New Jobs Data Reveals A Hidden Secret Everyone Missed
Summary
Labor Market: The guest argues the headline 50,000 payroll gain masks weakness, citing rising long-term unemployment, more underemployed workers, and declining labor force participation.
Revisions Matter: Significant downward revisions to prior months suggest the labor market is softer than reported, challenging the bullish narrative.
Consumer Discretionary: Restaurants and retail show strain; the Restaurant Performance Index remains below 100 (contraction) and retail lost jobs, indicating consumer softness.
Restaurants Sub-Industry: Multiple references to restaurant bankruptcies and a persistently weak RPI point to ongoing pressure in dining and food services.
Fed Policy: Bond market action (30Y down, 2Y up) implies a yield-curve flattener and higher odds of a Fed pause per CME probabilities.
GDP vs Jobs: The divergence between strong GDP prints and weak payroll trends is unsustainable, raising risk of future GDP revisions or labor market inflection.
Risks: Overreliance on headline data and omission effects in unemployment metrics could mislead markets, potentially setting up a policy surprise.
Tickers: No specific public companies were pitched; analysis focused on sectors and macro themes.
Transcript
Hello fellow rebel capitals. Hope you're well. So we got new jobs data out. Everyone has been expecting this and the market is claiming this proves that the labor market is very stable. So don't you ever ever ever say that the economy is weak or the economy is contracting. The economy is booming for heaven's sakes. Don't you know it? The numbers prove it. Let's go right over to CNBC and check it out. And then we're going to get into the details. And that's where the hidden secrets lie that the mainstream media doesn't want you to know about. Or also the politicians don't want you to know about. [laughter] So let's go over to uh CNBC right here. Here's the headline. US payrolls rose. >> You need to share your screen. >> 50,000. Ah, yeah. Sorry. 50,000. That's the punchline. Guys don't even need to see the screen share, but it's 50,000. That's what the non-farm payrolls were up, so that should be fixed. Okay, you see it now, Josh? >> Yeah. >> Okay, so 50,000 increase in December. Now, let's keep in mind this is in an economy of 350 million plus people. So 50,000's terrible. And I know a lot of people say, "Well, because we have everyone moving back to Mexico, all or Venezuela or wherever uh Biden was importing people from that because all these people went back, you're not going to see the job growth." That that argument has never made sense to me because if we're looking at this through the lens of what's going to happen to the economy, which we should, uh we just have to look at how much the uh how many people are working, right? That equals aggregate demand. And if you have fewer and fewer people working, then that means less and less aggregate demand. That means you should see a contraction at some point in time in the economy. Now, I know the GDP numbers are booming as well, but we'll save that topic for a completely separate video. So, the punch line here, 50,000 in December, unemployment rate falls to 4.4%. I don't know how it fell to 4.4 um other than the um labor force participation shrinking. Okay, so key talking points. Uh the Dow estimate was for 73,000. So it came in below estimates. The unemployment rate we just talked about that the forecast there was for 4.5%. Now here's what we really need to pay attention to. And we're going to get into this when we go over the details. a more encompassing measure, I believe that would be U6 as opposed to use U3 that includes discouraged workers and un under underemployed dropped to 8.4%. So yeah, it dropped but it's still 8.4%. I think that would be a better reflection of the overall labor market. So average hourly earnings rose.3 the month that was in line with forecast. So that brings us to an annual increase of 3.8. 8. Now, if you believe the CPI, then okay, so we've got positive real wage growth, but then of course the devil there is in the details. So, let's um Oh, here's [laughter] here's where they start to get into the revisions, right? So, let's go over to the BLS because that's really where rubber meets the road. I highlighted this for you guys. I did a little work before the video, believe it or not. And so let's zoom in and here we go. So we just went over the headline. That's what they're going to highlight here. But here's where we get into the nitty-gritty. The number of long-term unemployed, those jobless for 27 weeks or more changed a little over the month at 1.9 million. But this is up 397,000 almost 400,000 people just this year. The long-term unemployed accounted for 26% of all unemployed people. Now let's think about that. Why is that important? Because that number is such a huge percentage. Let's just assume for a moment that it goes up to let's take it to an extreme. Let's say it goes up to 100%. Well, if it goes up to 100% then what's the U3? There's the headline number. then that's going to go down to basically zero, right? Because they don't even count those people. So, if you have more and more and more and more people that are in this category, the long-term unemployed, then that means that there's fewer and fewer and fewer fewer people that can be categorized in the metric that is used or the analysis, the formula that's used for the U3 headline number. And obviously that's going to skew the numbers in the favor [laughter] of the unemployment rate uh or the the basically the labor market looking a lot better than