Offshore
Video
EndGame Macro
This is not a business and government partnership. It is the full outsourcing of sovereign state functions to a figure who answers to no electorate, but whose actions shape the global balance of power. https://t.co/Fa4AKEoqal
tweet
This is not a business and government partnership. It is the full outsourcing of sovereign state functions to a figure who answers to no electorate, but whose actions shape the global balance of power. https://t.co/Fa4AKEoqal
(1/3) 🇺🇸 The Private Pentagon: How Washington Weaponized Musk’s Infrastructure for the Next War
⸻
I. The Hidden Doctrine: Strategic Leverage Through Privatization
Elon Musk’s elevation to the heart of U.S. national security architecture was not the product of mere entrepreneurial brilliance. It reflects a larger structural transformation in how America asserts power in the 21st century. As trust in institutions collapses and bureaucratic inertia stifles innovation, the United States has shifted to a more agile, deniable form of statecraft: embedding sovereign functions within privately controlled platforms.
Musk’s companies SpaceX, Starlink, Tesla, Neuralink, and X have evolved into more than market leaders. They now function as critical organs of U.S. infrastructure: in defense, energy, communications, and artificial intelligence. And crucially, they operate outside of traditional oversight. This privatized scaffolding can scale up instantly in a crisis or conflict, sidestepping the usual public scrutiny that hinders state mobilization.
This isn’t nationalization. It’s something more efficient and more dangerous: strategic hollowing of the state into a civilian-owned empire capable of both wartime execution and peacetime ambiguity.
⸻
II. How the Musk Doctrine Functions in Practice
The clearest demonstration of this model is Starlink, Musk’s satellite internet constellation. While marketed as a civilian connectivity solution, Starlink is now a frontline asset in conflicts such as Ukraine, providing jam-resistant battlefield communications. It has been described in military planning circles as a redundant command-and-control grid for scenarios like a Taiwan conflict, where traditional infrastructure might be destroyed in a first strike.
SpaceX, meanwhile, now carries not only NASA payloads but also sensitive DoD and intelligence assets. Its classified arm, Starshield, is tightly integrated with U.S. military orbital surveillance and targeting functions. Through Starshield, Musk has effectively become the logistics commander of American space warfare infrastructure without a rank, a uniform, or a vote of Congressional approval.
Tesla’s Dojo supercomputer, originally trained for self-driving systems, is now being discussed as a viable platform for military-grade AI: drone swarming, ISR pattern recognition, autonomous convoy management. Musk has built the hardware and neural training base for battlefield autonomy, ahead of DARPA timelines.
Tesla’s vertically integrated supply chain including lithium, nickel, and cobalt mining and refining positions it as a strategic energy reserve. If China weaponizes rare earth exports, Tesla’s U.S.-based refining capacity and battery plants could pivot instantly into military energy logistics hubs.
Even Musk’s ownership of X (formerly Twitter) serves strategic U.S. interests. It provides deniable information operations infrastructure, with the ability to shape narratives in real time, disrupt hostile campaigns, or quietly amplify state-aligned voices. Unlike state-run media, it’s privately controlled and therefore exempt from FOIA, FARA, and Geneva restrictions. tweet
Offshore
Video
EndGame Macro
Elon Musk’s elevation to the heart of U.S. national security architecture was not the product of mere entrepreneurial brilliance. It reflects a larger structural transformation in how America asserts power in the 21st century. As trust in institutions collapses and bureaucratic inertia stifles innovation, the United States has shifted to a more agile, deniable form of statecraft…embedding sovereign functions within privately controlled platforms.
tweet
Elon Musk’s elevation to the heart of U.S. national security architecture was not the product of mere entrepreneurial brilliance. It reflects a larger structural transformation in how America asserts power in the 21st century. As trust in institutions collapses and bureaucratic inertia stifles innovation, the United States has shifted to a more agile, deniable form of statecraft…embedding sovereign functions within privately controlled platforms.
