Mouthing the magical mantras of Millennial liberalism doesn’t work anymore. EyesWideOpen/Getty Images

Millennials are having their post-Soviet moment: the truths, the lifestyles, the ideologies, and the religions that girded us through adulthood: all vapour. Our mode of social experience — in which boilerplate moralising, right-think, and right-language confer status — is coming to an end.
Many email jobs have disappeared overnight. The material economy of the Millennial manager is under pressure from automation; from DOGE-era disclosures about NGOs; and from broader, Trump 2.0 shifts back toward — or at least, an appreciation for — family and church, farm and toil.
The Millennial economy was a virtue economy. Some of the most successful among us held managerial roles in tech, education, finance, arts, and politics that centred on controlling and reshaping language and brand perception — what might be called “virtue refereeing”. The most ambitious American Millennials, in a broad sense, became the apparatchiks of the globalised economy built by our parents, in part because there were few other pathways to the American Dream: stable jobs, home ownership, rising wages. Successful Millennials scuttled across the narrow footbridge between the eras. Many others, however, fell into the voids on all sides.
The new economic and political paradigm that is settling into place suggests redress, and greater social dignity, for those who didn’t land managerial email jobs in the first place, who didn’t sell out to become virtue referees. Put simply: many Americans look forward to paying fewer taxes indirectly into the managerial caste’s pocketbooks and to the potential reshoring of industrial jobs. Thus, these changes may be bad for the few and good for the many; many of them deserve to be celebrated.
Start with politics. Because former President Joe Biden’s staffers ran his administration, the Biden years were the first Millennial presidency: inauthentic, bureaucratic, neurotic, seduced by jargon and theory, indifferent to the needs of those outside their own caste. The Biden era was a great reveal: we saw the wizard behind the curtain (and that wizard talked like us, with upspeak and a tendency to twist declarative sentences into the interrogative tone). More damningly, the wizard also made things worse: there was a seeping sense of decline in the Biden years, which produced the inevitable political backlash.
Beyond politics, virtue-referee work has lost its appeal, and the way Millennials talk about their jobs is shifting. Sunny, Obama-inflected language about contributing to progress is an embarrassment for all but the last true believers. My friend Sam Venis, for instance, a journalist and part-time corporate consultant, admits that he is “completely disenchanted by the notion of a ‘job’, which makes me much more comfortable exploiting the money slushing around the corporate world”. Halfway through this decade, he feels “freed of the delusion that that portion of my work matters in some spiritual [or] societal way, which allows me to view it transactionally, and take even more seriously my creative work”.
There were always, broadly speaking, two groups of Millennials (at least, among the millions with college degrees who attempted to make it in the big cities). There were those who, in some way, kept the faith of early-2000s hipster bohemianism — the late-30-something who still shares an apartment and doesn’t have a spouse or kids and has slowly turned toward Trump. The second group are the careerists and strivers, who built up good credit scores and used grad-student jargon to facilitate unnecessary meetings for the last decade and voted for Kamala Harris — the professional overclass.
While the two groups have always co-existed, socialised, even aligned politically for a long time, the bohemian caste not only voted for Trump, but did so with a deep sense of vindication. Trump’s high approval ratings aren’t coming from rural evangelicals or blue-collar voters alone. Recall that the areas that shifted most sharply to the GOP in last year’s election were the blue strongholds; the calls are coming from inside the house of urban liberalism.
This turn of events flows from 2008, the year of the financial crisis and a pivotal moment for older Millennials. The economy of our parents disappeared in that year. As a consolation prize, we were offered the opportunity to be morally better than them. Our generation might be a generation of baristas and bartenders saddled with debt, but we could nurture our own inflated sense of importance by being more socialist, less racist, more liberatory, more linguistically sophisticated. Maybe we wouldn’t own homes, but we’d have doctorates.
Those who managed to parlay moral superiority into actual, dependable, well-paying jobs remained staunchly progressive — because fervency unlocked job security. Those who didn’t manage this feel some sense of hope now, only because practising the verbal rituals of liberalism is no longer a prerequisite to social credibility.
It would be fascinating to see time-lapse movies of Millennials’ Facebook pages (and later Instagram and Twitter feeds) from, say, the mid-2000s to 2025. Essentially, 20 years of social media: from apolitical to staunchly progressive to whatever we have now — sceptical, realistic, finally clear-sighted, and even optimistic in ways we have never had reason to be.
