A strong September labor market is set to hammer stocks and bonds, because in the Fed's rigged game, working Americans having jobs is the trigger that keeps rate hikes coming and mortgage debt crushing family budgets.

Here is the scam: the Federal Reserve looks at a healthy labor market and sees a problem. September's employment report came in strong, and Wall Street knows what that means — more tightening. The Fed already raised its federal funds target range by a quarter percentage point to 3.75% to 4%, and policymakers are signaling they may not be done. Every time Main Street gets a raise, the Fed moves to take it back through higher borrowing costs.

Seeking Alpha framed the September jobs report as something that will "crush stocks and bonds" — a frank admission that Wall Street treats your employment as a threat. CNBC buried the real stakes for ordinary borrowers beneath portfolio chatter about four bank stocks, framing the story around how different financial institutions — Wells Fargo, Capital One, Goldman Sachs, and BNY — weather a tightening cycle differently. The working family trying to afford a mortgage doesn't make the CNBC lineup.

The damage is already showing. The State Street Financial Select Sector ETF is down more than 5% in September, making financials the third worst-performing S&P 500 sector. Since the Fed's September 16 rate hike, the XLF has dropped roughly 4% while the broader index climbed 1.6%.

But the real cost isn't on a stock chart. It's in the ripple effect. As CNBC noted, changes in the federal funds rate "ripple through other short-term borrowing costs across the economy, influencing everything from bank funding costs to credit card rates." Translation: your credit card APR climbs, your auto loan gets more expensive, and if you're trying to buy a house, the monthly payment just moved further out of reach. The Fed says it's fighting inflation — stubborn inflation stemming in part from the war with Iran, as CNBC reported — but the weapon of choice is making credit more expensive for people who actually use it.

RBC Capital Markets analyst Gerard Cassidy told CNBC the old rule that higher rates are "good for margins" is too simplistic: "When it comes to interest rates, it's more nuanced," depending on the hiking cycle. Banks can benefit early when loan yields rise faster than deposit rates. But as hikes accumulate, deposit costs catch up, the yield curve distorts, and higher borrowing costs "begin to hurt the economy and credit quality." Who gets hurt first? The borrower, not the balance sheet.

The question the Fed refuses to answer plainly: how many hikes will it take to bring inflation back under its 2% target, and how many paychecks get squeezed along the way? The central bank has a mandate for maximum employment, yet treats maximum employment as the very condition that requires intervention. Working Americans are left to fund the fight against inflation through debt service while the asset class waits for the cycle to turn.

The open question isn't whether the Fed hikes again. It's whether anyone in Washington ever asks who actually pays for it.