US Had Almost No Job Growth in 2025 (nbcnews.com) 106
An anonymous reader shares a report: The U.S. economy experienced almost zero job growth in 2025, according to revised federal data. On a more encouraging note: hiring has picked up in 2026. Preliminary data had indicated that the U.S. economy added 584,000 jobs last year. But the Bureau of Labor Statistics revised that number after it received additional state data, and found that the labor market had added 181,000 jobs in all of 2025. This is far fewer than the 1.46 million jobs that were added in 2024.
One bright spot was last month, when hiring increased by 130,000 roles. This was significantly more than the 55,000 additions that had been expected by economists. "Job gains occurred in health care, social assistance, and construction, while federal government and financial activities lost jobs," BLS said in a statement.
One bright spot was last month, when hiring increased by 130,000 roles. This was significantly more than the 55,000 additions that had been expected by economists. "Job gains occurred in health care, social assistance, and construction, while federal government and financial activities lost jobs," BLS said in a statement.
MAGA cult says (Score:5, Insightful)
Zero job growth is good for the economy
Re: MAGA cult says (Score:5, Interesting)
Answers in the report. Generally the answer is no to most of your statements. Wages aren't going up to a degree that would indicate people moving up into higher paying jobs. Unemployment ticked down only to 4.3% from 4.4%âoe"which doesn't show Americans suddenly getting jobs, remember unemployement is measured by benefits application which is not available to illegal immigrants. That number is effectively the citizens and legal residents unemployment number.
This is a job market stagnation. Potentially a signal for recession. And given that recovery from the heavy inflation of C19 is incomplete, this potentially leads us to a long recession as consumer prices and wages need to recover as a prerequisite of recession recovery. (Depression is not likely, unless there is something major like martial law or a world war)
Re: MAGA cult says (Score:5, Insightful)
here it means clutching at imaginary straws in the face of incontrovertible evidence of a massive political and economic failure.
Re: MAGA cult says (Score:5, Interesting)
What does the daily show have to do with all this?
And what "millions removed", that's an operation that took the real Hitler a decade.
Your shitler has only one successful operation and it is making money off you bros, whether you troll from Northern Macedonia or St. Peterburg.
Re: (Score:3)
To trust trump government "data" is the same as to trust "data" from the PRC. Case in point - the "fixed" employment data for 2025.
But you do MAGA, no worries :)
Re: (Score:2)
WUT?
Re: (Score:3)
TDS: the affliction where sufferers practically worship the current POTUS no matter what he says or does. Victims have the inability to understand why someone else could possibly dislike the current POTUS, assuming that they must be deranged.
Re: (Score:2)
remember unemployement is measured by benefits application...
No. Unemployment is measured by the Bureau of Labor Statistics [bls.gov] using survey data [youtu.be]. It is not based on benefit applications or benefit payments. If it was, people who never applied for benefits, people who are ineligible (e.g. students in some states) for benefits, or whose benefits ran out would no longer be counted as unemployed.
Re: (Score:1)
Hey - do you know Obama Deported more people then Trump....
Without killing American citizens and then outrageously lying about them.
It should be "than", not "then", by the way.
Re: (Score:2)
Could you guys make up your mind? Because I could have sworn you assholes pretended Trump had to be elected because Democrats are "soft on "illegal" immigration" or want "open borders" or some other shit.
Now you're all "Acksurely the Democrats are the ones that are hardest on "illegal" immigration", which is doubly ridiculous because liberals and the left aren't criticizing Trump for being hard on undocumented immigrants, but on being *sadistic* on immigrants (all immigrants) and on those who oppose sadism
We put a pedophile in the White House (Score:3, Insightful)
If the TDS morons can briefly come to their senses and at least stay home (I don't have any faith in them voting blue) we might be able to stop the worst of it.
I don't think the old farts care though. They're old, in pain, angry, their kids don't visit and they wanna burn it all down.
And thanks to 25 years of low birth rates there aren't enough kids to save us. We boned.
Re:We put a pedophile in the White House (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:We put a pedophile in the White House (Score:4, Insightful)
We have yet to reach the level of stove touching this nation requires. If anything I'm worried about the midterms in that the Democrats will be able to stop some of Trump's worst actions and his supporters will be allowed to move on yet again without suffering their justly deserved consequences.