The weird reality of Facebook, the ur-social media for older Millennials, is that it has always been a place to advertise personal triumphs. I’m so excited to announce that I have been accepted into Georgetown’s security-studies programme; I’m delighted to share that I’ll be serving as an editorial assistant at The Nation this summer; here’s our first child. And secondarily, for fears: Can’t believe Orange Hitler is taking away the presidential fellows programme; climate change is so scary; I don’t feel safe here.
It’s a strange zone of contradiction, where the expectation is that one poses simultaneously as successful and fragile: I can afford to take an upscale vacation to Europe, and I’m afraid of the future and the responsibilities of family; a place where one’s network can watch and participate in this strange spiral of anxiety and bold confidence.
The Millennial virtue economy — the rump of the Boomer white-collar economy — had no room for people who couldn’t tap into this mix of anxiety and celebration, self-interest and “purpose”. They couldn’t do it, either because they’d chosen entirely different paths — farming, construction, small-scale entrepreneurship, odd jobs — that didn’t lend themselves to online self-celebration. Or because they were simply too dignified to post: I’m delighted to announce. . .
I think of people with whom I grew up in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania. One of them is working odd jobs in halfway homes, going for long walks, praying — essentially, a secular monk. Another, last I checked in, was working on a hydroponic lettuce farm, painting every morning, ever an artist. Another works on film sets when possible and bounces back and forth between New York and Bethlehem. They, and many others like them, may relish the collapse of the virtue economy and the rise of something once again material and dignified — or at least, less self-righteous, less bloated with gaseous smugness.
Clearly for others, especially in the absurdly affluent DC suburbs, the pain is real. Friends from college and my early 20s in New York City, who successfully tapped into the zeitgeist of the 2010s, who became Obama-era media figures, seem to be confronting not just joblessness, but irrelevancy for the first time. The magic produced by saying the ritual words the right way has run out. No one’s up for progressive scolding anymore. You can’t make a career out of it. The outrage, the nitpicking, the Ezra Klein voice — it’s out.
That doesn’t mean that what comes next necessarily makes for a good society. Far from it. There is a plausible version of events in which many jobs are automated out of existence and universal basic income will play the role that state distributions of bread played in the late-stage Roman Empire: a fragile band holding together urban civilisation.
Cutting fake, grating, pompous virtue referees from prestige jobs that drive up the federal deficit is inarguably egalitarian. It is no guarantor of substantial progress and meaningful social security, however. Moreover, the Right shows signs of creating its own, reciprocal patronage and virtue economy, stocked with influencers and thought-leaders who similarly produce little more than anger at their now dethroned Left-wing counterparts. That ought to be abhorred as much as its progressive forebear.
2025 is partly about coming to grips with how tenuous, silly, and demoralising the last era was for the many; this clarity has to be exploited, not obscured in new ways. This is the Millennial reckoning: the end of the moral-superiority economy, and the slow, painful realisation that tangible value lies in places and communities many of us had long considered beneath us.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
Subscribe.
A fantastic essay that would deflate the progressive bubble of self-congratulatory importance except that Trump already popped that particular bubble with a very sharp pin
They’ll be back. The grift is just too hard to resist, and too many have tasted the teat to give it up by not voting for another set of virtue-signalling “representatives” who will re-inflate the Quangosphere once they seize the reins again
What about those of us millennials who are just bums?
The author is “the founder of the Brooklyn Center for Theater Research“.
His business involves “bums on seats”, whether in the upper circles or stalls.
There is alot of work to be done replacing rotted out infrastructure and cleaning up polluted landscape. That alone would facilitate gobs of functional white collar jobs to support the blue collar work.
That is an area our Federal Government should spark along with cutting red tape to make it possible. The beautification of broken towns and communities. New roads and bridges, replacement of septic systems and rail projects that actually get completed.
Economic growth will lead to those things. As it created them in the first place. They are the consequence not the cause of success. The paradigm of trying to eat your cake before you bake it has largely contributed to losing our way.
That is what they said in the 80s: we needed more growth, less government and less public spending. Then markets would take care of public facilities while the wealth would trickle down. None of it worked out. We got private debt bubbles, cronyism, growth actually stagnated and public facilities were neglected. Now the government has to spend even more to constantly duct tape the broken system. This makes the vicious circle of cronyism worse and worse. And that is besides the fact that growth in itself does not necessarily mean that anything useful is going on.