(1/3) 🇺🇸 The Private Pentagon: How Washington Weaponized Musk’s Infrastructure for the Next War
⸻
I. The Hidden Doctrine: Strategic Leverage Through Privatization
Elon Musk’s elevation to the heart of U.S. national security architecture was not the product of mere entrepreneurial brilliance. It reflects a larger structural transformation in how America asserts power in the 21st century. As trust in institutions collapses and bureaucratic inertia stifles innovation, the United States has shifted to a more agile, deniable form of statecraft: embedding sovereign functions within privately controlled platforms.
Musk’s companies SpaceX, Starlink, Tesla, Neuralink, and X have evolved into more than market leaders. They now function as critical organs of U.S. infrastructure: in defense, energy, communications, and artificial intelligence. And crucially, they operate outside of traditional oversight. This privatized scaffolding can scale up instantly in a crisis or conflict, sidestepping the usual public scrutiny that hinders state mobilization.
This isn’t nationalization. It’s something more efficient and more dangerous: strategic hollowing of the state into a civilian-owned empire capable of both wartime execution and peacetime ambiguity.
⸻
II. How the Musk Doctrine Functions in Practice
The clearest demonstration of this model is Starlink, Musk’s satellite internet constellation. While marketed as a civilian connectivity solution, Starlink is now a frontline asset in conflicts such as Ukraine, providing jam-resistant battlefield communications. It has been described in military planning circles as a redundant command-and-control grid for scenarios like a Taiwan conflict, where traditional infrastructure might be destroyed in a first strike.
SpaceX, meanwhile, now carries not only NASA payloads but also sensitive DoD and intelligence assets. Its classified arm, Starshield, is tightly integrated with U.S. military orbital surveillance and targeting functions. Through Starshield, Musk has effectively become the logistics commander of American space warfare infrastructure without a rank, a uniform, or a vote of Congressional approval.
Tesla’s Dojo supercomputer, originally trained for self-driving systems, is now being discussed as a viable platform for military-grade AI: drone swarming, ISR pattern recognition, autonomous convoy management. Musk has built the hardware and neural training base for battlefield autonomy, ahead of DARPA timelines.
Tesla’s vertically integrated supply chain including lithium, nickel, and cobalt mining and refining positions it as a strategic energy reserve. If China weaponizes rare earth exports, Tesla’s U.S.-based refining capacity and battery plants could pivot instantly into military energy logistics hubs.
Even Musk’s ownership of X (formerly Twitter) serves strategic U.S. interests. It provides deniable information operations infrastructure, with the ability to shape narratives in real time, disrupt hostile campaigns, or quietly amplify state-aligned voices. Unlike state-run media, it’s privately controlled and therefore exempt from FOIA, FARA, and Geneva restrictions. tweet
Offshore
Video
EndGame Macro
China Turns EU Agriculture Into a Weapon to Break Europe at Its Weakest Moment
Formally, this is about trade law. China is imposing provisional tariffs of up to 42.7% on EU dairy, effective December 23, 2025, arguing that European subsidies allowed producers to undercut China’s domestic market. The tiered structure with lower rates for firms that cooperate, higher ones for those that don’t follows standard anti subsidy playbooks. But that structure also turns the policy into leverage, not just enforcement.
What makes this move powerful isn’t the tariff itself. It’s the timing.
Why the Timing Is the Weapon
This lands right after farmer protests in Brussels forced EU leaders to delay the Mercosur decision. That episode revealed a vulnerability that when rural Europe mobilizes, the EU’s political machinery slows and fractures quickly. Beijing didn’t create that stress, it stepped directly into it.
Dairy is a smart target because it’s politically sensitive in countries where farmer unrest already has momentum. The goal isn’t to damage Europe’s economy in the aggregate. It’s to intensify a domestic pressure point that Brussels is already struggling to manage.
The Trap Brussels Can’t Easily Escape
Brussels also can’t relieve that pressure by quietly backing down elsewhere. Loosening tariffs on Chinese EVs would risk accelerating the squeeze on Europe’s auto sector that’s already under strain from high costs, shrinking margins, and uneven EV adoption. Those tariffs were meant to buy time for domestic industry. Reversing course under pressure would signal that Europe’s industrial defenses don’t hold when challenged.
So China is forcing a narrow corridor…maintain the EV line and accept agricultural fallout, or bend and risk deeper credibility damage in manufacturing.