Re: (Score:2)
If the Democrats get a large enough wave, ie. they get 60 senate seats and the house, do you think they will remove Trump and Vance from office, thus elevating the Speaker (who will be a Democrat, whoever that may be)?
I mean, I can't see why they shouldn't do that, but do you think they will?
Re: (Score:3)
60 isn't enough for removal, it's 67 Senators. Maybe in that case you can get 7 Republican Senators to go for it but I doubt it. If Democrats get a simple majority of be happy enough at this point considering the state of the Senate map.
Now 60 lets them send bills to Trump's desk without blowing up the filibuster and that's something can/should do, just keep passing bills and either make him veto them or I bet he actually signs some of them.
Re: We put a pedophile in the White House (Score:2)
Such a wave would be a start of the Seventh Party System. But I seriously doubt the survival of the Democratic party in it's current state. We may see splits in the parties and a reevaluation of two party elections on the national level. Things are going to be very chaotic over the next decade
Re: (Score:2)
Don't promise me with a good time!
Drunk coked-up girlfriends that give great head... (Score:4, Insightful)
If the Democrats get a large enough wave, ie. they get 60 senate seats and the house, do you think they will remove Trump and Vance from office, thus elevating the Speaker (who will be a Democrat, whoever that may be)?
I mean, I can't see why they shouldn't do that, but do you think they will?
...are far more fun than ones who eat right, exercise, contribute to their 401k, avoid credit card debt and balance their checkbook. The Democrats are the responsible college girls with their natural tits and hair color. The Republican party has degraded into the equivalent of 19yo party girls with too many tattoos at Daytona Spring Break, who will be dancing the pole once they hit 21. Adulting sucks. Promising tax breaks you can't afford? That's a party! Rounding up the "illegals" with paramilitary force to round up some underpaid grocery baggers? That's fucking fun if you're inclined to such things. Some fucking braindead roid-abusing 72 yo anti-vax macho natural living fitness freak telling you to try all the supplements advertised on Joe Rogan's Podcast is far more fun than an actual physician telling you to take positive steps towards your health in conjunction with medical science.
The Democrats are cursed with being a responsible adult party. They attempt to balance budgets and pass policy and make the world a better place. Some think they're too liberal (they're honestly VERY centrist if you listen to actual elected DNC politicians instead of twitter stereotypes provided by Fox News). They know that if they're elected, the adults that voted for them will hold them accountable. Republicans? The adults left that party LONG ago. Now they can promise whatever they want and do whatever they want and it will barely matter.
Your tariff policy is a failure?...no problem.
The economy is in a recession?...no problem.
ICE raids are pointless, ineffective theater and insanely expensive?...no problem.
Cowering to Russia, our long time foe, over and over?...no problem.
The Democrats lose votes when they fail. Rational voters vote Democrat and don't when the Democrats don't deliver. Republicans appeal to emotion only, fail every time they're in office and basically never lose their voters...when they fail, it's because they fail so spectacularly and leave the economy in such shambles that the rational adults that are displeased with the Democrats get off their ass and vote. Their voters will NEVER abandon the party, no matter how badly they fail or deviate from the stated ideals of the voter. It's depressing, but it's life. There's no liberal or conservative anymore. Fox news destroyed 10-15 years ago. Now we have a party of grifters and loons and a party for everyone else. No one rationally benefits from Republican administrations beyond the top 1% of earners. Billionaires soak up all those tax breaks...everyone else watches their quality of live and income go down...institutions fail, etc. Nothing about today's Republican Party is actually conservative, certainly not fiscally.
Re: (Score:2)
The Democrats are cursed with being a responsible adult party.
LOL, if they are so responsible, why do they ALWAYS provide the necessary votes to get the worst of the Republican agenda through? They confirmed RFK Jr as Secretary of Health and Human Services. Go ahead and try to convince anyone but yourself that they are the adult party. They are playing a game of optics that appear to have fooled you with its illusory reality.
The proof is in the pudding ;)
Re: (Score:2)
If anything I'm worried about the midterms in that the Democrats will be able to stop some of Trump's worst actions and his supporters will be allowed to move on yet again without suffering their justly deserved consequences.
The thing I worry about is whether the Democrats can avoid shooting themselves in the foot between now and November. They've snatched defeat from the jaws of victory on more than one occasion in the past...