No, I think the postwar period and many other examples show it is precisely the other way around. The government needs to provide a solid foundation on which a market and a healthy society can develop.
You’re obviously dividing people on here. Personally I’d like to see a government which actually sets out to fix things, rather than leaving it to uncle growth. Especially when uncle growth never seems to turn up.
On our current approach, if British children were dying of malnutrition while the well off wasted vast sums on luxury lifestyles our approach would be: growth will solve that – once their parents have more money they’ll be able to buy them a decent meal.
To be fair, the luxury goods market is going through a golden age. Growth is phenomenal. Luxury cars, luxury handbags and watches, jewellery etc – never had it so good!
But we didn’t get less government, did we? Meanwhile, interest rates were held artificially low, encouraging financialisation and The Everything Bubble, and people thought the country could become wealthier by selling houses at ever-higher prices to each other.
The “growth” we got was mostly in the form of phantom GDP increases; as the joke goes, three economists – let’s say, Paul Krugman, Joseph Stiglitz, and Ludwig von Mises – were walking down the road, when they see a giant pile of dog poo.
Paul turns to the others and says, “I’ll give $20,000 to whomever jumps all over that pile of dog poo!”
Joseph eagerly obliges, and soon his shoes are covered in foul-smelling excrement. Krugman smirks and hands him $20k.
The three walk on, and soon come across another giant pile of dog poo.
Joseph turns to the other two and says, “I’ll give $20,000 to whomever jumps all over that pile of dog poo!”.
Paul soon obliges. Joseph notes Paul’s ruined shoes with some satisfaction, and hands him back the $20,000.
The three walk on, until Ludwig Von Mises, perplexed, remarks, “so now neither of you are any richer, but you’ve both got ruined footwear!”
His companions turn to look at him in amazement. “We’ve just raised GDP by $40k, you dolt!” replies Paul.
I knew the joke but it’s funny and actually true. Although high asset prices do not necessarily produce direct GDP growth even on paper. However, it can produce indirect growth and euphoria.
The artificial low interest rates produced the phenomenon that Minsky called Ponzi borrowing. The 2008 crisis is sometimes also called the Minsky moment. After 2008 the bubbles were essentially re-inflated by central banks.
I think the “government is the problem” rhetoric is sometimes used as a disingenuous oversimplification. There is obviously some truth in it but in practice the argument has been used to dismantle welfare states and financial regulation that should have prevented extreme problems such as 2008. Those neutered governments could then effectively be turned into a bureaucratic nanny state to big corporate interests, which is why it never got smaller and cheaper.
I guess I’m trying to be pragmatic here. I’ve been pretty close to a market fundamentalist but I’ve come to realize it is literally impossible to have complete separation between the public and private spheres. I agree that the private market should drive the economy but here we’re talking about public projects.
A capital investor isn’t going to sink a bunch of cash in revitalizing communities when the risk so outweighs the reward. In cases like this, we might as well acknowledge that the government can aid this kind of endeavor. At least it would be a productive use of money.
As a millennial I don’t think I fell into this virtue-refereeing economy at all – but I definitely fell for the corporate lifestyle I’d come to believe was the ultimate sign of success and female empowerment.
Stayed in it for a while (good money, paid off my student loans quickly) and had an interesting career in banking & finance law but was never happy.
Became a freelance legal translator and loved it until AI ate my job. Now make my money with SEO.
No longer believe in the idea of a “career”, I just want to earn enough money for the life I want, which is very simple indeed. I missed the real estate train so no mortgage to worry about! I have time to be creative, cook proper meals instead of surviving on sandwiches and read. My “career” objective these days is simply to sustain this quiet and solitary lifestyle, as uncoupled as possible from the world around me.
I like what I do but that also seems a bit tenuous and fake sometimes. Sometimes I think I’d like to be a postwoman. Quite far removed from the life I imagined when I was doing my A-levels.
A sign of the times – I first read this as a desire to move beyond the state of womanhood – to become a post-woman.
I don’t think you are alone. I think there might be a quiet reevaluation of what life is about going on. Perhaps especially for women. And I’m not sure it has much to do with the Starmer (or Trump) growth agenda. I think people are perhaps a little too disillusioned for that.
Haha, that didn’t even cross my mind until you wrote it! I was more preoccupied with the decision on whether to write postwoman or postlady. Since I’m from Yorkshire, I thought “postlady” would be rather too genteel and getting ideas beyond my station.