The Mercosur Angle Beneath the Surface
There’s another layer here. Delaying or destabilizing Mercosur works in China’s favor. A fully executed Mercosur deal would pull Europe deeper into South American supply chains, reduce dependence on Chinese inputs over time, and potentially strengthen a Western Hemisphere bloc that Washington would be eager to anchor especially under a U.S. administration openly looking to counter China’s global reach.
By stirring pressure among EU farmers the very group most hostile to Mercosur, China helps keep that agreement politically radioactive. Europe stays fragmented, cautious, and more dependent on existing trade relationships, including Chinese technology and critical minerals like lithium that underpin the EV transition.
Into China’s Mind…A Low Cost, Asymmetric Bet
From Beijing’s perspective, this is a low cost move with asymmetric upside. China doesn’t rely heavily on EU dairy and has diversified food imports for years. That keeps the economic downside contained. Politically, though, the payoff can be large.
If Brussels bends, China gains leverage on EVs and accelerates its foothold in Europe’s auto market. If Brussels holds firm, pressure can widen…dairy today, pork or brandy tomorrow increasing internal strain without China needing a full escalation. Either path tests EU cohesion.
Who This Really Pressures
Farmers feel the pain first, but they aren’t the end target. Brussels is. China is turning Europe’s internal politics into the bargaining channel, betting that sustained pressure on agriculture will eventually collide with industrial policy, trade strategy, and alliance politics all at once.
That’s why this feels like the worst possible moment. Not because dairy is decisive on its own but because Europe’s margin for political error is already thin, and Beijing is pushing precisely where it knows the system bends before it breaks.
China will impose provisional duties of up to 42.7% on certain dairy products imported from the European Union after concluding the first phase of an anti-subsidy probe widely seen as retaliation for the bloc's electric vehicle tariffs https://t.co/CT4CJjgKQ7 https://t.co/Lic[...]
China Turns EU Agriculture Into a Weapon to Break Europe at Its Weakest Moment
Formally, this is about trade law. China is imposing provisional tariffs of up to 42.7% on EU dairy, effective December 23, 2025, arguing that European subsidies allowed producers to undercut China’s domestic market. The tiered structure with lower rates for firms that cooperate, higher ones for those that don’t follows standard anti subsidy playbooks. But that structure also turns the policy into leverage, not just enforcement.
What makes this move powerful isn’t the tariff itself. It’s the timing.
Why the Timing Is the Weapon
This lands right after farmer protests in Brussels forced EU leaders to delay the Mercosur decision. That episode revealed a vulnerability that when rural Europe mobilizes, the EU’s political machinery slows and fractures quickly. Beijing didn’t create that stress, it stepped directly into it.
Dairy is a smart target because it’s politically sensitive in countries where farmer unrest already has momentum. The goal isn’t to damage Europe’s economy in the aggregate. It’s to intensify a domestic pressure point that Brussels is already struggling to manage.
The Trap Brussels Can’t Easily Escape
Brussels also can’t relieve that pressure by quietly backing down elsewhere. Loosening tariffs on Chinese EVs would risk accelerating the squeeze on Europe’s auto sector that’s already under strain from high costs, shrinking margins, and uneven EV adoption. Those tariffs were meant to buy time for domestic industry. Reversing course under pressure would signal that Europe’s industrial defenses don’t hold when challenged.
So China is forcing a narrow corridor…maintain the EV line and accept agricultural fallout, or bend and risk deeper credibility damage in manufacturing.
The Mercosur Angle Beneath the Surface
There’s another layer here. Delaying or destabilizing Mercosur works in China’s favor. A fully executed Mercosur deal would pull Europe deeper into South American supply chains, reduce dependence on Chinese inputs over time, and potentially strengthen a Western Hemisphere bloc that Washington would be eager to anchor especially under a U.S. administration openly looking to counter China’s global reach.
By stirring pressure among EU farmers the very group most hostile to Mercosur, China helps keep that agreement politically radioactive. Europe stays fragmented, cautious, and more dependent on existing trade relationships, including Chinese technology and critical minerals like lithium that underpin the EV transition.