Be part of the solution (Score:1)
But you don't need permission to make your own choices about who you surround yourself with. Many of us are collecting names and sharing with like-minded souls as we research. Start your own! LinkedIn is a fucking gold mine of people tel
Re: We put a pedophile in the White House (Score:2)
My voting is more civic responsibility/ethics based, so apparently I'm not sane. I'm
Re: We put a pedophile in the White House (Score:3, Insightful)
Wrong. If we let it slide then it doesn't end in 3 years. Possible never ends. This is the fundamental mistake that the majority of people are making right now.
Re: We put a pedophile in the White House (Score:4, Interesting)
I keep thinking "surely not" with Trump, and then he proves me wrong. I think the chances of him leaving office without violence are getting more and more remote now. Last time it was just his MAGA mob, but this time he has his brownshirts (ICE). They have a strong interest in keeping him in power, because once he's out the legal repercussions for their actions will start to kick in.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't consider our little problem over with Trump. History is full of strongmen, dictators, autocrats, and fascists that are replaced by a slightly different faction within their own group. People who think violence is power tend to be backstabbers. The moment that Trump seems weak, we'll see Vance and Rubio wrestle over the top billing. And someone who actually has respect on the far right, such as Glenn Youngkin or perhaps another, and likely will crush Vance or Rubio in the Primaries and capture the ri
Re: (Score:1)
There used to be an easy fix to low birth rates, immigrants. Lots people just wanted to come to the U.S., work hard, and see their kids do better than they. In short, the kind of Americans Americans wanted. That is in the past test and used to be what most Americans wanted. Then la Presidenta became the alleged president (alleged because he's just a useful idiot for Project 1825 (they lost two centuries) and the Kremlin). Now, the world hates the U.S. because he's such a jingoistic weirdo.
He dd not spring f
Re: (Score:2)
At least 200 for Mar a Lago. https://www.theguardian.com/us... [theguardian.com]
They can't hire red blooded MAGA workers to pick weeds and serve well done steaks?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
My point still stands. Why are they not hiring citizens?
Re:And how many went to H1B? (Score:4, Interesting)
> Those are H1A visas, which goes to seasonal workers, who work during the peak season, and then go back to their home countries when the season is over
Most of his hires don't look seasonal:
"the Trump Organization sought to bring in at least 184 foreign workers in 2025 for temporary positions at the US president’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, two golf clubs and his Virginia winery. The number of applications for H-2A and H-2B visas covering temporary workers including servers, clerks, housekeepers, kitchen staff and farm workers was the highest ever submitted by the company, and up from 121 in 2021, when Trump’s first term of office ended."
https://www.theguardian.com/us... [theguardian.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Far fewer after October 1 when you basically needed to pay an extra full year's salary to hire an H-1b over a citizen.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:And how many went to H1B? (Score:4, Interesting)
And how many of those jobs went to people who received H-1B visas They didn't actually need to be imported into the country, Well American engineers looked for work and couldn't find it because they were not of a legal status that allowed the company to treat them like slaves and underpaid them by as much as 30% per https://www.teamblind.com/post... [teamblind.com]
H1B hiring has dried up, since for any new H1Bs, a company has to pay $100,000, which few companies are willing to do: it makes more sense to set up shop in the countries of those employees, which is what we're seeing w/ Google and other companies expanding in India. Only in the case of H1B transfers or renewals do they not have to do it
I also don't agree w/ you that offshoring jobs is the equivalent of hiring H1Bs. A company has free agency to make its own decisions, which are not necessarily the same as that of Uncle Sam. If it's legal (and convenient) to hire somebody and bring them to the US, they'll do it. But if that is made onerous, then they do have the option of opening up a division in that employee's country and hiring him/her there.
In the event that they choose to do the latter, these are not "slave" wages (never mind the small factoid that slaves were considered property, like robots are, and were never paid!) While a 30% wage drop may be devastating if one lives in California, New York, New Jersey or Virginia, it's much higher than the weighted average salary in India. Indians who do get those jobs working in India do reasonably well, particularly if they happen to be native to the city where they are employed and have homes there. So these arrangements happen to be a win-win for both employer and employee: employer gets the employee they want for even less than what they'd have had to pay them on a visa, while the employee gets a cushy job without undergoing a major relocation to another country where they are not necessarily fluent in the language
On top of that, if an H1B worker loses his job, he has to find another quickly, or else leave the country, since he's out of status. As a result, they are captive employees of the employer while in the US: they can't just switch jobs like that. In sharp contrast to that, if the same person worked for the same company in India, they are at liberty to switch jobs any time, which is what results in an upwards pressure of wages to entice these employees not to jump ship
Re:And how many went to H1B? (Score:5, Informative)
Employers are legally required to hire Americans for American jobs before considering H1-B hires.
