Taylor Swift accepts the Best Pop Vocal Album award for “Midnights” onstage during the 66th Grammy Awards at Crypto.com Arena in Los Angeles on Feb. 4, 2024.
Kevin Mazur | Getty Images
When Taylor Swift on April 19 surprised the world with “The Tortured Poets Department,” a double album complete with 31 self-composed songs, there was one line on “I Can Do It With a Broken Heart” that hit home with her — mostly female — listeners: “I cry a lot, but I am so productive, it’s an art.”
As of April 25, more than 98,000 short-form video posts on TikTok featured the lyric along with a glimpse of the user’s daily grind.
“It resonates with both millennials and Gen Zers, which I think indicates that Gen Z is feeling the same ‘girl-boss’ pressures that millennials famously grew up with,” said Casey Lewis, a social media trend forecaster.
More from Women and Wealth:
Here’s a look at more coverage in CNBC’s Women & Wealth special report, where we explore ways women can increase income, save and make the most of opportunities.
There’s a reason so many working women, regardless of age, can relate to the 14-time Grammy winner’s lyrics, according to Eve Rodsky, the author of “Fair Play” and an expert in domestic labor and partnership equity.
“We have been gaslighted to believe that having it all means doing it all,” she said. “The good news is that people like Taylor are calling this out.”
‘Maximize every minute’: pressures Taylor sings about
Women are steadily working more, but they continue to pick up a heavier load when it comes to household chores and caregiving responsibilities, according to a recent Pew Research Center survey and analysis of government data.
“I’m a millennial and I grew up like I needed to maximize every minute of the day,” Lewis said. “It’s interesting to see [Taylor] sing about those pressures.”
In February 2024, the labor force participation rate for women between the ages of 25 and 54 hit 77.7%, according to data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. That’s just shy of the June 2023 peak of 77.8%.
And yet, even in cases where women are now breadwinners, the division of labor at home has barely budged, the Pew report found.
“We are expected to wear many hats and achieve the same benchmarks at work, but often without the care infrastructure, employer support, or equitable division of labor in the home to make it happen,” said Heather Boneparth, co-author of The Joint Account, a money newsletter for couples.
“But we also live in an environment of layoffs and rising costs, so not being productive isn’t really an option,” she added.
We have been gaslighted to believe that having it all means doing it all. The good news is that people like Taylor are calling this out.
Eve Rodsky
author of “Fair Play”
Working women are shouldering more burdens
Members of Gen Z and millennials are the first two generations that grew up alongside the internet, making them uniquely exposed to, and aware of, what’s going on in the economy, experts say.
“Part of that is thanks to the platform TikTok. Even though you’re not reading the news, you’re still seeing how the economy is impacting peers. It gives you a peek into many different worlds,” Lewis said.
At the same time, stress levels for working women have increased with long working hours, contributing to poor mental health, according to Deloitte’s most recent Women at Work report published this year.
Women are shouldering most of the responsibility for child care, domestic tasks, and, increasingly, care for aging parents — even if they’re the primary earner, the Deloitte report found.
This year, half of women who live with a partner and have children at home bear the most responsibility for child care, up from 46% last year. At the same time, 37% of women said they feel like they have to prioritize their partner’s career over their own — another increase from 2023 — in part because their partner earns more but also due to societal or cultural expectations.
“That’s going in the wrong direction,” said Deloitte’s Global Chief Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Officer Emma Codd, who is also a working mother.
“We need to be able to talk about it,” Codd said, and Taylor Swift’s new track is a good motivator, she added.
Correction: An earlier version of this story inaccurately characterized the labor force participation rate among women aged 25 to 54 in June 2023.
The U.S. Department of Education is seen on March 20, 2025 in Washington, DC. U.S. President Donald Trump is preparing to sign an executive order to abolish the Department of Education.
Win Mcnamee | Getty Images News | Getty Images
The U.S. Department of Education is pausing its plan to garnish people’s Social Security benefits if they have defaulted on their student loans, a spokesperson for the agency tells CNBC.
“The Trump Administration is committed to protecting Social Security recipients who oftentimes rely on a fixed income,” said Ellen Keast, an Education Department spokesperson.
The development is an abrupt change in policy by the administration.
The Trump administration announced on April 21 that it would resume collection activity on the country’s $1.6 trillion student loan portfolio. For nearly half a decade, the government did not go after those who’d fallen behind as part of Covid-era policies.
The federal government has extraordinary collection powers on its student loans and it can seize borrowers’ tax refunds, paychecks and Social Security retirement and disability benefits. Social Security recipients can see their checks reduced by up to 15% to pay back their defaulted student loan.
More than 450,000 federal student loan borrowers age 62 and older are in default on their federal student loans and likely to be receiving Social Security benefits, according to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
This is breaking news. Please refresh for updates.
The massive package of tax cuts House Republicans passed in May is expected to increase the U.S. debt by trillions of dollars — a sum that threatens to torpedo the legislation as the Senate starts to consider it this week.
The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates the bill, as written, would add about $3.1 trillion to the national debt over a decade with interest, to a total $53 trillion. The Penn Wharton Budget Model estimates a higher tally: $3.8 trillion, including interest and economic effects.
Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky was one of two Republicans to vote against the House measure, calling it a “debt bomb ticking” and noting that it “dramatically increases deficits in the near term.”
“Congress can do funny math — fantasy math — if it wants,” Massie said on the House floor on May 22. “But bond investors don’t.”
A handful of Republican Senators have also voiced concern about the bill’s potential addition to the U.S. debt load and other aspects of the legislation.
“The math doesn’t really add up,” Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, said Sunday on CBS.
The legislation comes as interest payments on U.S. debt have surpassed national spending on defense and represent the second-largest outlay behind Social Security. Federal debt as a percentage of gross domestic product, a measure of U.S. economic output, is already at an all-time high.
The notion of rising national debt may seem unimportant for the average person, but it can have a significant impact on household finances, economists said.
“I don’t think most consumers think about it at all,” said Tim Quinlan, senior economist at Wells Fargo Economics. “They think, ‘It doesn’t really impact me.’ But I think the truth is, it absolutely does.”
Consumer loans would be ‘a lot more’ expensive
A much higher U.S. debt burden would likely cause consumers to “pay a lot more” to finance homes, cars and other common purchases, said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s.
“That’s the key link back to us as consumers, businesspeople and investors: The prospect that all this borrowing, the rising debt load, mean higher interest rates,” he said.
The House legislation cuts taxes for households by about $4 trillion, most of which accrue for the wealthy. The bill offsets some of those tax cuts by slashing spending for safety-net programs like Medicaid and food assistance for lower earners.
Some Republicans and White House officials argue President Trump’s tariff policies would offset a big chunk of the tax cuts.
But economists say tariffs are an unreliable revenue generator — because a future president can undo them, and courts may take them off the books.
How rising debt impacts Treasury yields
U.S. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) speaks to the media after the House narrowly passed a bill forwarding President Donald Trump’s agenda at the U.S. Capitol on May 22, 2025.
Kevin Dietsch | Getty Images News | Getty Images
Ultimately, higher interest rates for consumers ties to perceptions of U.S. debt loads and their effect on U.S. Treasury bonds.
Common forms of consumer borrowing like mortgages and auto loans are priced based on yields for U.S. Treasury bonds, particularly the 10-year Treasury.
Yields (i.e., interest rates) for long-term Treasury bonds are largely dictated by market forces. They rise and fall based on supply and demand from investors.
The U.S. relies on Treasury bonds to fund its operations. The government must borrow, since it doesn’t take in enough annual tax revenue to pay its bills, what’s known as an annual “budget deficit.” It pays back Treasury investors with interest.
If the Republican bill — called the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” — were to raise the U.S. debt and deficit by trillions of dollars, it would likely spook investors and Treasury demand may fall, economists said.
Investors would likely demand a higher interest rate to compensate for the additional risk that the U.S. government may not pay its debt obligations in a timely way down the road, economists said.
Interest rates priced to the 10-year Treasury “also have to go up because of the higher risk being taken,” said Philip Chao, chief investment officer and certified financial planner at Experiential Wealth based in Cabin John, Maryland.
Moody’s cut the U.S.’ sovereign credit rating in May, citing the increasing burden of the federal budget deficit and signaling a bigger credit risk for investors. Bond yields spiked on the news.
How debt may impact consumer borrowing
Zandi cited a general rule of thumb to illustrate what a higher debt burden could mean for consumers: The 10-year Treasury yield rises about 0.02 percentage points for each 1-point increase in the debt-to-GDP ratio, he said.
For example, if the ratio were to rise from 100% (roughly where it is now) to 130%, the 10-year Treasury yield would increase about 0.6 percentage points, Zandi said. That would push the yield to more than 5% relative to current levels of around 4.5%, he said.
“It’s a big deal,” Zandi said.
A fixed 30-year mortgage would rise from almost 7% to roughly 7.6%, all else equal — likely putting homeownership further “out of reach,” especially for many potential first-time buyers, he said.
The debt-to-GDP ratio would swell from about 101% at the end of 2025 to an estimated 148% through 2034 under the as-written House legislation, said Kent Smetters, an economist and faculty director for the Penn Wharton Budget Model.
Bond investors get hit, too
It’s not just consumer borrowers: Certain investors would also stand to lose, experts said.
When Treasury yields rise, prices fall for current bondholders. Their current Treasury bonds become less valuable, weighing on investment portfolios.
“If the market interest rate has gone up, your bond has depreciated,” Chao said. “Your net worth has gone down.”
The market for long-term Treasury bonds has been more volatile amid investor jitters, leading some experts to recommend shorter-term bonds.
On the flip side, those buying new bonds may be happy because they can earn a higher rate, he said.
‘Pouring gasoline on the fire’
The cost of consumer financing has already roughly doubled in recent years, said Quinlan of Wells Fargo.
The average 10-year Treasury yield was about 2.1% from 2012 to 2022; it has been about 4.1% from 2023 to the present, he said.
Of course, the U.S. debt burden is just one of many things that influence Treasury investors and yields, Quinlan said. For example, Treasury investors sent yields sharply higher as they rushed for the exits after Trump announced a spate of country-specific tariffs in April, as they questioned the safe-haven status of U.S. assets.
