I’m not afraid to bend my back.
I’m not afraid of dirt.
But how I fear the things I do
For lack of honest work…
— from the song ‘Honest Work’ by Todd Rundgren, 1985.
If we want to believe government statistics — and that’s a big “IF” of course — things have changed in America, in terms of labor force participation.
Back in October 1949, about 9-out-of-10 American men, age 16 and up, were employed and contributing meaningful labor to our economy. Like, 87% of men. Bending their backs, and building a strong America.
Fewer than 1-out-of-3 women were working… (outside the home, I mean). 32%.
If I were a male chauvinist, I would say something like, “Back in 1949, men were men, and women were housewives.” Luckily, I’m not a male chauvinist.
A new report from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics claims that the labor force participation by men has dropped to 67%. Only 2-out-of-3 American men were working at meaningful (or meaningless) jobs in March 2026.
Meanwhile, more than 1-out-of-2 women had a paying job in March. That’s about 57% of our women. So, at least they’re trying to pick up the slack.
Here’s the graph from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (which I picked because of “Louis” in the bank’s name.) The labor force participation by men shows a discernible trend.
This is the kind of thing that we simply might not notice — a drop in participation from nearly 9-out-of-10 … down to 2-out-of-3 — because it happened slowly, over 75 years.
Still… it did happen. According to the government.
We can note that this massive change was taking place long before the arrival of A.I., and from all the accounts I’ve read, A.I. is only going to make matters worse.
We naturally need someone to blame. The government is a convenient scapegoat. Maybe too convenient.
Fortunately, American women are once again stepping up to address the problem. They’re having fewer babies. They understand that any children they bring into the world are not going to have jobs when they become adults.
Important American men, meanwhile, are campaigning hard for “more babies”. Which is, like, insanity. To put it mildly.
From CNN Health:
Maddy Olcott plans to start a career once she graduates from college. But the junior at the State University of New York-Purchase College is so far not planning to start a family — even with the Trump administration dangling inducements like thousand-dollar “baby bonuses” or cheaper infertility drugs.
“Our country wants us to be birthing machines, but they’re cutting what resources there already are,” said Olcott, 20. “And a $1,000 baby bonus? It’s low-key like, what, bro? That wouldn’t even cover my month’s rent.”
The Trump administration wants Americans to have more babies, and the federal government is debuting policy initiatives to reverse the falling U.S. fertility rate. In mid-October, the White House unveiled a plan to increase access to in vitro fertilization treatment. President Donald Trump has heralded such initiatives, calling himself “the fertilization president.”
I don’t know about you, but some of us would prefer “the employment president.”
And when I say, “some of us”, I’m including the young men and women graduating from college with $35,000 in student debt they will never be able to pay off because they can’t find good-paying jobs.
On the other hand, the $1000 “baby bonus” would buy a heck of a lot of Pampers, even if it wouldn’t pay the rent. But in my experience, the kids eventually grow out of diapers, and the rent remains. As does the student debt.
Like I said, the government is a convenient scapegoat. Altogether too convenient.
Last week, a friend who recently retired and began collecting his monthly Social Security checks, was complaining that young people these days “don’t want to work”.
Of course, neither does my friend.
Underrated writer Louis Cannon grew up in the vast American West, although his ex-wife, given the slightest opportunity, will deny that he ever grew up at all. You can read more stories on his Substack account.