Americans' views on inflation are finally turning a corner
Americans are finally starting to feel less anxious about inflation.
Consumer price index data showed inflation cooled in May. That comes alongside a brightening of inflation expectations in the latest survey data.
The New York Fed's survey of consumer expectations, published on Monday, showed that consumers' forward-looking inflation outlook declined in May for the first time this year.
The median one-year-ahead inflation expectation decreased, dropping from 3.6% in April to 3.2%. Three-year-ahead and five-year-ahead inflation expectations also declined, falling from 3.2% to 3.0% and from 2.7% to 2.6%, respectively.
The survey marks a turning point in the gap between "soft" and "hard" economic data, with the vibes in the economy starting to more closely align with the facts on the ground.
Inflation and labor market data have been looking more and more upbeat, but forward-looking gauges like inflation expectations and consumer sentiment have headed in the opposite direction.
Last Friday's jobs report also showed higher-than-anticipated job creation and unemployment levels hovering near historic lows. Yet, May's University of Michigan consumer sentiment reading plunged to from 52.2 to 50.8, the second-lowest reading ever recorded.
Consumers are catching up to Wall Street
Wall Street has been more focused on the hard data.
May was a strong month for markets as slowing inflation and US-China trade relations led stocks to recover their Liberation Day losses. Recession expectations have come down from 60% to as low as 30% among some forecasters.
As stocks continue to gain after April's peak tariff volatility, strategists are also recalibrating their inflation expectations. While inflation could spike later this summer, as it could take three months or more for retailers to pass on tariff-related price increases to consumers, Goldman Sachs believes inflation will only see a temporary uptick from tariffs in 2025 before heading back down in 2026.
Now, it seems like consumers are finally getting on the same page. In addition to the improved inflation outlook reported by the New York Fed, the Consumer Confidence Index rebounded, increasing 12.3 points in May to 98.0 — its first increase after falling for five consecutive months.
Goldman Sachs said that for past event-driven recessions, soft data has usually bottomed around 60 days after a catalyst. As Liberation Day moves further into the rearview, Americans appear to be adjusting their economic outlooks.
Darrell Cronk, chief investment officer of Wells Fargo, echoed this perspective.
"What people forget is that sentiment is a reflection of what has happened already, not what will happen in the future," Cronk said during the bank's midyear outlook conference on Tuesday.
More optimistic sentiment could be a tailwind for markets, according to Goldman Sachs. Pessimistic consumers have pulled back on spending, especially in discretionary categories like airfare and travel.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
Is Using Tech To Make Your Own Sparkling Water Worthwhile?
This portable system makes instant sparkling water Americans apparently love effervescence. According to Google's Gemini, the global sparkling water market was valued at about $42.62 billion last year. And it's projected to grow significantly, with estimates maxing it out at $108 billion by 2032. That's a lot of burps. So it shouldn't shock you that companies are flocking to get in on a piece of and Kirkland flavored sparkling water are mainstays in our home. The labeling implies there's no sugar – just essentially water and CO2. So it's way better for you than carbonated soda. And to me, it's so much tastier than plain drinking water, with all the used to have a Sodastream unit, in which we made our own seltzer water by carbonating ordinary tap water and adding flavor syrup. Somewhere along the way, it broke or stopped working. So we just went back to buying cans of the good stuff. Of course, this habit can get a little pricey. But more than anything, I really just don't like carrying the heavy cases of it in from the car, once we get home from I heard about Aerflo, which brings portability to the category. It's a single drinking water bottle in which the top holds a refillable CO2 canister -- making it a portable, zero-waste carbonation system. It's kind of an online sensation, I noticed, with reviewers posting how-to videos and hundreds of people joining in on the for $74, the system includes the portable carbonator, a reusable bottle, and a set of refillable CO₂ capsules that each make up to four bottles of sparkling water. It's compact enough to fit in your front-seat cup holder; is free of PFAS, BPA and microplastics; and is backed by a circular exchange model. Just drop used capsules in the mail using the prepaid return box, and Aerflo refills and recirculates them from its New Jersey facility. The company claims it's ideal for those who care about sustainability, simplicity and well-made gear. And it of course eliminates the need for counter-top appliances that carbonate two weeks, I've been trying Aerflo – along with friends and family. It's easy to use: You place the small CO2 canister in the lid, fill the water bottle, tighten the lid, press the lid in the marked spot three times or so, shake the container, and then repeat the last two steps three times. When the water has carbonated enough, it lets out a noise of air escaping. Then you remove the lid and drink. The entire process takes maybe 30 my brief experience, it works fine but the water does not get as carbonated as a can of Lacroix – no matter how much I've tried carbonating and even over-carbonating. Yet it generates a pleasing amount of bubbles that does the job. The company asks you not add syrup or flavoring, but you can just pour the water into a separate glass with syrup if you want. I added a lime wedge to the Aerflo bottle, and that worked fine. Also, I was only able to get two glasses of carbonation out of any canister – even once I started pressing the lid the minimum amount of times per glass. So I'm not sure how much savings it's truly offering over just buying cans of sparkling water. But it's definitely better for the environment than throwing out can after an industry clearly growing exponentially, it's good that there are options. I expect there will be more products like this emerging as time goes on. And that makes me feel bubbly.