“might be a quiet reevaluation of what life is about going on. Perhaps especially for women”
It is primarily middle to upper class women, or those on benefits (male or female), who can “reevaluate”.
Lower income men or women with self respect don’t have the option.
Middle to upper class men don’t, because the same women who opt for balance or lifestyle, don’t even look at men who are not high earning.
Here is the thing. No one enjoys working a stressful job, or spending hours in a corporate. Men have to do it or forget a relationship.
Women for all the talk of “female empowerment”, are too selfish to do the same, and either just take care of themselves or expect men to bear the load of providing, if in a family. Hence no women in plumbing or truck driving, and the dozens of people I know who decided to either a) walk away from a stressful corporate career or b) go part time especially in the NHS or admin roles, are almost entirely middle – upper class women
I think Western women, at least a subset of them, decided at some point after WW2 they no longer trust men and they need to take control. I don’t think anyone understood how catastrophically bad the consequences would be for them and society overall in the end, however much they tried to make it work. It’s all the more ironic, if not outright hilarious, that the leader of the German far-Right/fascist party (according to liberal view point anyhow) today is an empowered feminist and queer to boot.
And in the 20th century Women got to work and earn money FOR THEMSELVES and this gained Equality. After millennia of sitting in the parlour being bored women could go OUT TO WORK. The poor dears LUVVED IT. The Pankhurst duo really got the party started just prior to WW1 when they promised Lloyd George if he granted the right to vote to Wimmin,they the gruesome twosome would crack the whip and force all the girls and older ladies to man those (woman those?) munitions factories. Aw,those chirpy Cockneys they LUVVED it. How do I know all this? I was taught it at school and the image has long been polished up by the BBC in many a drama series or documentary. But then Shoveling Shit in the company of people you loathe is so much more intellectually stimulating than being IN YOUR OWN HOME reading or listening to Melvyn Bragg.
To be fair, I wonder how many millennials – who did supposedly buy into the virtue-refereeing economy – actually believed it. When I see a typical LinkedIn Lunatic spewing the typical buzzwords, it never seems genuine.
The world in which millennials started to work was always severely anti-meritocratic and rigged. Those with the hardest and most useful degrees – e.g. in healthcare and STEM – got mediocre incomes and hard work while those in the manegerial BS industry prospered. Those who wisely saved money instead taking on too much debt to buy a house and invest got locked out of the market because they essentially have to pay the bill for everyone and everything borrowing whatever they could. The winners are the charlatans, the irresponsible and the con artists. Even startup culture seems like a lot hot air where simple ideas are rewarded by investors who do not know what to do with the billions they got after the 2008 crisis and the pandemic. Again, those who played by the rules get the bill for all of this. But the worst is probably the alienation that you describe.
I invest the money I’ve saved myself, mostly in funds and shares. If I get anything from the pension system when my time comes, I will see it as a bonus – I choose to take my future into my own hands as I no longer trust the state and its ability to provide.
But I’ve got a nasty feeling that even this approach – adjusted for dreams of owning one’s own property being dashed to pieces – will be punished.
I’m guessing I’m part of a whole new property-free generation that is securing their own future in the same way – but you can bet your bottom dollar that self-responsibility will be punished and we’ll have to pay for the people who were profligate and didn’t plan. Capital gains tax is already at 27.5% in Austria with no lower rate for long-term holdings as there is in some countries – an increase would be a bit of a spit in the face.
Social systems are meant to be built on solidarity, but I wonder where the motivation to feel such solidarity is supposed to come from when so many people milk the system and freeload.
Well, congratulation on the courageous decision to take your future into your own hands. With how things are going it is probably a logical decision.
I’m also afraid that limited investments won’t be enough. In the end I think many millennials ending up owning nothing is just the simple economics of inequality. Yes, many countries are dealing with bloated governments and questionable welfare systems, but for the big freeloaders you’ll have to look up, not down. After 2008 and the pandemic a huge amount of money was printed which disproportionately ended up boosting the assets of the ultra-wealthy while the rest of society had to deal with austerity. People have not realized the full magnitude of this yet I think. Money is fundamentally a way to allocate resources and if much more of it is given the 1% – by the government/central bank! – they will outcompete you for those resources more and more. Using, e.g. private equity, they will own your house, your pension, your digital platforms, your energy, your land, your work, your mortgage if you did buy, and in many ways they own parts of your government who tax you but not them. It is what Piketty predicted: if the yield on capital is greater than economic growth, the middle classes will be sucked dry and it’s back to the 19th and early 20th century essentially.
