Official headlines and government data often tell the story late. At best, they leave the public behind the curve - behind the real trend as it is developing. At worst, they direct attention the wrong way until the facts are too deeply established to ignore. That is the danger of relying on lagging indicators - statistics that reflect changes only after they have already happened.
Before the war, the American economy was already showing signs of stagflation - a mix of slow growth, weak job creation, and rising prices.
This argument does not require a full review of business-cycle indicators - data used to track whether the economy is expanding or slowing - or a critique of every policy decision. The evidence can be seen in two places alone: jobs and prices.
Weakness in the labour market
The January 2026 Non-Farm Payrolls report - America’s main monthly measure of jobs added or lost, excluding farm work - was widely presented as strong. The headline showed 130,000 jobs added, beating expectations for a decline of 55,000. On the surface, that looked like resilience, meaning economic strength under pressure.
But the same Bureau of Labour Statistics release - the official U.S. government report on jobs and inflation - contained a much more important message beneath the headline: total job creation for 2025 was revised down by 898,000. A revision is a correction to earlier data when more complete information becomes available. This was one of the largest negative revisions since the 2008 financial crisis.
That matters more than the headline surprise. A single monthly beat can create optimism, but a revision of that size changes the underlying picture. It suggests that the labour market had been much weaker than first reported, and that much of the earlier apparent strength was overstated.
This is the recurring problem with headline labour data: the initial print gets the celebration and the revision is in the footnotes.
The composition of job growth - the types of jobs being added - also raises questions. Much of the increase was concentrated in healthcare and social assistance, sectors heavily influenced by public spending and government policy. Those jobs are real, but they do not necessarily show broad private-sector momentum, meaning strong growth across ordinary businesses operating without direct government support. When job growth depends too heavily on government-supported sectors, the impression of economic strength can be misleading.
That is why official claims of a strong economy deserve skepticism. When the Treasury, the Federal Reserve, and the White House describe the economy as healthy while hundreds of thousands of jobs are being revised out of existence, the issue is not simply whether they are right or wrong. It is that they still respond to political incentives - pressures that encourage them to maintain confidence and avoid causing alarm.
The Federal Reserve, for example, has a mandate - an official duty - to pursue price stability and full employment. Price stability means keeping inflation under control. Full employment means trying to maintain a labour market in which most people who want work can find it. Because the wider economy depends heavily on consumer spending, their role often includes preserving public confidence. But confidence does not always align with economic precision.
More recent labour data only strengthen that concern. Private-sector weakness - weakness in businesses outside government - became harder to ignore, with reported job losses concentrated beyond the public sector.
And when private payroll measures such as ADP - a large payroll-processing company whose employment reports are often used as a private-sector comparison - are added to the picture, the trend looks softer still. The broad direction is not one of labour-market strength, but of deterioration that official narratives were slow to admit.
Price pressures were already building
The same pattern appears in inflation.
The Consumer Price Index, or CPI, is a measure of changes in the prices consumers pay for goods and services. But it is not inflation in the fullest sense. It is better understood as a symptom than a root cause. Treating CPI as the whole story is like treating arm pain as the whole of a heart attack: it may capture the signal, but too late and too narrowly to reveal the underlying condition.
By the time CPI shows a sustained rise in prices, inflationary pressure - forces pushing prices upward - has often been moving through the economy for months.
The April CPI release showed 3.3% year-over-year inflation and 0.9% month-over-month. Year-over-year compares prices with the same month a year earlier. Month-over-month compares prices with the previous month. But by then, war-related price effects from March were already entering the data. More importantly, CPI is a lagging indicator. It does not tell us whether inflation began with the war. It tells us only what had already reached consumers by that stage
There are several reasons to treat CPI cautiously. Owners’ Equivalent Rent is an estimate of what homeowners would pay to rent their own homes, and it often lags actual market rents by six to nine months. Used vehicle prices can enter the index with delay. And methodological choices such as hedonic adjustment, substitution weighting, and chained indexing can all make rising prices appear less severe in official data than they feel in daily life.
Hedonic adjustment tries to account for improvements in product quality—for example, saying a laptop is effectively cheaper because it is more powerful than last year’s model.
Substitution weighting assumes consumers switch to cheaper alternatives when prices rise.
Chained indexing updates the basket of goods more frequently to reflect those changing buying habits.