Into China’s Mind…A Low Cost, Asymmetric Bet
From Beijing’s perspective, this is a low cost move with asymmetric upside. China doesn’t rely heavily on EU dairy and has diversified food imports for years. That keeps the economic downside contained. Politically, though, the payoff can be large.
If Brussels bends, China gains leverage on EVs and accelerates its foothold in Europe’s auto market. If Brussels holds firm, pressure can widen…dairy today, pork or brandy tomorrow increasing internal strain without China needing a full escalation. Either path tests EU cohesion.
Who This Really Pressures
Farmers feel the pain first, but they aren’t the end target. Brussels is. China is turning Europe’s internal politics into the bargaining channel, betting that sustained pressure on agriculture will eventually collide with industrial policy, trade strategy, and alliance politics all at once.
That’s why this feels like the worst possible moment. Not because dairy is decisive on its own but because Europe’s margin for political error is already thin, and Beijing is pushing precisely where it knows the system bends before it breaks.
China will impose provisional duties of up to 42.7% on certain dairy products imported from the European Union after concluding the first phase of an anti-subsidy probe widely seen as retaliation for the bloc's electric vehicle tariffs https://t.co/CT4CJjgKQ7 https://t.co/Lic[...]
Offshore
Photo
AkhenOsiris
RT @21jumpllc: another nugget from our favorite intellectually dishonest exchange, @Kalshi:
'Create a new order group with a contracts limit. When the limit is hit, all orders in the group are cancelled and no new orders can be placed until reset'
>be market maker
>1 trillion contracts 2 way on kalshi, earn liquidity reward
>get filled for 1 contract
>nope the fuck out
how much liquidity on @Kalshi is fake due to this?
market on @j0hnwang , @mansourtarek_ , @luanalopeslara in jail next year, i am very bid.
tweet
RT @21jumpllc: another nugget from our favorite intellectually dishonest exchange, @Kalshi:
'Create a new order group with a contracts limit. When the limit is hit, all orders in the group are cancelled and no new orders can be placed until reset'
>be market maker
>1 trillion contracts 2 way on kalshi, earn liquidity reward
>get filled for 1 contract
>nope the fuck out
how much liquidity on @Kalshi is fake due to this?
market on @j0hnwang , @mansourtarek_ , @luanalopeslara in jail next year, i am very bid.
New CFTC Chair will “cement the U.S. as the Crypto Capital of the World”
Warm welcome to @MichaelSelig 🎉 tweet
Offshore
Photo
Midnight
Midnight is coming to Japan 🇯🇵
Join us for a multi-city tour exploring rational privacy with builders, institutions, and the wider Midnight community—focused on privacy that works in the real world, not just in theory.
Sponsored by @IOGroup.
📍 Cities & registration links below 👇
https://t.co/Q4p7Gmnu47
tweet
Midnight is coming to Japan 🇯🇵
Join us for a multi-city tour exploring rational privacy with builders, institutions, and the wider Midnight community—focused on privacy that works in the real world, not just in theory.
Sponsored by @IOGroup.
📍 Cities & registration links below 👇
https://t.co/Q4p7Gmnu47
tweet
Offshore
Video
EndGame Macro
Why the Arctic Is Turning Greenland Into a Strategic Flashpoint
Greenland keeps coming up because the world is changing faster than people are used to, and geography that once felt remote is quietly becoming central again.
For most of the last few decades, the Arctic was treated like a frozen buffer…interesting on maps, irrelevant in practice. That’s no longer true. As the ice retreats, the Arctic is turning from a moat into a corridor. Shipping routes shorten. Flight paths concentrate. Data cables get laid. Military planners start caring again about angles and distances most people haven’t thought about since the Cold War.
Greenland sits right in the middle of all of that.
It’s Not About Land It’s About Leverage
One thing people miss is that Greenland isn’t a trophy. It’s a switchboard. From a security standpoint, it’s about early warning and visibility. The shortest route between Eurasia and North America runs over the pole, not across oceans. Greenland hosts infrastructure that helps the U.S. see what’s coming like missiles, aircraft, objects in space…early enough to matter. In a world of hypersonics and faster escalation, minutes are everything.