it really is. All right, let's keep going here. The number of employed part-time for economic reasons at 5.3 million changed little but is up by almost a million just this year. These individuals would have preferred full-time employment but are working part-time because their hours had been reduced or they were unable to find full-time jobs. So, first what we have to do here is we have to determine the strength of the labor market. This is really important because at the end of the day that's going to give you the best insight as to what's happening with the real economy. Why is that important for your portfolio? Because it has nothing to do with stocks that's for sure. But it definitely has to do with interest rates. It has to do with the bond market and it has to do what the Fed's going to do and that could potentially impact your portfolio. So that's kind of the daisy chain here. So getting back to this, what we want to think about is all right, is the labor market weak or is it strong or is it maybe just somewhere in the middle? And what's the trend here? Is the trend getting better or is the trend getting worse? So, why I highlight this and why we need to go over the hidden stuff that the market just didn't really pay any never ever ever pays any attention to is because that's really where you're getting the insights that you need to determine these probabilities. So that's why it's important that we realize that the amount of undermployed or whatever they call it, the amount of people that are working part-time because they can't find full-time work is up by over a million or not over almost a million just this year. So then we look at the number of people not in the labor force who typically want or actually want a job. That's up by 684,000 just this year. So these individuals are not counted as unemployed because they were not actively looking for work during the last four weeks even though they don't have a job. So you see what's happening here. What we do, it's a bit like the CPI is they just keep omitting things until the point where they get the number where they want it and [laughter] say, "Well, I don't know. That guy didn't look for work on Monday, so let's just not count him as unemployed, even though he's unemployed." Well, we had all these people just go to Mexico or back to Venezuela. So, let's just pretend like 50,000 is a great number as opposed to a horrific number and a number that would lead you to believe there's a high probability of the economy slowing down. It's all just like you can almost manipulate the data to the point where you can make it tell any story you want it to tell or you can make it back up any narrative you want to push. Now, before we go any further, let me go over here because this is something I I wanted to highlight for you guys as well. Look at this for 2025. And this is so far. Remember, we're not done with revisions, but for 2025 so far, payroll employment grew by 584,000, significantly lower than an increase of 2 million in 2024. Two, we go from 2 million to 584,000. I mean, that in and of itself should tell you almost everything you need to know about the labor market. But let's get back to the BLS. So when we sift through who is working, who isn't working, you see that the food services, drinking establishments, health care, social system, they're always, especially healthcare is always going to have a tailwind because of the demographics, because of all the baby boomers retiring and they're getting to that age where they're going to need a lot of health care. So th this is always it doesn't matter how bad the economy is going to get, you're likely going to see a positive number for health care and social assistance. Not really with food services and drinking places. In fact, now that I'm thinking about it, let's go over to that indicator that I love. Another kind of hidden secret that the mainstream media doesn't tell you about, and this is the restaurant index. Josh, do you remember the name of this? I think it's the the RPI. Is that it? Restaurant Performance Index. Let's see here. >> Let's see. I'm looking it up right now. >> It's restaurant. I always misspel restaurant. Aha, that is it. Restaurant performance index. It's like your brain goes to mush over the holidays, but then once you hit January 5th, 67, it kind of gradually creeps back [laughter] like, oh, I'm not as dumb as I was two weeks ago. Okay, let's reject that. So, we're still under the 50, the 100% number here. Let me zoom in for you guys so you can see this. So this 100, the value of 100 represents kind of just a flatline. So anything over 100 would be expansion. Anything less would be a contraction. And we're still just slightly less. We've ticked up a bit here, but for most of the year, it's been in the no bueno zone. But that you could say the same thing for 2024 as well, which makes a lot of sense because remember just what was it nine months ago, a year ago, we had all of these restaurants filing for bankruptcy, I think. Um, what was the steakhouse? I mean, there were so many of them. What was that steakhouse at the Blooming Onion? Josh, what was they probably have one of those where you live. >> Oh, I know exactly what you're talking about. Um, it wasn't it >> Outback Outback. Yeah, >> Outback Steakhouse. There we go. [laughter] All right, let's get back road. >> They probably filed for bankruptcy, too. They all filed for bankruptcy. Okay, let's go back to the report. So, we got retail lost 25,000 jobs in December. The reason I highlighted this is because you probably don't remember being a viewer, but because I do these