"I mean, that that was a blow away number in some capacity. We were talking about closer to 60,000. But if you look under the hood, unfortunately not the best news, right? When you look at the revisions, we're still negative over the last couple of months. And I think it's really interesting. We're starting to see maybe cracks in this K-shaped economy narrative."
"You have roles where you're not going to be getting paid as much being the ones that are growing, but the highest paying roles are still in the negative tech financials. Matt did a great job running through those numbers, and that makes me wonder whether we are starting to see a little bit of an A.I.-ification of this economy."
"Yes, with us now, senior A.I. reporter for Axios, Madison Mills, who also has covered the markets for a long time. What's your major takeaway to this report? I should say the three-month average is 48,000, which is pretty low. And I should say the three-month average is 48,000, which is pretty low."
"But I'm looking at the numbers added, and I'm old enough to remember when we would have looked at 115,000 jobs. That's okay. It's an okay month. So, the expectations I think are just much lower now. And I should say the three-month average is 48,000, which is pretty low. Pretty low. And again, under the hood, the wage growth numbers very Meh, to your point."
The April jobs report showed 115,000 jobs created, down from 180,000 in March but above expectations of about 60,000. The three-month average was 48,000, described as pretty low. Revisions over the prior months remained negative. Wage growth was characterized as meh. The report’s details suggested uneven job quality, with some roles growing without high pay while the highest-paying roles in tech and financials were still negative. These patterns raised the possibility of an “AI-ification” of the economy, where employment gains do not translate into broad wage improvements.
Read at www.mediaite.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]