Then there’s the GIUK gap with Greenland, Iceland, and the UK which still matters because submarines don’t magically stop being relevant. Russia’s northern fleet is modernizing. China is learning blue water operations. That corridor is how you monitor who’s moving between the Arctic and the Atlantic. Greenland anchors the western side of that picture.
And it’s not just military hardware. People underestimate how much modern power runs through invisible infrastructure. Subsea fiber optic cables carry global data traffic, and new routes are pushing farther north. Whoever has influence near those nodes has leverage that never shows up in headlines until something breaks.
The China and Russia Layer
This is where timing matters. Russia is rebuilding its Arctic posture because it sees the region as core to its defense and identity. China, meanwhile, isn’t trying to invade the Arctic, it’s doing what it does everywhere else…showing up with research projects, infrastructure bids, financing, and trade ties that look civilian but quietly create influence.
Greenland is vulnerable to that kind of approach. It wants more autonomy and eventually independence, but it has a small economy and huge infrastructure needs. In places like that, influence rarely arrives with flags. It arrives with capital, contracts, and long term dependency.
The U.S. knows this. So do its rivals.
My Take
The mistake is arguing about whether Greenland can or should be bought. That’s the wrong frame. Greenland’s people govern themselves, and any future relationship will run through consent and partnership, not ownership.
The real question is who is willing to stay engaged over time, invest patiently, and show up consistently as the Arctic becomes more contested?
If the U.S. treats Greenland like a joke or a headline stunt, others will treat it like an opening. And once influence shifts in places like this, it doesn’t snap back easily.
That’s why this keeps resurfacing now. Not because Trump rediscovered a map but because the world is drifting back toward hard geography, contested routes, and great power competition. Greenland didn’t change. The environment around it did.
tweet
Why the Arctic Is Turning Greenland Into a Strategic Flashpoint
Greenland keeps coming up because the world is changing faster than people are used to, and geography that once felt remote is quietly becoming central again.
For most of the last few decades, the Arctic was treated like a frozen buffer…interesting on maps, irrelevant in practice. That’s no longer true. As the ice retreats, the Arctic is turning from a moat into a corridor. Shipping routes shorten. Flight paths concentrate. Data cables get laid. Military planners start caring again about angles and distances most people haven’t thought about since the Cold War.
Greenland sits right in the middle of all of that.
It’s Not About Land It’s About Leverage
One thing people miss is that Greenland isn’t a trophy. It’s a switchboard. From a security standpoint, it’s about early warning and visibility. The shortest route between Eurasia and North America runs over the pole, not across oceans. Greenland hosts infrastructure that helps the U.S. see what’s coming like missiles, aircraft, objects in space…early enough to matter. In a world of hypersonics and faster escalation, minutes are everything.
Then there’s the GIUK gap with Greenland, Iceland, and the UK which still matters because submarines don’t magically stop being relevant. Russia’s northern fleet is modernizing. China is learning blue water operations. That corridor is how you monitor who’s moving between the Arctic and the Atlantic. Greenland anchors the western side of that picture.
And it’s not just military hardware. People underestimate how much modern power runs through invisible infrastructure. Subsea fiber optic cables carry global data traffic, and new routes are pushing farther north. Whoever has influence near those nodes has leverage that never shows up in headlines until something breaks.
The China and Russia Layer
This is where timing matters. Russia is rebuilding its Arctic posture because it sees the region as core to its defense and identity. China, meanwhile, isn’t trying to invade the Arctic, it’s doing what it does everywhere else…showing up with research projects, infrastructure bids, financing, and trade ties that look civilian but quietly create influence.
Greenland is vulnerable to that kind of approach. It wants more autonomy and eventually independence, but it has a small economy and huge infrastructure needs. In places like that, influence rarely arrives with flags. It arrives with capital, contracts, and long term dependency.
The U.S. knows this. So do its rivals.
My Take
The mistake is arguing about whether Greenland can or should be bought. That’s the wrong frame. Greenland’s people govern themselves, and any future relationship will run through consent and partnership, not ownership.
The real question is who is willing to stay engaged over time, invest patiently, and show up consistently as the Arctic becomes more contested?
If the U.S. treats Greenland like a joke or a headline stunt, others will treat it like an opening. And once influence shifts in places like this, it doesn’t snap back easily.
