PHOENIX—All around this desert city’s sprawling metro area, low-rise office parks with tinted windows and vast parking lots stretch to the horizon. This is America’s back office.

Abundant land and cheap labor made Phoenix a premier place for companies to stash lower-paid office workers who don’t need to be physically close to clients or headquarters. The cubicle-based jobs—customer service, data entry, payroll processing—created a vital ladder to the middle class, helping replace factory work lost to overseas competition. 

Now, these white-collar jobs are fading, too, thanks to continued offshoring and, increasingly, artificial intelligence. Tens of thousands of local workers suddenly face an uncertain future.

A test grader saw her work outsourced to India. A customer-relations manager, recently laid off and his savings running low, is looking to become a bartender. Job-placement firms that supply companies with back-office workers are seeing less demand and are cutting their own staff, too. Those who still have jobs are increasingly leery of automation, even as it’s become an unavoidable part of their days.

Janus Henderson Investors exists to help clients achieve their long-term financial goals. Formed in 2017 from the merger between Janus Capital Group and Henderson Global Investors, we are committed to adding value through active management. For us, active is more than our investment approach – it is the way we translate ideas into action, how we communicate our views and the partnerships we build in order to create the best outcomes for clients. While our investment managers have the flexibility to follow approaches best suited to their areas of expertise, overall our people come together as a team. This is reflected in our Knowledge. Shared ethos, which informs the dialogue across the business and drives our commitment to empowering clients to make better investment and business decisions.www.janushenderson.com

There was a moment, somewhere around 1990, when I sincerely believed that the most important thing my mother did each evening was sit down at 9.00pm sharp to watch the news.

Not 9.01pm. Not 8.59pm. Nine, on the dot, because that was when the news began, because Sir Alastair Burnet had decided it was so, and because the rest of the United Kingdom, including, by the look of it, the entire cabinet, appeared to be doing exactly the same thing. The country ran on a single national rhythm, like a great wheezing grandfather clock, and the people who set the time wore tailored suits and lived in a place called Wood Lane.

That rhythm is now thoroughly, demonstrably, embarrassingly dead. And the people doing the burying are not bedroom-bound teenagers in TikTok-stained pyjamas. They are the very figures who built the broadcast schedule in the first place.

Take Stephen Colbert. Forty-eight hours after CBS finally smothered The Late Show with a corporate pillow, the network insists this had nothing to do with the lawsuit, the Skydance merger or the present occupant of the Oval Office, and we are of course expected to accept that assertion at the value of a Liz Truss lettuce, Colbert popped up on a public-access channel called Monroe Community Media. Then he popped up, rather more pointedly, on his shiny new YouTube channel, with Eminem and Jeff Daniels in tow, gathering 120,000 subscribers in a single weekend. No 11.35pm slot. No commercial break. No procession of Affiliate Sales stations of the cross. Just Stephen, a camera, and the most generous tip jar in the history of broadcasting.

A few months earlier, Piers Morgan walked off the Murdoch reservation entirely, to which I would normally raise a single languid eyebrow, but the man left a reported £50 million on the table to do it. He has called the TalkTV slot a “straitjacket”. He has 3.6 million YouTube subscribers and a four-year arrangement that hands him ownership of his own brand. Trump, Zelensky, Peterson, Ronaldo: all interviewed not for the dignified British 10 o’clock viewer but for a global congregation that watches him in Brisbane, Boston and bed.

And while the talent is bolting for the exits, the institutions are quietly digging tunnels under the perimeter fence. The BBC, that great, lumbering, well-meaning monument to the licence fee, is putting the finishing touches on a landmark deal to produce original shows for YouTube. Why? Because, mortifyingly, YouTube has overtaken BBC One on monthly reach in this country. The corporation that gave us Reith, Attenborough and Bake Off is now obliged to commission content for the same platform that hosts cats falling off skirting boards. The licence fee, it turns out, doesn’t beat free.

The numbers, for those of us who still pretend to be grown-ups, are devastating. Per Ofcom’s Media Nations 2025 report, Britons aged 16 to 24 now watch a startling 33 minutes of broadcast television a day, of which barely 20 minutes is live; they spend an hour and a half on YouTube and TikTok. For someone over 75, broadcast still hoovers up 90 per cent of in-home viewing. For a 16-year-old, it is 19 per cent. We are not, as is so often claimed, watching the gradual decline of an industry. We are watching its will being read.