These methods are not necessarily dishonest, but they can smooth the appearance of inflation in ways that make it feel less immediate on paper than it does in practice
Commodity prices signalled inflation earlier
If the goal is to spot inflation before it shows up in CPI, upstream indicators - measures that capture price pressures earlier in the production chain - are more useful
Commodity prices were already sending warning signals. Commodities are raw materials such as oil, wheat, copper, and natural gas. The CRB Commodity Index, a broad measure of commodity prices with heavy exposure to energy, agriculture, and industrial metals, had been rising sharply since the Federal Reserve began cutting interest rates in September 2024.
That matters because commodity markets often absorb inflationary effects earlier than consumer data do. They react faster to monetary conditions - the level of interest rates and money flowing through the economy - along with supply disruptions and changes in global demand. By the time those moves reach CPI, the inflation process is already under way..
Trade prices told a similar story
Import and export prices were also rising before the war. These measures track the cost of goods moving through international trade and give a more immediate view of how general prices are changing beneath the surface.
Before the conflict in the Middle East, both import and export prices had already been trending upward. By February, import prices had reached 1.3%. Monthly figures should not be overstated, but the direction was clear: price pressure was building, not fading.
There was some temporary relief due to uncertainty around tariffs - taxes placed on imported goods - but that did not change the wider pattern. The inflationary impulse was already present before geopolitical conflict gave policymakers a cleaner explanation.
Producer prices come before consumer pain
Producer prices strengthen the case further. These are the prices businesses pay for goods and inputs before products reach the consumer. They are often the last major stop before higher costs show up in shop prices.
Businesses do not always pass those costs on immediately. For a period, they may absorb them through lower margins, meaning lower profit on each sale. But that buffer has limits
What producers absorb today is often passed through to consumers a quarter or two later.
That delay helps explain why policymakers can sound calm even while inflation is already spreading through the system. By the time the damage is obvious in consumer-facing data, the process is usually too advanced to describe as sudden
The central issue is incentives
It is not necessary to say that officials are lying. The deeper issue is that political actors are rarely rewarded for blunt economic honesty at inconvenient moments. They are rewarded for maintaining stability, defending institutions, and preserving confidence.
That creates a predictable gap between the public narrative and economic reality.
This gap can also create mal-investment - money flowing into the wrong places because the signals guiding investors and businesses are distorted - and overconsumption, where people and governments spend too freely when resources should be used more carefully. Over time, that can deepen the economic damage and reduce living standards, meaning the overall quality of material life people can afford.
The public, then, has a different responsibility: to look beyond the headline, to distinguish leading indicators from lagging ones, and to judge the economy by the structure of the data rather than the reassuring tone of official commentary.
Actionable Thoughts:
Preserve purchasing power. Favour resilience over optimism. Keep diversification, but tilt the portfolio toward liquidity, inflation protection, quality cash flows, and low leverage until the data clearly disprove my stagflation thesis.
Raise liquidity and shorten duration.
If inflation is continues as growth slows, long-dated nominal bonds are vulnerable, fixed payments lose real rates run the risk of being negative. I keep a larger reserve in short-term, high-quality instruments rather than reaching for yield.
Explicit inflation protection.
Bonds, TIPS, Inflation-Indexed gilts as inflation-protected Treasury options and Monetary Metals.
Favour quality.
Lean toward businesses with pricing power, durable margins, low refinancing risk, and products customers keep buying even when growth slows (inelastic goods). In practice, that often means avoiding the most cyclically exposed and debt-heavy firms, be cautious with firms whose valuations depend on falling rates.
Reduce exposure to anything that needs perfect conditions.
Highly leveraged real estate, speculative growth stocks, fragile small caps, and businesses dependent on cheap financing tend to struggle when inflation stays elevated and growth disappoints. If the article is right, the mistake would be assuming a clean “disinflation plus reacceleration” outcome too early.
Monitor better inflation signals than headline CPI alone.
Business-owners:
Act operationally: In a stagflationary environment, preserving margin matters just as much as chasing revenue.
Locking in financing where sensible.
Review supplier concentration.
Renegotiate contracts faster.
Tighten working capital, and test whether they you can pass through costs without destroying demand.
Preserve purchasing power. Favour resilience over optimism. Keep diversification, but tilt the portfolio toward liquidity, inflation protection, quality cash flows, and low leverage until the data clearly disprove my stagflation thesis.
Contact:
For more tailored solutions.