That’s why this keeps resurfacing now. Not because Trump rediscovered a map but because the world is drifting back toward hard geography, contested routes, and great power competition. Greenland didn’t change. The environment around it did.
PRES. TRUMP: "We need Greenland for national security."
"You have Russian and Chinese ships all over the place."
"We have to have it." https://t.co/H4aUkjr52d tweet
Offshore
Photo
EndGame Macro
The Second Job Economy And Why Working More Still Isn’t Enough
This chart tracks how many Americans are holding more than one job at the same time. Not overtime. Not side projects for fun. Literally stacking jobs to make the math work.
For most of the period from the early 2000s through the mid 2010s, that number sat in a fairly tight range. It dipped during recessions because jobs disappeared altogether 2008 and especially 2020 show that clearly. But what stands out now is what happens after the COVID shock. The line doesn’t just recover, it pushes to new highs. By late 2025, roughly 9 million people, about 5.4% of the workforce, are juggling multiple jobs.
That red box at the top isn’t a sign of hustle culture. It’s a stress signal.
Wages Went Up But Life Got More Expensive Faster
If you zoom out from 2002 to today, wages did rise. Nominal pay roughly doubled. On paper, that sounds fine. But the dollar didn’t stand still. Inflation over that same span quietly stripped away around 40–45% of purchasing power. Once you adjust for that, real wages are only modestly higher than they were two decades ago maybe 20–30%, and that gain wasn’t smooth or evenly shared.
Now compare that to the things people actually can’t avoid paying for.
Housing is the clearest example. Home prices more than doubled, and rents followed close behind. When mortgage rates jumped, affordability didn’t just slip, it broke. Even people with decent incomes found that the same lifestyle suddenly required a much bigger monthly nut.
College and childcare are worse. Tuition at public schools roughly doubled; private tuition went far beyond that. Student loan delinquencies spiking after payments resumed aren’t a mystery, they’re the lagged result of costs that rose far faster than earnings ever did.
Healthcare, insurance, energy, and transportation followed the same pattern. Groceries didn’t explode like housing, but they rose enough to matter. Cars became dramatically more expensive once you factor in financing, insurance, and repairs, even if the sticker price indices don’t fully capture that pain.
The punchline is simple…wages rose, but the adult bills rose faster. And when that happens, people don’t debate CPI formulas. They take a second job.
Why The Post 2021 Surge Matters
This isn’t the Great Recession dynamic. Back then, multiple jobholding fell because unemployment surged, people couldn’t find any job. Today is different. Jobs still exist, but one job often isn’t enough.
That’s why this chart climbing while unemployment drifts higher is so telling. Layoffs are up. Bankruptcies are rising. Delinquencies on credit cards, autos, and student loans are flashing warning signs. Yet people are still working, just more hours, in more places, with less margin for error.
This is what underemployment looks like in a modern economy. Not mass joblessness yet, but financial fragility masked by activity.
My View
To me, this chart captures the core tension in the U.S. economy right now.
Employment exists. Wages are higher than they used to be. But underneath that surface is an economy that has slowly shifted the burden of adjustment onto households. Currency debasement didn’t collapse the system, it thinned it out. Costs crept higher year after year, especially in housing and education, while paychecks struggled to keep pace.
Multiple jobholding at record highs tells you the economy is functioning, but only by asking more people to sell more of their time just to stay in place. That’s not prosperity. It’s adaptation. And historically, when an economy relies on adaptation rather than genuine affordability, resentment builds long before the data finally breaks.
This feels like the phase before something snaps, when the system still runs, but only because households are absorbing shocks that used to be shared elsewhere. That’s what this chart is quietly warning about.
Working one job is no longer enough to cover living costs:
The numb[...]
The Second Job Economy And Why Working More Still Isn’t Enough
This chart tracks how many Americans are holding more than one job at the same time. Not overtime. Not side projects for fun. Literally stacking jobs to make the math work.
For most of the period from the early 2000s through the mid 2010s, that number sat in a fairly tight range. It dipped during recessions because jobs disappeared altogether 2008 and especially 2020 show that clearly. But what stands out now is what happens after the COVID shock. The line doesn’t just recover, it pushes to new highs. By late 2025, roughly 9 million people, about 5.4% of the workforce, are juggling multiple jobs.