Across the Atlantic, Nielsen’s Gauge confirms YouTube has now spent six consecutive months as the single largest distributor of television in America, larger than Disney, larger than NBCUniversal, larger than the entire stricken cable bundle put together. YouTube earned $36 billion in ad revenue in 2024, more than all four American broadcast networks combined. The schedule, to put it baldly, has been replaced by the search bar. The time slot has been replaced by the thumbnail.

The business lesson here is not “everyone should start a YouTube channel”. Please don’t. You’ll fail, embarrass your spouse and spend Saturdays editing in your shed. The lesson, for those of us building businesses outside the M25 commentary bubble, is rather more important than that. Ownership, distribution and audience relationship are now the three things that actually count, and the platform that delivers all three at once is winning. Witness Gary Lineker’s Goalhanger Ventures putting capital into creator-led media businesses precisely because the old playbook, make show, hand to broadcaster, hope, is demonstrably worse than the new one. The talent keeps the IP. The talent keeps the audience. The talent, increasingly, is the broadcaster.

The slot, that great totem of the 20th-century media baron, was never about the viewer. It was about logistics, advert breaks, satellite uplinks, union breaks, Carol Vorderman’s hairdresser. The viewer wanted the show. They never wanted nine o’clock. And now, at last, they don’t have to take both.

Sir Alastair Burnet, sleep well.

Richard Alvin

Richard Alvin is a serial entrepreneur, a former advisor to the UK Government about small business and an Honorary Teaching Fellow on Business at Lancaster University.

A winner of the London Chamber of Commerce Business Person of the year and Freeman of the City of London for his services to business and charity. Richard is also Group MD of Capital Business Media and SME business research company Trends Research, regarded as one of the UK’s leading experts in the SME sector and an active angel investor and advisor to new start companies.

Richard is also the host of Save Our Business the U.S. based business advice television show.

NEW YORK — The average rate on the most popular U.S. home loan rose to a nine-month high last week, delivering another setback to housing affordability as persistent inflation concerns linked to the ongoing U.S.-Iran conflict kept borrowing costs elevated.

The 30-year fixed-rate mortgage averaged 6.65 percent in the week ended May 22, up from 6.56 percent the previous week, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association. It marked the highest level since August 2025, before the Federal Reserve began cutting rates to support the labor market.

Mortgage applications fell 8.5 percent from the prior week, with refinancing activity dropping sharply. Overall application volume reached its lowest level since last summer, the trade group said.

The increase in borrowing costs reflects broader market reactions to geopolitical developments. Renewed military exchanges between the United States and Iran near the Strait of Hormuz have pushed oil prices higher, contributing to renewed inflation pressures across the economy. This dynamic has driven up Treasury yields, to which mortgage rates are closely linked.

Fed Policy and Economic Backdrop

The rise comes as the Federal Reserve navigates a complex environment. After a series of rate cuts in late 2025, officials are now weighing whether to pause or even consider increases amid sticky inflation. Consumer prices rose 3.8 percent in April from a year earlier, compared with 2.9 percent last August.

The labor market has stabilized, with the unemployment rate holding at 4.3 percent. However, energy costs tied to Middle East tensions have spilled over into broader price increases, prompting caution from policymakers.

New Federal Reserve Chair Kevin Warsh, who succeeded Jerome Powell, faces immediate pressure to balance growth concerns with inflation control. Markets are now pricing in the possibility of a rate hike by the end of 2026, reversing earlier expectations for further easing.

Tight Supply Exacerbates Affordability Issues

Limited housing inventory continues to compound the challenge for potential buyers. Many homeowners with mortgage rates below 5 percent are reluctant to sell and take on higher borrowing costs, creating what economists call the “rate lock-in” effect.

Nancy Vanden Houten, U.S. lead economist at Oxford Economics, highlighted this dynamic in a recent analysis. “That shortage is compounded by the fact that historically few homeowners are selling their properties,” she said. “The turnover of the existing owner-occupied stock averaged 4.7 percent over the last four quarters, which is below the turnover rate we saw during the depths of the global financial crisis.”

As of the end of 2025, nearly two-thirds of outstanding mortgages carried rates below 5 percent, according to Federal Housing Finance Agency data. This low-rate lock-in has severely restricted the flow of homes onto the market, keeping prices elevated even as demand cools.

Impact on Homebuyers and the Market

Higher mortgage rates are pricing out many first-time buyers and making monthly payments less affordable for middle-income households. The combination of elevated home prices and borrowing costs has pushed affordability measures to multi-decade lows in many markets.