Still, the only way for the masses to reverse this is how the ancestors did it: working together and demanding a fair share. Although I’m sympathetic towards all kinds of decentralized initiatives, the state apparatus is still the most obvious way to do this in democratic societies I think.
Thanks for some really interesting posts. And good to see Piketty getting a mention.
There is nothing worse than relying on the government
It’s “the state apparatus” that enabled all this blood-sucking in the first place, first by instituting credit-based fiat currencies, and then by allowing the central banks to bail out the banks and other financiers when their bets went sour.
They could (and should!) have let the bond and shareholders twist in the wind, nationalised the banks, and only made the depositors whole.
But no, they destroyed capitalism – ironically – by rescuing capitalists
You are correct but what alternatives do people have except capturing the state? At least Western states are democracies to some degree.
Unfortunately the hog troughers in government may disposes the people with money but they will only give it to their friends.
50+ years ago,as a Brit in England when I started work I asked questions about how to provide for my old age which astonishingly I have reached. I didn’t die before I got old! It seemed to me but in an unfocused and inchoate way that our social safety net was based on the pyramid system and I’d heard how bad that was. But I was unlucky in that in my world no one had the answers for me. I just got told my enquiries were in appropriate,in fact stupid,and in any case someone else would be sorting all that out for me. They meant the future man in my life but I knew there never would be,or taking equality! into account,any partner at all,even in crime,lol. But it was just too hard so I gave up thinking about it. Now people that know me laugh when I say one day I’m going to check my bank account and my state pension wont be in there. Theyve sent all the money to Ukraine. It’s still appalling how little financial advice is given to school children or is even available,real advice,not open an ISA with us advice. (So yesterday I hear)
You’re right. It was class warfare by another name. Class warfare against the manufacturing class.
You may be right, but I would like to see the figures on which graduates in which subjects are really earning the most. I think you’ll find it is engineering and other STEM subjects.
I missed the real estate train so no mortgage to worry about!
So just a rent/landlord/security issue instead?
I’m not sure why you seemingly took offense to her statement, as if one way were better than the other. I read her statement as slightly tongue in cheek, but even if it weren’t, yes, a rent/landlord/security issue is the alternative to home ownership, which itself has unique issues to deal with.
Van dwelling is an uncomfortable but viable option especially in van dweller central,the City of Bristol. At least most of ours are Vegan,Just Stop Oil,Animal Rights just left posh kids Uni (Bristol) never paying it back ha ha!
Any children, natural or adopted or fostered?
Definitely not.
Nope, I decided when I was 12 I didn’t want kids. I don’t have any cats either, although I do like them.
Women need to start having. kids again so as to make one of the said little bastards look after them in old age. That was my destiny and I did resent it when young (it seemed so Victorian and uncool) but actually it’s a privilege.
Huh?
After Cambridge university I did become a postman and was paid to cycle around lovely countryside. I thought the simple life a good idea. It gave me great times with my children when they were young but they found it harder later.Money was tight and my wife’s hope for a house didn’t happen until retirement. So swings and roundabouts.
Yeah you did
As a just-about-millennial that went into engineering, unlike many my age, this article makes me feel vindicated.
As the parent of millennials who also didn’t buy into the progressive left virtual signal, self-righteousness I am so pleased, this group like you, can come into their own now.
The author highlights several key phenomena related to Western millennial culture. However, I believe to really understand some of these phenomena, such as the virtue economy and the manegerial bureaucracy, they have to be placed into a broader historical perspective.
To start, I think that the virtue economy goes all the way back to the 1920s when manufacturing consent in mass democratic society, using PR, became a things under influence of Edward Bernays. In that sense this millennial adventure is really just another episode in the Century of the Self, as Adam Curtis called it in his must see documentary.