That red box at the top isn’t a sign of hustle culture. It’s a stress signal.
Wages Went Up But Life Got More Expensive Faster
If you zoom out from 2002 to today, wages did rise. Nominal pay roughly doubled. On paper, that sounds fine. But the dollar didn’t stand still. Inflation over that same span quietly stripped away around 40–45% of purchasing power. Once you adjust for that, real wages are only modestly higher than they were two decades ago maybe 20–30%, and that gain wasn’t smooth or evenly shared.
Now compare that to the things people actually can’t avoid paying for.
Housing is the clearest example. Home prices more than doubled, and rents followed close behind. When mortgage rates jumped, affordability didn’t just slip, it broke. Even people with decent incomes found that the same lifestyle suddenly required a much bigger monthly nut.
College and childcare are worse. Tuition at public schools roughly doubled; private tuition went far beyond that. Student loan delinquencies spiking after payments resumed aren’t a mystery, they’re the lagged result of costs that rose far faster than earnings ever did.
Healthcare, insurance, energy, and transportation followed the same pattern. Groceries didn’t explode like housing, but they rose enough to matter. Cars became dramatically more expensive once you factor in financing, insurance, and repairs, even if the sticker price indices don’t fully capture that pain.
The punchline is simple…wages rose, but the adult bills rose faster. And when that happens, people don’t debate CPI formulas. They take a second job.
Why The Post 2021 Surge Matters
This isn’t the Great Recession dynamic. Back then, multiple jobholding fell because unemployment surged, people couldn’t find any job. Today is different. Jobs still exist, but one job often isn’t enough.
That’s why this chart climbing while unemployment drifts higher is so telling. Layoffs are up. Bankruptcies are rising. Delinquencies on credit cards, autos, and student loans are flashing warning signs. Yet people are still working, just more hours, in more places, with less margin for error.
This is what underemployment looks like in a modern economy. Not mass joblessness yet, but financial fragility masked by activity.
My View
To me, this chart captures the core tension in the U.S. economy right now.
Employment exists. Wages are higher than they used to be. But underneath that surface is an economy that has slowly shifted the burden of adjustment onto households. Currency debasement didn’t collapse the system, it thinned it out. Costs crept higher year after year, especially in housing and education, while paychecks struggled to keep pace.
Multiple jobholding at record highs tells you the economy is functioning, but only by asking more people to sell more of their time just to stay in place. That’s not prosperity. It’s adaptation. And historically, when an economy relies on adaptation rather than genuine affordability, resentment builds long before the data finally breaks.
This feels like the phase before something snaps, when the system still runs, but only because households are absorbing shocks that used to be shared elsewhere. That’s what this chart is quietly warning about.
Working one job is no longer enough to cover living costs:
The numb[...]
Offshore
EndGame Macro The Second Job Economy And Why Working More Still Isn’t Enough This chart tracks how many Americans are holding more than one job at the same time. Not overtime. Not side projects for fun. Literally stacking jobs to make the math work. For…
er of multiple jobholders surged 499,000 in October and November, to a record 9.3 million.
This figure has risen +3.9 million since the 2020 low.
This is also 1.2 million above the 2008 Financial Crisis peak.
As a % of total employment, multiple jobholders rose to 5.8%, nearly matching the 2 previous highs seen over the last 25 years.
At the same time, Americans working primary full-time and secondary part-time jobs jumped to 5.3 million, the 2nd-highest in history.
As a % of employment, this metric now stands at 3.4%, the 2nd-highest since 2000.
The cost of living crisis is real. - The Kobeissi Letter tweet
This figure has risen +3.9 million since the 2020 low.
This is also 1.2 million above the 2008 Financial Crisis peak.
As a % of total employment, multiple jobholders rose to 5.8%, nearly matching the 2 previous highs seen over the last 25 years.
At the same time, Americans working primary full-time and secondary part-time jobs jumped to 5.3 million, the 2nd-highest in history.
As a % of employment, this metric now stands at 3.4%, the 2nd-highest since 2000.
The cost of living crisis is real. - The Kobeissi Letter tweet