videos so often, I I just have this stuff kind of lodged in my my brain. um the the the main reason or one of the main reasons we had such huge job growth in or relatively speaking in 2024 was retail. So I was always kind of looking for the retail to kind of turn because that's another indicator of what's happening with disposable income. And you can see that now retail is on the flip side to where it just lost 25,000 jobs. Now we go to warehouse club super centers merchandise retail. They lost jobs as well. Food and beverage retailers uh lost 9,000 jobs. And here we go, guys. Here's the main thing you need to focus on for this video. The change in total non-farm payroll employment for October was revised down by 68,000 jobs. from a negative 105 to a negative 173 a negative and 73,000 jobs. Now, I know a lot of you will say, "Oh, that's because of the shutdown." Yeah, I get it. I get it. But it's still [laughter] we're still having these huge downward revisions. And it doesn't stop there. We look at November and that was downwardly revised by 8,000. Now, let's remember that we get several revisions for each month. So, I would assume that the that the now 173 is the final number for October because I think it's revised down three times. So, that's likely the last number. But for November, we're likely going to see or we are going to see another revision when we get the January data. And so, we're going to get that in February. So, the next non-farm payroll, we're going to get the final revision. Not the final revision because that's the the annual, but the final monthly revision, let's say. So, we're going to get that in January. So, this is only the second revision where they downwardly rise it again by 8,000 from 64 down to 56. That's a positive. But remember, we're not done yet with November. Who knows? That could be negative when everything when the dust settles. With these revisions, employment in October and November combined is 76,000 jobs lower than previously reported. And this is what you got to pay attention to because for some reason the market and the mainstream media, social media, they just focus on this headline number. And the headline number sucks. Let's be very, very clear. but they just try to rationalize it any way that they can because they want to push this bullish narrative. Now, look, I I don't want to constantly be bearish. I I want to look at the data and come to an objective conclusion as to what I think the probabilities are for the overall economy, not the stock market. That's that's different. The overall economy, that's what we're focusing on right now with this video. But I also don't want to just, you know, have uh tunnel vision. And I want to look at all the data and then you've got to weigh it, right? And when we look at this, I I think you've got to look at, okay, you got 50,000. And sure, you've got to consider the fact that maybe it's lower than it otherwise would be because we have people moving back to Mexico or wherever they came from. And but even that are I think that's so weak because not we discussed how okay that's still a loss of jobs. But think about that if you had a million Mexicans moving back to wherever they came from. Wouldn't you fill those jobs? The fact that you didn't fill those jobs which would mean okay sure you quit but you're going to hire back. Right? So, all right, you would hire back and then you would have the the net would be the same. That's my point. The net would be the same. But what we're seeing, so that 50,000 number, I think any way you slice it, dice it, is a horrible number. And then when you combine that with the revisions, I think that you're like, okay, great, 50,000, but what's it going to be next month? And what's it going to be after the third revision? You see, when we I I want to look at a chart. I I don't even need to look at a chart. You guys know just from watching my videos that if we had the headline numbers going all the way back, let's say two years, I'll bet you 99% of them are downwardly revised. It's substantially substantially downwardly revised. And let's remember that when you are Let's see. Do I have that chart up? I was going to look at uh No, this is the last one. Well, I know right off the top of my head. I know it well. And where I was going with that is when you look at negative non-farm payrolls, which we just had, you know, from 105 to 173. And I know that was anomaly because of the shutdown, but you look, and that's not the only negative print that we had this year. Whenever you start to see several of these negative non-farm payroll prints, you're almost always in an economic contraction. So, I guess the question there becomes, how do you reconcile this with not the stock market because there's almost an inverse relationship between the stock market and the real economy, but how do you reconcile this with GDP? because GDP was like 4.3%. And like I've been saying on these videos, one of them doesn't jive. So either we're going to have to have a huge decrease in GDP, downwardly revised GDP like we saw in 2008, or we're going to have to see the labor market just absolutely take off. One of those things has to happen because you can't have this divergence where you have, you know, [laughter] every single month when you look at the revisions, you've got like negative or barely positive non-farm payrolls and you have, you know, economic growth at 5% or 4%. Like we're some developing economy in Africa or [laughter] it's just the dog don't hunt. Those two don't match. So something's got to give. And the question becomes, what do you think it is? Right? There