Then during the 60s things indeed changed when college educated babyboomers had their cultural pseudo-revolution. This was further accelerated by mass media and the culture industry, similar to the current revolution in social media. What followed looks a lot like the millennial timeline as well. After tuning in and dropping out, boomers went to work. However, many of their 60s virtues were coopted by the virtue economy and a lot of boomers got very lucrative and powerful positions pretty quickly. Unfortunately for them there was an economic downturn in the 70s and in the 80s we saw a conservative ‘neoliberal’ backlash, similar to the current ‘populist’ backlash. Offshoring, financialization, unemployment, and generally a somewhat darker nihilistic time, followed. But then, in the 90s the early tech boom produced better times, at least for white collar workers. It is during this era that the 60s progressive counter culture merged with the neoliberal economy. This produced the manegerial bureaucracy as we know it. David Graeber provides a lot of interesting insights as to why Bullshit Jobs exist in postindustrial societies in his book Bullshit Jobs. In any case, this manegerial bureaucracy is what millennials were told to aim for if they wanted an upper middle class position. In that sense millennials are really their parents’ children.
The only difference is, is that the Big Betrayal during the 2008 crisis was worse than the downturn in the 70s. Instead of reforms, all the malignancies of neoliberal society were put on steroids. There is basically a backlash against that now, but if we do not de-financialize, I think things will not really change and bullshit jobs will probably remain or reappear in a different form, with sightly different PR justifying them.
I can’t stand this desire to use marketing labels for cultural and political commentary. Gen Z, Millenials, Boomers, give me a break!
Hear hear!
“The pronoun party is over; get a real job”. There. Saved you an 8 minute read.
I should have read your summary comment first. Instead I ran across female empowerment in comments.
Funny! You got distracted… I understand.
Took me that amount of time trying to decode Ezra Klein voice
Having listened to him briefly, I’ll say sanctimonious and smug with vocal fry.
Wow! Well said, especially however the warning at the end. If there is one thing worse than progressive moralising, it will be moralising from the right.
But wait a minute. Research into theatre, and no less than three books in the pipeline! Sounds like a heavy dose of BS work.
I know you don’t want to hear it in the UK – or me in Canada – but I think the next decade in the US is going to be fantastic for young and youngish people. Trump demanding that businesses re-shore operations in the US will reinvigorate their economy – as will dramatically reducing taxes.
You may well be right. The U.K. not so much.
If Britain resurrected its cheap energy (that would be coal) and slashed its sloth-inducing welfare state, we could re-industrialise.
But on the whole, Brits no longer believe they need to work hard in order to do well. A couple of generations of witnessing people getting rich from flipping houses to each other has erased any notion of genuine value-add. Throw in the ridiculous “influencer” phenomenon, and very few youngsters accept the notion of working hard in order to live well.
We’re in the soft-men-create-hard-times part of the cycle, I’m afraid.
I enjoyed this! It’s definitely time to build embodied lifestyles ….rich in deep relationships and meaning .
Seldom has a group taken itself so seriously for less reason. Good grief. I realize there are differences among generations but no cohort has ever busied itself on things so meaningless as the Millennials—at least some of them.
Don’t conflate being a barista with working in PR, DEI or any other of the virtue economy jobs. Baristas make something. Some even make a good coffee.
And coffee is one of the few things that has really improved in Britain.
By the end of the Clinton Administration (1993-2000), federal spending came to occupy about 17% of GDP. Just before the COVID hysteria, federal spending occupied about 19% of GDP. By the end of the Biden’s term, federal spending came to occupy about 24% of the economy. In real, 2025 dollars, the difference between 2000 and 2024 amounts to about $2 trillion.
That $2 trillion/year got pumped into the already-existing NGO Borg-osphere.
That $2 trillion/year amounts to affirmatively destructive spending, notwithstanding the fact that it gets counted in the GDP. Worse, that $2 trillion a year has been financed with deficit spending. It is the source of the Biden-era inflation, and that inflation is just a way of implicitly taxing everyone else in order to support the bloated NGO Borg-osphere.
On their way out, the Biden Administration worked hard to shovel as much printed money out the door to their comrades in the NGO Borg-osphere, all as a way of “Trump-proofing” that deficit spending.
Unwinding this mess makes for a hazardous business. The Borg deserve to bear the costs of unwinding the mess, but the rest of us will likely end up bearing much of that cost.
Blimey that was a lot of waffle.You could have just used “bullshit jobs” and be done with it.
Haha, take away all the fake pompous moralising virtue signalling from England and they’ll be nothing……the virtual email class of bulls hit is all there is. Obvious, just look at who rules us.
Fake=England
This is a little harsh but very insightful. I wonder if the values embodied in these jobs are like a new religion. Also, since many in these jobs are extremely talented, it seems likely they may emerge stronger. I hope the result is not more bitterness. We have too much of that now.