“But it’s not going out on too much of a limb to suggest financial markets the last couple years have grown increasingly concerned about debt levels,” Quinlan said.
Absent action, the U.S. debt burden would still rise, economists said. The debt-to-GDP ratio would swell to 138% even if Republicans don’t pass any legislation, Smetters said.
But the House legislation would be “pouring gasoline on the fire,” said Chao.
“It’s adding to the problems we already have,” Chao said. “And this is why the bond market is not happy with it,” he added.
That’s often not a quick trip: Nearly one-quarter of seniors live more than an hour away from their local Social Security field office, according to a new analysis from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Meanwhile, half of seniors need to drive for at least 33 minutes without traffic to get to their Social Security office.
The policy changewill lead to more than 1 million hours of travel per year, according to the nonpartisan policy and research institute.
Why more people need to visit Social Security offices
The Social Security Administration said the new direct deposit requirements would curb fraud, which it said it’s been working to root out in coordination with the Trump administration’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency.
Since 2023, the agency has experienced a “marked increase” in allegations of direct deposit fraud, a Social Security Administration official said via email.
In March, SSA implemented enhanced fraud protection for direct deposit changes. Between March 29 and April 26, the enhanced fraud protection flagged more than 20,000 Social Security numbers where phone direct deposit requests failed security measures that check for multiple fraud indicators.
Of the direct deposit transactions flagged, 61% to 72% of individuals never resubmitted their requests, a “strong indicator” that many of those attempts may not have been legitimate, according to the SSA official.
The agency estimates $19.9 million in losses were avoided as a result of the enhanced safety measures.
However, advocates say the change is an overreaction, given the scale of such fraud. The Social Security Administration has said about 40% of direct deposit fraud comes from phone calls attempting to change direct deposit information.
In early 2024, anti-fraud officials at the agency told The New York Times that about 2,000 beneficiaries had their direct deposits redirected over the prior year. By those estimates, that would mean just 800 of those people experienced direct deposit fraud by phone, according to Kathleen Romig, director of Social Security and disability policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Yet the agency is now requiring about 2 million elderly and disabled individuals to visit its offices to prevent such fraud, she said.
To help ensure benefit payments are not misdirected, the Social Security Administration has tightened beneficiaries’ ability to change their bank information over the phone.
As of April 28, individuals who want to change their direct deposit information will need to log into or create a personal My Social Security online account and obtain a one-time code before they call the agency’s 800 number.
Individuals who cannot use online or automatic enrollment services will need to visit a local field office to verify their identity in person. While the agency encourages those individuals to make an appointment, it is also possible to walk in for direct deposit changes.
Individuals who want to change their direct deposit information may also use automatic enrollment services through their bank. To do so, individuals need to contact their bank directly. Not all financial institutions participate in this process, according to SSA.
Because many seniors or disabled individuals do not have internet service, computers or smart phones — or if they do, may not know how to use those resources — many will likely have to make an in-person visit to their local Social Security office.
About 6 million seniors don’t drive, while almost 8 million older Americans have a medical condition or disability that makes it difficult for them to travel, according to CBPP research.
Where seniors may face longest drive times
In-person appointments may be burdensome for beneficiaries who face long travel times to get to their nearest Social Security office, according to the CBPP analysis.
In 31 states, more than 25% of seniors face travel times of more than an hour to get to their local field office.
In certain less-populated states, more than 40% of seniors would need to drive more than an hour. Those include Arkansas, Iowa, Maine, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont and Wyoming.
In other states, around 25% to 39% of seniors would need to travel over an hour. That includes Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Virginia.
Residents of other states may also face a burden if they do not live near their closest Social Security field office.
The analysis is a conservative estimate to help assess how much time it may cost individuals who are affected by the policy, according to Devin O’Connor, senior fellow at the CBPP.
For example, it doesn’t take into account the time spent getting an appointment to visit a Social Security office and the time spent waiting for the appointment, he said.
The CBPP’s analysis was created with information from multiple sources including the 2022 National Household Travel Survey, SSA field office location data, the OpenTimes travel time database and the Census Bureau’s 2023 American Community Survey.
The Social Security Administration has not independently validated the data, the agency said via email in response to a request for comment.
Staffing cuts may add to appointment wait times
Notably, the new direct deposit requirements come as the Social Security Administration has moved to cut its work force by about 7,000 employees, reductions that have led some of the agency’s field offices to be “understaffed,” O’Connor said.
However, while it had been reported that DOGE planned to close Social Security field offices to help curb spending, thus far that has largely not happened, he said. The Social Security Administration has denied it plans to close local field offices.
Individuals who need to visit a Social Security field office will also be confronted by long wait times for appointments. Currently, just 43% of individuals are able to get a benefit appointment within 28 days, Social Security Administration data shows.
The agency’s new policy to limit phone transactions has been scaled back. The agency had proposed limiting the ability to apply for benefits over the phone, but after it received pushback from organizations including the AARP, the agency changed that policy to limit only direct deposit transactions.