are no certainties. They're only probabilities. So based on your lived experience and based on all the rest of the data we have, do you think there's a higher probability that the labor market just takes off and explodes higher or that GDP comes down? I don't know. I'll let you be the judge. But let's see the ultimate arbiter of truth, the bond market. Let's see what they're doing in response. So, we've got the 30-year that's down slightly, down one and a half basis points. So, h you know, not not too much here. What do we have the 10-year doing? The 10-year basically flat. And then we have the 2-year up slightly. So, we have a bit of a flattener. That's interesting. That's really interesting. So, the market is leaning a little bit more with a pause from the Fed. That's what this would tell me. In fact, let's do that. Let's go to the CME. And so, right here, before I refresh, we had a 88.4% probability of a pause. So, let's see if that increased. Oh my gosh. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So that's what you're picking up in the curve. So remember when I just said that it it we had a flattener. So you had the long end going down and you had the the front end actually going up the 2-year. And that's because again the market they just don't look at the revisions. They just look at the headline number and say, "Well, 50,000 isn't bad enough in order for the Fed to cut considering the fact that we just had a GDP print at 4.3% and the stock market's at all-time highs and yada yada yada yada yada." So, what ends up happening in these scenarios usually the way these cycles play out is the Fed is kind of lulled to sleep by the positive data and then you boom kind of get a right hook from Tyson. Let's remember that the CPI was going up throughout 2008 until we get to about July or August. And let's also remember that we had we had positive GDP. I know that then it was downwardly revised. I think we might have one negative quarter, but then when the positive quarters were obviously substantially downwardly revised. So the labor market there with 2008 was the truth. That's for sure. and then everything kind of caught up with the labor market. So that's what happened during the GFC. Now, will it happen the same way this time? I don't know. Again, we'll have to keep paying attention to the data. But right now, the market is saying the Fed is not going to cut and the economy is I don't know if you want to call it Goldilocks. Uh and they're just kind of shrugging off all these downward revisions. And what's happening in the labor market when we look at the U6 numbers and you easily conclude that we have fewer and fewer and fewer and fewer and fewer people working. I mean at the end of the day, let's think about this. If the labor force participation was one person in an economy of 350 million and that one person was working, well then unemployment would be at zero. Does that mean the economy is booming? No, the opposite of that, right? That would be Mad Max. But yet the the unemployment rate would be at zero. So you see, that's why I think it's far more important to look at this through the lens of how many people are actually working versus what's just the headline number. All right, guys. On that bombshell, enjoy the rest of your afternoon. As always, make sure you're standing up for freedom, liberty, free market, capitalism. We'll see you in the next video.
New Jobs Data Reveals A Hidden Secret Everyone Missed
Summary
Transcript
Hello fellow rebel capitals. Hope you're well. So we got new jobs data out. Everyone has been expecting this and the market is claiming this proves that the labor market is very stable. So don't you ever ever ever say that the economy is weak or the economy is contracting. The economy is booming for heaven's sakes. Don't you know it? The numbers prove it. Let's go right over to CNBC and check it out. And then we're going to get into the details. And that's where the hidden secrets lie that the mainstream media doesn't want you to know about. Or also the politicians don't want you to know about. [laughter] So let's go over to uh CNBC right here. Here's the headline. US payrolls rose. >> You need to share your screen. >> 50,000. Ah, yeah. Sorry. 50,000. That's the punchline. Guys don't even need to see the screen share, but it's 50,000. That's what the non-farm payrolls were up, so that should be fixed. Okay, you see it now, Josh? >> Yeah. >> Okay, so 50,000 increase in December. Now, let's keep in mind this is in an economy of 350 million plus people. So 50,000's terrible. And I know a lot of people say, "Well, because we have everyone moving back to Mexico, all or Venezuela or wherever uh Biden was importing people from that because all these people went back, you're not going to see the job growth." That that argument has never made sense to me because if we're looking at this through the lens of what's going to happen to the economy, which we should, uh we just have to look at how much the uh how many people are working, right? That equals aggregate demand. And if you have fewer and fewer people working, then that means less and less aggregate demand. That means you should see a contraction at some point in time in the economy. Now, I know the GDP numbers are booming as well, but we'll save that topic for a completely separate video. So, the punch line here, 50,000 in December, unemployment rate falls to 4.4%. I don't know how it fell to 4.4 um other than the um labor force participation shrinking. Okay, so key talking points. Uh the Dow estimate was for 73,000. So it came in below estimates. The unemployment rate we just talked about that the forecast there was for 4.5%. Now here's what we really need to pay attention to. And we're going to get into this when we go over the details. a more encompassing measure, I believe that would be U6 as opposed to use U3 that includes discouraged workers and un under underemployed dropped to 8.4%. So yeah, it dropped but it's still 8.4%. I think that would be a better reflection of the overall labor market. So average hourly earnings rose.3 the month that was in line with forecast. So that brings us to an annual increase of 3.8. 