[zeroonetwothree]

Why don’t we see it in the aggregate job data? Could it be that people sometimes lose jobs for “reasons” but that’s just the normal flow of the economy? Until there’s some effect on actual unemployment rates I wouldn’t be worried.

[burnerRhodov2]

Employment stats are designed to measure economy-wide shifts, not early, localized, white-collar disruptions. The sampling will smooth those effects away until they’re large.

CPS samples 60k households per month to represent ~150+ million workers. Households stay in the sample 4 months, out 8, back 4.

Copywriters will get smoothed out in the aggregate, and the definition will mask this. Even if you work one hour, you are technically employed. If you are not actively looking for work for more than a month, you are also not technically unemployed.

Unemployment data is a lagging indicator for detecting recessions not early technological displacement in white-collar niches.

[ThrowawayR2]

There are some claims that an increasing percentage of employment is comprised of lower paid and more precarious gig workers, e.g. from https://www.forbes.com/sites/kirkogunrinde/2025/11/18/gig-ec... "Hours worked on gig platforms in 2025 have increased, even as payroll growth has slowed, suggesting more workers have taken up gig work during a cooling labor market, according to a report released by Goldman Sachs."