Kathryn Anne Edwards

It just took it down a little bit, you know.

But I would be remiss if I didn't say any reliance on one single number produced by the data is not the right way to interpret it.

The economy always moves in directions and not with the numbers.

So that

It's a lesson to not focus too much on the number, more so the relative position of the economy.

This report today is a great example.

Is 130,000 good or bad?

Well, would your opinion change if it went from 110 to 150, you know, the range of a typical revision?

No, you would still think this is a pretty middling job report and the U.S.

economy should be adding more, but you're going to be grateful that it wasn't a really low number because we've had such a weak year.

So I think about it that way of just take whatever is the jobs number, add 25,000 to each side, and ask if it would really change your opinion of the report.

Young people are always doing worse in the job market because they have less experience and they have less financial responsibilities.

So they're also able to kind of ride out a bad labor market for longer because they are not, you know, most 21-year-olds don't have mortgages.

They don't have children.

They don't have childcare payments and so on.

So they are both weaker in how they're treated by the labor market and weaker in how they respond to that.

this labor market in particular this low hiring almost frozen labor market that we see is particularly damaging to young people who are not getting their their foot in the door and again you know it's dropping to nine being up at 11 doesn't change the story on the ground which is that young people are not finding jobs and they're not finding them at the degree we want or the pace that we want

I welcome this slight dip.

I didn't love that the 25 to 34-year-old rate jumped up a little bit.

So you do wonder if a bunch of people just got a little older.