8. Now, if you believe the CPI, then okay, so we've got positive real wage growth, but then of course the devil there is in the details. So, let's um Oh, here's [laughter] here's where they start to get into the revisions, right? So, let's go over to the BLS because that's really where rubber meets the road. I highlighted this for you guys. I did a little work before the video, believe it or not. And so let's zoom in and here we go. So we just went over the headline. That's what they're going to highlight here. But here's where we get into the nitty-gritty. The number of long-term unemployed, those jobless for 27 weeks or more changed a little over the month at 1.9 million. But this is up 397,000 almost 400,000 people just this year. The long-term unemployed accounted for 26% of all unemployed people. Now let's think about that. Why is that important? Because that number is such a huge percentage. Let's just assume for a moment that it goes up to let's take it to an extreme. Let's say it goes up to 100%. Well, if it goes up to 100% then what's the U3? There's the headline number. then that's going to go down to basically zero, right? Because they don't even count those people. So, if you have more and more and more and more people that are in this category, the long-term unemployed, then that means that there's fewer and fewer and fewer fewer people that can be categorized in the metric that is used or the analysis, the formula that's used for the U3 headline number. And obviously that's going to skew the numbers in the favor [laughter] of the unemployment rate uh or the the basically the labor market looking a lot better than it really is. All right, let's keep going here. The number of employed part-time for economic reasons at 5.3 million changed little but is up by almost a million just this year. These individuals would have preferred full-time employment but are working part-time because their hours had been reduced or they were unable to find full-time jobs. So, first what we have to do here is we have to determine the strength of the labor market. This is really important because at the end of the day that's going to give you the best insight as to what's happening with the real economy. Why is that important for your portfolio? Because it has nothing to do with stocks that's for sure. But it definitely has to do with interest rates. It has to do with the bond market and it has to do what the Fed's going to do and that could potentially impact your portfolio. So that's kind of the daisy chain here. So getting back to this, what we want to think about is all right, is the labor market weak or is it strong or is it maybe just somewhere in the middle? And what's the trend here? Is the trend getting better or is the trend getting worse? So, why I highlight this and why we need to go over the hidden stuff that the market just didn't really pay any never ever ever pays any attention to is because that's really where you're getting the insights that you need to determine these probabilities. So that's why it's important that we realize that the amount of undermployed or whatever they call it, the amount of people that are working part-time because they can't find full-time work is up by over a million or not over almost a million just this year. So then we look at the number of people not in the labor force who typically want or actually want a job. That's up by 684,000 just this year. So these individuals are not counted as unemployed because they were not actively looking for work during the last four weeks even though they don't have a job. So you see what's happening here. What we do, it's a bit like the CPI is they just keep omitting things until the point where they get the number where they want it and [laughter] say, "Well, I don't know. That guy didn't look for work on Monday, so let's just not count him as unemployed, even though he's unemployed." Well, we had all these people just go to Mexico or back to Venezuela. So, let's just pretend like 50,000 is a great number as opposed to a horrific number and a number that would lead you to believe there's a high probability of the economy slowing down. It's all just like you can almost manipulate the data to the point where you can make it tell any story you want it to tell or you can make it back up any narrative you want to push. Now, before we go any further, let me go over here because this is something I I wanted to highlight for you guys as well. Look at this for 2025. And this is so far. Remember, we're not done with revisions, but for 2025 so far, payroll employment grew by 584,000, significantly lower than an increase of 2 million in 2024. Two, we go from 2 million to 584,000. I mean, that in and of itself should tell you almost everything you need to know about the labor market. But let's get back to the BLS. So when we sift through who is working, who isn't working, you see that the food services, drinking establishments, health care, social system, they're always, especially healthcare is always going to have a tailwind because