Looks like that didn't happen. Employers are breaking the law.
But sure, fuck that guy. For what? Stating the obvious? American engineers are getting screwed by American tech companies who can't stop hiring foreign workers in the middle of a jobs recession.
47% of new jobs to non-Americans (Score:5, Interesting)
That means 85,000 of the 181,000 new jobs last year went to foreign workers brought in by companies such as Amazon, Meta, Microsoft, and Google.
That's 47% of new jobs created in America in 2025 going to non-Americans.
But yeah, fuck us for bringing it up.
Re: (Score:2)
And the total number of layoffs of American tech workers in 2022-2025 was in the hundreds of thousands.
Re:47% of new jobs to non-Americans (Score:4, Interesting)
Not necessarily. Many of those 85k jobs were likely replacing people who left, and thus presumably would not have counted in the 181,000 figure.
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.wsj.com/articles/B... [wsj.com]
If the 85,000 H1-b workers were replacing existing workers (and that hasn't been established), the fact that they were taking any jobs in the US economy means they added to the US unemployment rate. The 181,000 new jobs for the year already wasn't enough to absorb the 145,000 new wo
Re: (Score:2)
Given the growth of the overall population, the US economy needs to add 145,000 jobs per month to hold the unemployment rate steady and absorb the flow of new workers into the labor force.
4.47 million people turn 16 every year in the U.S., so that's 372,000 per month.
Subtract the 4.2 million who retired in 2025, and if you ignore immigration, the U.S. would need to add only 270,000 jobs per year, or about 22,000 jobs per month.
1.3 million people came to the U.S. in 2025. That's an additional 108,000 per month.
So in total, that's only 130,000 per month by my math. Your numbers seem high to me — perhaps based on immigration numbers in prior administrations, when people weren't scared t
Re: (Score:2)
Also, I'm not sure how attacking me personally is any kind of relevant remark.
Re: 47% of new jobs to non-Americans (Score:2)
Welcome to slashdot newb!!
It's actually worse (Score:2)
I know the Republican party is not really going to do anything to help me but it doesn't help when the Democrats aren't doing anything either. At least the Republicans have the common courtesy to lie to me. Democrats haven't lied to
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Seriously try to come up with all obvious lie that a Democrat told and you won't find it.
"This is the best Joe Biden ever"
"The border is secure"
"Inflation is transient"
??
Shall I go on? I mean, Democrats don't have a monopoly on telling lies, but they don't not tell lies.
Re: (Score:2)
True. Politicians will lie if they can get away with it. The important difference is the left has a media ecosystem that is much more likely to call them out on those lies and half truths.
Re: (Score:2)
those are pretty pathetic 'lies'.
nothing like the 'stolen election' lie or the
'migrants eating your pets' lie or the
'democrats are aborting babies after their born' lie.
you need to do better! the republicans are lying you into the ground!
Re: (Score:2)
It is estimated that 25% of people in India do not have access to a toilet. That is approximately 400 million people, roughly equivalent to the entire population of the U.S. and Canada combined, literally shitting in the street. And the number of people who are illiterate is far above any western country. But go ahead and tell me about how all the Indian workers being used to replace Americans are "highly skilled workers".
The other 75% who aren't shitting in the streets are twice as many people as the US and Canada. You start hiring from the top of the list, not the bottom.
In the real world though...you hire from the cheapest who are "good enough". With a sprinkling of top talent as a garnish.
Whoops we made a tiny 320% overstatement! (Score:1)
> One bright spot was last month, when hiring increased by 130,000 roles. This was significantly more than the 55,000 additions that had been expected by economists.
Bet: in six months the BLS will "revise" this figure down to ~55k, at the same time they announce the chocolate ration will be reduced from thirty grams to twenty.
Why is the media still treating this horseshit propaganda like it remotely reflects reality?