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Investors brace for oil price spike, rush to havens after US bombs Iran nuclear sites
The U.S. attack on Iranian nuclear sites is expected to cause market reactions, potentially increasing oil prices and strengthening the U.S. dollar. Increased oil prices could lead to higher inflation and reduced consumer confidence, potentially impacting interest rate cuts. Market uncertainty remains high due to limited information regarding the extent of damage and future developments in the conflict. NEW YORK - A U.S. attack on Iranian nuclear sites on Saturday could lead to a knee-jerk reaction in global markets when they reopen, sending oil prices higher and triggering a rush to safety, investors said, as they assessed how the latest escalation of tensions would ripple through the global economy. The attack, which was announced by President Donald Trump on social media site Truth Social, deepens U.S. involvement in the Middle East conflict. That was the question going into the weekend, when investors were mulling a host of different market scenarios. In the immediate aftermath of the announcement, they expected the U.S. involvement was likely to cause a selloff in equities and a possible bid for the dollar and other safe-haven assets when trading begins, but also said much uncertainty about the course of the conflict remained. While Trump called the attack "successful", few details were known. He was expected to address the nation later on Saturday. "I think the markets are going to be initially alarmed, and I think oil will open higher," said Mark Spindel, chief investment officer at Potomac River Capital. "We don't have any damage assessment and that will take some time. Even though he has described this as 'done', we're engaged. What comes next?" Spindel said. "I think the uncertainty is going to blanket the markets, as now Americans everywhere are going to be exposed. It's going to raise uncertainty and volatility, particularly in oil," he added. Spindel, however, said there was time to digest the news before markets open and said he was making arrangements to talk to other market participants. How will oil prices and inflation be affected? A key concern for markets would center around the potential impact of the developments in the Middle East on oil prices and thus on inflation. A rise in inflation could dampen consumer confidence and lessen the chance of near-term interest rate cuts. "This adds a complicated new layer of risk that we'll have to consider and pay attention to," said Jack Ablin, chief investment officer of Cresset Capital. "This is definitely going to have an impact on energy prices and potentially on inflation as well." While global benchmark Brent crude futures have risen as much as 18% since June 10, hitting a near five-month high of $79.04 on Thursday, the S&P 500 has been little changed, following an initial drop when Israel launched its attacks on Iran on June 13. Before the U.S. attack on Saturday, analysts at Oxford Economics modeled three scenarios, including a de-escalation of the conflict, a complete shutdown in Iranian oil production and a closure of the Strait of Hormuz, "each with increasingly large impacts on global oil prices." In the most severe case, global oil prices jump to around $130 per barrel, driving U.S. inflation near 6% by the end of this year, Oxford said in the note. "Although the price shock inevitably dampens consumer spending because of the hit to real incomes, the scale of the rise in inflation and concerns about the potential for second-round inflation effects likely ruin any chance of rate cuts in the U.S. this year," Oxford said in the note, which was published before the U.S. strikes. In comments after the announcement on Saturday, Jamie Cox, managing partner at Harris Financial Group, agreed oil prices would likely spike on the initial news. But Cox said he expected prices to likely level in a few days as the attacks could lead Iran to seek a peace deal with Israel and the United States. "With this demonstration of force and total annihilation of its nuclear capabilities, they've lost all of their leverage and will likely hit the escape button to a peace deal," Cox said. Economists warn that a dramatic rise in oil prices could damage a global economy already strained by Trump's tariffs. Still, any pullback in equities might be fleeting, history suggests. During past prominent instances of Middle East tensions coming to a boil, including the 2003 Iraq invasion and the 2019 attacks on Saudi oil facilities, stocks initially languished but soon recovered to trade higher in the months ahead. On average, the S&P 500 slipped 0.3% in the three weeks following the start of conflict, but was 2.3% higher on average two months following the conflict, according to data from Wedbush Securities and CapIQ Pro. What will this mean for the US dollar? An escalation in the conflict could have mixed implications for the U.S. dollar, which has tumbled this year amid worries over diminished U.S. exceptionalism. In the event of U.S. direct engagement in the Iran-Israel war, the dollar could initially benefit from a safety bid, analysts said. "Do we see a flight to safety? That would signal yields going lower and the dollar getting stronger," said Steve Sosnick, chief market strategist at IBKR in Greenwich, Connecticut. "It's hard to imagine stocks not reacting negatively and the question is how much. It will depend on Iranian reaction and whether oil prices spike."
Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
Climate Lawsuits Are Weakening America And Strengthening China
A Chinese flag flies in front of a coal fired power plant in Tianjin. China has been building new ... More coal-fired power plants, with construction starts reaching a ten-year high in 2024. (Photo by) Sen. Ted Cruz deserves credit for saying what too many in Washington are unwilling to admit. American energy security is under coordinated attack, and it is not just coming from progressive environmental activists. It's being encouraged and in some cases funded by our top geopolitical rival. On Wednesday, Sen. Cruz's Judiciary oversight subcommittee will hold a hearing to examine how China and America's climate litigation movement are working in parallel to undermine U.S. energy dominance. These efforts are being carried out under the banner of environmental protection and the clean energy transition, but the real goal is to weaken America's energy sector and give the advantage to China in global energy and manufacturing markets. Climate cases brought by plaintiff firms like Sher Edling are supported by a network of well-funded foundations and nonprofits that are unwittingly advancing the strategic interests of America's adversaries by weakening domestic energy production and increasing our dependence on foreign-controlled supply chains—particularly those dominated by China. There is growing recognition that this is a national security problem. The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission has warned that the Chinese Communist Party is actively working to 'directly and malignly influence state and local leaders to promote China's global agenda.' A recent report by national security nonprofit State Armor outlines how China has co-opted elements of the U.S. climate lobby to drive a transition away from fossil fuels. The result is greater U.S. reliance on Chinese-controlled technologies, minerals, and supply chains. China dominates the global markets for lithium, cobalt, solar panels, and battery components. It stands to gain enormously from U.S. policies that force a premature shift away from traditional energy sources. The report spotlights Energy Foundation China (EFC) which claims to be a nonprofit headquartered in San Francisco. In reality, its staff are mostly based in Beijing, and its operations align closely with the Chinese Communist Party's interests. EFC has spent millions supporting anti-fossil fuel groups in the United States, including the Rocky Mountain Institute and the Natural Resources Defense Council. NRDC was the subject of a 2018 congressional inquiry over whether it should register as a foreign agent due to its ties to China. House Energy and Commerce Committee leaders last year warned that 'China has already attempted to influence United States policy and opinion through covert influence and by exploiting perceived societal divisions.' Their letter raised concerns about China-affiliated organizations influencing U.S. energy policy. A number of foundations have played a role in financing climate litigation efforts nationwide. A decade of litigation that most likely would not have happened without their financial backing. Major donors to this network include some of the largest philanthropic institutions in the country, including the Children's Investment Fund, MacArthur, Rockefeller, and Hewlett foundations. Yet few of these donors have accounted for the risk of foreign manipulation embedded in the organizations they fund. The influence campaign also extends into U.S. academic institutions. The National Natural Science Foundation of China, a government-run research entity, has published articles in American journals criticizing fossil fuels and accusing U.S. companies of deceptive practices. One of EFC's top communications directors previously held a position at that same Chinese foundation. At the same time, the revolving door between activist nonprofits and government agencies is raising serious ethical and legal questions. Ann Carlson, a senior official in the Biden administration, previously sat on the board of the Environmental Law Institute while also consulting for Sher Edling. This institute has hosted multiple educational events with Chinese organizations on 'climate litigation capacity building' aimed at influencing judges and shaping the legal landscape in both countries. Sen. Cruz is right to shine a spotlight on these connections. There is no shortage of outside forces fueling this wave of litigation, and his subcommittee is well positioned to expose them. The American people deserve transparency about who is bankrolling the litigation assault on domestic energy and to what end. This is not simply the work of environmentalists who believe they are saving the planet. It includes adversarial foreign actors with a vested interest in weakening U.S. energy leadership and shifting global influence away from the United States. President Trump's energy dominance agenda is helping restore American strength by unleashing domestic production and lowering energy prices. But the progress made is at risk. Foreign interference, opaque litigation funding, and activist-driven policy by lawsuit are undermining U.S. energy security. Prior administrations allowed this framework to take hold by ceding policymaking authority to the courts. China is more than happy to watch us tie our economy in regulatory knots while it builds new coal-fired power plants, locks in oil and gas contracts with OPEC+ members, and consolidates control over clean energy technologies. If we let this trend continue, we are handing Beijing exactly what it wants. We need stronger congressional oversight, new transparency requirements for nonprofits that receive foreign-linked funding, and a renewed national focus on producing energy here at home. That starts by recognizing that this is not just a political disagreement. It's a strategic threat to our country's future.