of the demographics, because of all the baby boomers retiring and they're getting to that age where they're going to need a lot of health care. So th this is always it doesn't matter how bad the economy is going to get, you're likely going to see a positive number for health care and social assistance. Not really with food services and drinking places. In fact, now that I'm thinking about it, let's go over to that indicator that I love. Another kind of hidden secret that the mainstream media doesn't tell you about, and this is the restaurant index. Josh, do you remember the name of this? I think it's the the RPI. Is that it? Restaurant Performance Index. Let's see here. >> Let's see. I'm looking it up right now. >> It's restaurant. I always misspel restaurant. Aha, that is it. Restaurant performance index. It's like your brain goes to mush over the holidays, but then once you hit January 5th, 67, it kind of gradually creeps back [laughter] like, oh, I'm not as dumb as I was two weeks ago. Okay, let's reject that. So, we're still under the 50, the 100% number here. Let me zoom in for you guys so you can see this. So this 100, the value of 100 represents kind of just a flatline. So anything over 100 would be expansion. Anything less would be a contraction. And we're still just slightly less. We've ticked up a bit here, but for most of the year, it's been in the no bueno zone. But that you could say the same thing for 2024 as well, which makes a lot of sense because remember just what was it nine months ago, a year ago, we had all of these restaurants filing for bankruptcy, I think. Um, what was the steakhouse? I mean, there were so many of them. What was that steakhouse at the Blooming Onion? Josh, what was they probably have one of those where you live. >> Oh, I know exactly what you're talking about. Um, it wasn't it >> Outback Outback. Yeah, >> Outback Steakhouse. There we go. [laughter] All right, let's get back road. >> They probably filed for bankruptcy, too. They all filed for bankruptcy. Okay, let's go back to the report. So, we got retail lost 25,000 jobs in December. The reason I highlighted this is because you probably don't remember being a viewer, but because I do these videos so often, I I just have this stuff kind of lodged in my my brain. um the the the main reason or one of the main reasons we had such huge job growth in or relatively speaking in 2024 was retail. So I was always kind of looking for the retail to kind of turn because that's another indicator of what's happening with disposable income. And you can see that now retail is on the flip side to where it just lost 25,000 jobs. Now we go to warehouse club super centers merchandise retail. They lost jobs as well. Food and beverage retailers uh lost 9,000 jobs. And here we go, guys. Here's the main thing you need to focus on for this video. The change in total non-farm payroll employment for October was revised down by 68,000 jobs. from a negative 105 to a negative 173 a negative and 73,000 jobs. Now, I know a lot of you will say, "Oh, that's because of the shutdown." Yeah, I get it. I get it. But it's still [laughter] we're still having these huge downward revisions. And it doesn't stop there. We look at November and that was downwardly revised by 8,000. Now, let's remember that we get several revisions for each month. So, I would assume that the that the now 173 is the final number for October because I think it's revised down three times. So, that's likely the last number. But for November, we're likely going to see or we are going to see another revision when we get the January data. And so, we're going to get that in February. So, the next non-farm payroll, we're going to get the final revision. Not the final revision because that's the the annual, but the final monthly revision, let's say. So, we're going to get that in January. So, this is only the second revision where they downwardly rise it again by 8,000 from 64 down to 56. That's a positive. But remember, we're not done yet with November. Who knows? That could be negative when everything when the dust settles. With these revisions, employment in October and November combined is 76,000 jobs lower than previously reported. And this is what you got to pay attention to because for some reason the market and the mainstream media, social media, they just focus on this headline number. And the headline number sucks. Let's be very, very clear. but they just try to rationalize it any way that they can because they want to push this bullish narrative. Now, look, I I don't want to constantly be bearish. I I want to look at the data and come to an objective conclusion as to what I think the probabilities are for the overall economy, not the stock market. That's that's different. The overall economy, that's what we're focusing on right now with this video. But I also don't want to just, you know, have uh tunnel vision. And I want to look at all the data and then you've got to weigh it, right? And when we look at this, I I think you've got to look at, okay, you got 50,000. And sure, you've got to consider the fact that maybe it's lower than it otherwise would be because we have people moving back to Mexico or wherever they came from. And but even that are I think that's so weak because not we discussed how okay that's still a loss of jobs. But think about that if you had a million Mexicans moving back to wherever they came from. Wouldn't you fill those jobs? The fact that you didn't fill those jobs which would mean okay sure you quit but you're going to hire back. Right? So, all right, you would hire back and then you would have