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect there will be some weasel wording around "gross" versus "net". A lot of people I know are getting laid off while their companies continue hiring. It's not even a shift in resources or skillsets, it's a true revolving door.
Re: (Score:1)
Why is the media still treating this horseshit propaganda like it remotely reflects reality?
Take a look at who owns the media.
Re: (Score:3)
“It appeared that there had even been demonstrations to thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grammes a week. And only yesterday, he reflected, it had been announced that the ration was to be REDUCED to twenty grammes a week. Was it possible that they could swallow that, after only twenty-four hours? Yes, they swallowed it.”
-- Geor
Re: Whoops we made a tiny 320% overstatement! (Score:2)
Bingo
According to the BLS report the margin of error for the 130,000 jobs in Jan is +/- 127,000
Re: (Score:1)
Revisions are normal and not a sign of political interference (despite Trump's many attempts TO interfere). The preliminary numbers are based on relatively small survey samples, while the revisions are based on a much larger data set drawn from concrete data. https://journalistsresource.or... [journalistsresource.org]
How bad is the report? (Score:3)
"Still, Wednesday’s report also shows that not nearly as many jobs were added in 2025 as thought and last year will go down as the worst year for hiring since 2020, or since 2003 outside of a recession."
Furthermore, most of the jobs added last month were in health care and social assistance which are generally regarded as less susceptible to economic cycles.
The question is whether this is simply reflective of the trough of an economic cycle or more fundamental, lasting shifts due to tariffs, geopolitics, or technology/business shifts (like AI).
This is "News for Nerds" how? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The biggest world power royally fucking itself up and descending into fascism is news for everyone including nerds.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes (Score:2)
It's for political nerds.
Re: (Score:2)
The Veil of Maya (Score:1)
"Preliminary data had indicated that the U.S. economy added 584,000 jobs last year. But the Bureau of Labor Statistics revised that number after it received additional state data, and found that the labor market had added 181,000 jobs in all of 2025. [...] One bright spot was last month, when hiring increased by 130,000 roles."
Okay, but how "preliminary" will the data for last month turn out to be?
They say the point of the liarocracy is not to make people believe lies. (Though many seem to anyway!) The poi
Trustworthy? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
None. Not now, and not ever. The economic numbers are always cooked, and the people doing the cooking never have your interests in mind.
Imagine honestly believing inflation has only been 3 or 4% per year for the past 15 years.
Re: (Score:2)
It really depends on what you're buying. Also, 15 years of 3.5% compound interest is not negligible.
Re:Trustworthy? (Score:4, Interesting)
Imagine honestly believing inflation has only been 3 or 4% per year for the past 15 years.
Average? Yeah, probably.
Description: 2010 / projected 2025 at 4% per year / actual 2025):
So a few things that people buy infrequently went up way faster than inflation, while things that you buy far more often tended to go up way more slowly than inflation.
You're cherry picking (Score:2)
Meanwhile your glossing over housing and rent as if those are things people buy infrequently. Yeah you make a home purchase once or twice in your life but you're paying on it for 20 or 30 years. You also left healthcare out which has skyrocketed in price.
It's the classic basket of goods trick where you only include things that make the numbers
Re: (Score:2)
Glossing over housing and rent? ... One went up, one went down. The people most affected the most by inflation are those unlikely to have a house (renters) who experienced lower figures. Meanwhile those who are most likely to buy a house right now do so with the capital of selling an existing one.
So yeah, housing numbers impact inflation, but the cost of housing doesn't impact the people most impacted by the rising cost of living.
But by all means, come up with your own numbers so we can blindly shit on them
Re: (Score:2)
what also needs to show is individual incomes.
I would also include other very significant income costs
Health Insurance
Auto Insurance
Phone/Internet Bills
Electric Bills (not just kw/h)
Gasoline
A few more core food items Chicken, Beef, Bread, Broccoli
cost of media (netflix was enough, not it's not and it went up in price too)
Taxes (mine went up 3+ times since then, which was % base before so it really hurts)
And, last but most important is wages!
Re: (Score:2)
Health Insurance
Insurance is hard, because every state has different insurance companies with different plans and prices, and different age groups have different prices. Unless I can find a website that has compiled averages for multiple years, there's just no good way to get these numbers. And the ACA didn't exist before 2014, which makes it even more impractical, and the comparisons even less useful (because the market changed so much).
