No. I wouldn't look at the month to month; focus on annual statistics and larger trends. Monthlies are mostly for posturing and hot takes (like say, "human at the helm"), not for the over all trend of the country.
Both US and Canada play games with the word "unemployment", whose definition is very questionable in and of itself.
The article says lowest in 2 years. That's not monthly. Also has a chart going back to 2021 (when the rate was like 9%). But this current rate (6.4) is above the lowest of the last five years (5%)
It's still monthly if you're only looking at a single monthly point outlier (1 month happened to be the lowest in 2 years). If unemployment stays (or improves) at this level for another month or two, then I'd start listening. Otherwise it's a blip.
Yeah, I wish journalists would just look up the EM-ployment rate and go from there. The official "unemployment" rate is based on who is collecting benefits. It doesn't count those unemployed but not collecting benefits.
Obvious caveat being that Claude Code might give you a confident statistic without being able to validate if the question can be validated with the sample (StatsCan suppresses C grade data and below).
"75,000 new jobs" - they forgot to add that most of those no longer provide livable wage. With the way inflation is going they could soon hire everyone since the real value of the salary for average Shcmoes ever diminishes.
Those are going down the drain. Far below inflation for many many years. Canada I came to and Canada now are 2 completely different countries, former being way better in terms of the American Dream