Purchase applications fell more sharply than refinancing last week, signaling weakening demand for new home loans. This trend could weigh on home sales in coming months, though tight supply may prevent a significant price correction.

Regional variations exist, with some Sun Belt markets showing more resilience due to job growth, while coastal areas face steeper challenges from high prices and rates.

Broader Economic Implications

Rising mortgage rates have ripple effects throughout the economy. The housing sector, which includes construction, real estate services and related industries, accounts for a significant portion of U.S. economic activity. Slower home sales can dampen consumer spending on furnishings, appliances and other big-ticket items.

Builders have responded by focusing on smaller, more affordable units and offering incentives, but high material and labor costs limit their flexibility. Multifamily construction remains active in many areas, providing some rental supply relief.

The Federal Reserve continues monitoring housing data closely as part of its dual mandate to promote maximum employment and price stability. Any further rate increases could intensify pressure on the sector, while premature easing risks reigniting inflation.

Outlook for Mortgage Rates and Housing

Analysts expect mortgage rates to remain volatile in the near term, influenced by geopolitical developments, inflation readings and Fed communications. A breakthrough in U.S.-Iran negotiations that eases oil price pressures could provide some relief, though underlying supply constraints will likely keep the market challenging.

Freddie Mac is scheduled to release its weekly mortgage rate survey on Thursday, which may show slightly different figures due to methodological variations. Last week, Freddie Mac reported an average 30-year rate of 6.51 percent.

Longer-term, structural issues including zoning restrictions, construction costs and labor shortages will continue shaping the housing market. Experts call for policy measures to boost supply, such as streamlined permitting and incentives for affordable development.

For prospective buyers, the current environment demands careful financial planning. Locking in rates through adjustable or hybrid products may offer short-term relief, though fixed-rate loans provide more certainty for long-term homeowners.

The latest data underscores the persistent challenges facing the U.S. housing market. While job stability and wage growth provide some support, the combination of elevated rates and limited inventory continues testing buyer resilience and market balance.

As summer approaches — traditionally a busy season for home sales — higher borrowing costs may further dampen activity. Policymakers, builders and real estate professionals will be watching closely to see how these dynamics evolve in the months ahead.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., is advocating for targeting the artificial intelligence industry with taxes.

“It’s time to tax AI and invest in people,” the left-wing lawmaker has asserted.

She has floated the prospect of taxing the energy consumed by AI data centers.

SEN WARREN BLASTED FOR CHEERING BLOCKING OF MERGER THAT MIGHT HAVE SAVED SPIRIT AIRLINES

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., ranking member of Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, speaks during a hearing in Washington, D.C., on Thursday, Feb. 5, 2026.  (Kent Nishimura/Bloomberg via Getty Images / Getty Images)

“Rethinking our tax code must also include going to the source: that means taxing AI companies directly, which can start with taxing AI data centers,” she wrote in an opinion piece posted by Time. “By imposing a reasonable excise tax on the energy used by data centers, families could recoup some of the gains of AI, while America continues to stay competitive in the AI race. A well-designed tax would focus on the companies that can afford it and scale with AI’s impact: the bigger the data center, the more they pay.”

“We can’t be afraid to consider even bigger and bolder proposals to tax AI too, including ideas that sound radical today but may quickly become common sense,” she asserted in the piece.

LAWMAKERS DEBATE AI’S IMPACT ON WHITE-COLLAR JOBS AS DISRUPTION FEARS GROW

The senator claimed that the tax system incentivizes replacing workers with AI.

“Right now, companies pay payroll taxes for their workers but get tax breaks for investing in technology—effectively, a tax penalty for hiring human beings and a tax break for buying equipment. In an AI world, that means our tax code is incentivizing corporations to fire people and replace them with AI. That’s wrong. We need to level the playing field by raising taxes on corporations and capital gains and closing corporate loopholes,” she wrote.

Warren also called for a “wealth tax” on affluent individuals.

AMERICANS OPTIMISTIC ABOUT INNOVATION ADDRESSING MAJOR CHALLENGES, SURVEY FINDS

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., speaks during the Borrowers Not Billionaires Rally To Defend the CFPB (Consumer Financial Protection Bureau) at Capitol Hill on Feb. 9, 2026 in Washington, D.C. (Jemal Countess/Getty Images for Protect Borrowers / Getty Images)

GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE

“AI billionaires are running the same playbook: get rich off massive stock valuations and avoid paying the taxes that would be owed if those funds were earned as salary. If it wasn’t clear before, there’s no question in a world of AI: we need a wealth tax,” she asserted in the Time piece.