So I'll do 2015 to 2025 instead.
Silver plan for 25-year-old in California: $255 to 2
Re: (Score:2)
Well, what's your evidence about inflation? The CPI iterally is just looking at the prices on a particular basket of goods. That's it, it's not some magic secret formula, it's all published data. The only reason Biden was able to be attacked for inflation was the BLS under his own admin published the numbers, do you believe inflation was only 2% in 2021 instead of like 10? I mean "they" are always lying right?
So, what's the evidence?
Re:Trustworthy? (Score:4, Interesting)
Should be none.
But look at the numbers - no job growth? Trump is boasting the economy is better than ever and jobs are plentiful. The fact the BLS is reporting that no jobs were created goes against what Dear Leader is saying. Which means likely Dear Leader needs to pick a new chief of BLS. The old one was fired because she refused to make the numbers look better.
Remember, Dear Leader keeps saying the economy is booming and jobs are easy to get. A department saying otherwise generally would be going against it.
I would doubt the numbers if it said jobs grew at 10% in 2025, because that contradicts the numbers that were being reported by the BLS until she got fired.
There are still some people that care and they're still reporting accurate numbers. (BLS is another one of those "nerd agencies" where people who join them have doctorates in mathematics).
Another thing to check would be to see what happens to the BLS - if news comes where people are getting fired, then you know likely the numbers are real.
Re: (Score:2)
Paul Krugman [youtu.be] answered this question in a recent podcast interview. He basically said that the BLS and similar government stats offices are still the world's gold standard. It takes hundreds of people to put these stats together. If someone started messing with them, it would be noticed pretty quickly. However, he also pointed out that the gov't is releasing less data now (e.g. the number of children going hungry).
we're down about a (Score:2)
I can't really blame the current guy for this one. "We the peo
Re: (Score:2)
While I agree (dogmatically), there are signs around where I am living of workforce expansion. I can't tell if it is more people picking up second jobs, working extra hours, or something else, but I notice restaurants expanding hours, construction companies running full crews, and more professional landscape crews around.
I can't tell if the economy has picked up to match-- my Costco bill is still up 50% a month, and there aren't obvious signs that people feel like they have more disposable income. Time wi
lol (Score:3)
>>One bright spot was last month, when hiring increased by 130,000 roles
as if that won't be revised later also
Winning (Score:1)
Getting difficult to deal with all this winning.
Need more destruction (Score:3)
This just goes to show: we need more terrorism and hurricanes, so that the resulting injuries and destruction can further brighten the spots of health care and construction labor.
If you're a patriotic American, then please do your part to increase GDP and employment, by breaking a window today! And if the glass shards hurt someone, so much the better. Economic growth is economic growth!
Businesses are Tarriff-ied (Score:3, Insightful)
Actual data says otherwise (Score:1)
Only revisionist "data" shows job loses. Actual U.S. Labor Department data shows the opposite.
U.S. Economy Adds 130,000 Jobs in January, Exceeding Expectations; Unemployment Falls to 4.3%
- On Wednesday, the U.S. Labor Department reported U.S. employers added 130,000 jobs last month and the unemployment rate fell to 4.3%.
- Government revisions cut into the previously reported 584,000 jobs figure, sharply reducing prior payroll totals and muddling 2024-2025 payrolls.
- Private measures showed weaker hiring as
Re: (Score:2)
You actually believe *anything* the current regime says? The same regime that cancelled job reports?
Oh, and btw, what no one here actually knows: about 20 years ago, we got *context* - that we needed about 119,000 new jobs every month to keep up with new people entering the workforce.
Of course, with population growth dropping, we need less... but then how are markets supposed to grow?
Re: (Score:2)
Only revisionist "data" shows job loses. Actual U.S. Labor Department data shows the opposite.
Um, it is the same U.S. Department of Labor outfit, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, that produces the revised data as well as the initial data. The data is revised because the unemployment numbers are based on survey data and response rates are generally low for the initial data release. The revised data includes survey responses that arrived too late to be included in the initial release. The revised data is generally considered to be more accurate than the initial batch of data.
AI crash (Score:2)
I am looking forward to the economic figures of the U.S. after the AI financial crash.
almost zero (Score:2)
For these guys, hundreds of thousands is almost zero.