s 4%.

What’s known and what’s still at play

As part of the deal, Netflix will retain the studio that controls the superheroes of DC, the Wizarding World of Harry Potter, and HBO’s prestige brands. Other details on what will happen to the standalone streaming service HBO Max were scant, with the companies saying only that Netflix will “maintain” Warner Bros. current operations. The companies expect the transaction to close after regulatory review, with Netflix projecting billions in annual cost savings by the third year after completion.

​The deal will not include all of Warner Bros. Discovery, according to the press release announcing the acquisition, which said the previously announced plans to separate WBD’s cable operations will be completed before the Netflix deal, in the third quarter of 2026. The newly separated publicly traded company holding the Global Networks division will be called Discovery Global, and will include CNN, TNT Sports in the U.S., as well as Discovery, free-to-air channels across Europe, plus digital products such as Discovery+ and Bleacher Report.  

On a conference call with reporters Friday morning, Sarandos said Netflix is “highly confident in the regulatory process,” calling the deal pro-consumer, pro-innovation, pro-worker, pro-creator and pro-growth. He said Netflix planned to work closely with regulators and was running “full speed” ahead toward getting all regulatory approvals. He added that Netflix executives were “tired” after “an incredibly rigorous and competitive process.” Alluding to Netflix’s traditional resistance to big M&A, Sarandos added that “we don’t do many of these, but we were deep in this one.”

Influential entertainment journalist Matt Belloni of Puck previewed the likely deal on Bill Simmons’ podcast on Spotify’s Ringer network (which recently struck a deal to bring some video podcasts to Netflix), and they speculated about potential problems inside Netflix that brought the deal to a head. In conversation about how defensive the move is, Belloni said Netflix is “doing this for a reason” and may have reached a “stress point” because it hasn’t been getting traction with its own moviemaking efforts after 10 years of trying. (Netflix has also been agonizingly close to an elusive Best Picture Oscar, with close calls on Roma and Emilia Perez, the latter of which was derailed in a bizarre social-media controversy.) Belloni also acknowledged the criticism that Netflix has struggled to create its own franchises, also after years of trying.

Sarandos highlighted Netflix’s homegrown franchises while announcing the deal, arguing that Netflix’s ” culture-defining titles like Stranger Things, KPop Demon Hunters and Squid Game” will now combine with Warner’s deep library including classics Casablanca and Citizen Kane, even Friends.

The biggest losers in the bidding war may be David Ellison and his father, Oracle co‑founder (and long-time Republican donor)Larry Ellison, whose Paramount‑Skydance empire had been widely seen as a front‑runner to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery. David Ellison, has since reportedly been pleading his case around Washington, meeting Trump administration officials as allies float antitrust and national‑interest concerns about giving Netflix control of such a critical studio.

While Netflix has tried to calm regulators by arguing that a combined Netflix–HBO Max bundle would increase competition with Disney and others, the Ellisons and their supporters are signaling they will continue to press for tougher scrutiny or even intervention. Large M&A has made a big comeback in 2025 as the Trump administration has been notably friendlier to big deals than the deep freeze of the Biden administration, making this deal an acid test for just how true that is when a company with deep ties to the White House gets jilted.​

[Disclosure: The author worked internally at Netflix from June 2024 through July 2025.]



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.