the the net would be the same. That's my point. The net would be the same. But what we're seeing, so that 50,000 number, I think any way you slice it, dice it, is a horrible number. And then when you combine that with the revisions, I think that you're like, okay, great, 50,000, but what's it going to be next month? And what's it going to be after the third revision? You see, when we I I want to look at a chart. I I don't even need to look at a chart. You guys know just from watching my videos that if we had the headline numbers going all the way back, let's say two years, I'll bet you 99% of them are downwardly revised. It's substantially substantially downwardly revised. And let's remember that when you are Let's see. Do I have that chart up? I was going to look at uh No, this is the last one. Well, I know right off the top of my head. I know it well. And where I was going with that is when you look at negative non-farm payrolls, which we just had, you know, from 105 to 173. And I know that was anomaly because of the shutdown, but you look, and that's not the only negative print that we had this year. Whenever you start to see several of these negative non-farm payroll prints, you're almost always in an economic contraction. So, I guess the question there becomes, how do you reconcile this with not the stock market because there's almost an inverse relationship between the stock market and the real economy, but how do you reconcile this with GDP? because GDP was like 4.3%. And like I've been saying on these videos, one of them doesn't jive. So either we're going to have to have a huge decrease in GDP, downwardly revised GDP like we saw in 2008, or we're going to have to see the labor market just absolutely take off. One of those things has to happen because you can't have this divergence where you have, you know, [laughter] every single month when you look at the revisions, you've got like negative or barely positive non-farm payrolls and you have, you know, economic growth at 5% or 4%. Like we're some developing economy in Africa or [laughter] it's just the dog don't hunt. Those two don't match. So something's got to give. And the question becomes, what do you think it is? Right? There are no certainties. They're only probabilities. So based on your lived experience and based on all the rest of the data we have, do you think there's a higher probability that the labor market just takes off and explodes higher or that GDP comes down? I don't know. I'll let you be the judge. But let's see the ultimate arbiter of truth, the bond market. Let's see what they're doing in response. So, we've got the 30-year that's down slightly, down one and a half basis points. So, h you know, not not too much here. What do we have the 10-year doing? The 10-year basically flat. And then we have the 2-year up slightly. So, we have a bit of a flattener. That's interesting. That's really interesting. So, the market is leaning a little bit more with a pause from the Fed. That's what this would tell me. In fact, let's do that. Let's go to the CME. And so, right here, before I refresh, we had a 88.4% probability of a pause. So, let's see if that increased. Oh my gosh. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So that's what you're picking up in the curve. So remember when I just said that it it we had a flattener. So you had the long end going down and you had the the front end actually going up the 2-year. And that's because again the market they just don't look at the revisions. They just look at the headline number and say, "Well, 50,000 isn't bad enough in order for the Fed to cut considering the fact that we just had a GDP print at 4.3% and the stock market's at all-time highs and yada yada yada yada yada." So, what ends up happening in these scenarios usually the way these cycles play out is the Fed is kind of lulled to sleep by the positive data and then you boom kind of get a right hook from Tyson. Let's remember that the CPI was going up throughout 2008 until we get to about July or August. And let's also remember that we had we had positive GDP. I know that then it was downwardly revised. I think we might have one negative quarter, but then when the positive quarters were obviously substantially downwardly revised. So the labor market there with 2008 was the truth. That's for sure. and then everything kind of caught up with the labor market. So that's what happened during the GFC. Now, will it happen the same way this time? I don't know. Again, we'll have to keep paying attention to the data. But right now, the market is saying the Fed is not going to cut and the economy is I don't know if you want to call it Goldilocks. Uh and they're just kind of shrugging off all these downward revisions. And what's happening in the labor market when we look at the U6 numbers and you easily conclude that we have fewer and fewer and fewer and fewer and fewer people working. I mean at the end of the day, let's think about this. If the labor force participation was one person in an economy of 350 million and that one person was working, well then unemployment would be at zero. Does that mean the economy is booming? No, the opposite of that, right? That would be Mad Max. But yet the the unemployment rate would be at zero. So you see, that's why I think it's far more important to look at this through the lens of how many people are actually working versus what's just the headline number. All right, guys. On that bombshell, enjoy the rest of your afternoon. As always, make sure you're standing up for freedom, liberty, free market, capitalism. We'll see you in the next video.