Data Weekly Report 108 (April 20-26, 2026) 1. Unemployment rate for 25-29 year olds hits historic high. 2. Domestic demand contributes 84.7% to GDP. 3. Kevin Warsh: Will absolutely not become Trump's puppet. 4. Asian Americans become the fastest-growing demographic in the US. 5. What is the next phase for AI? 6. March fiscal revenue primarily driven by tax income. 7. Personal income tax revenue increased by 188% year-on-year.
Text: 1. Unemployment rate for 25-29 year olds reaches historic high. Recent data released by the National Bureau of Statistics shows that in March, the unemployment rate for the labor force aged 16-24, excluding students, was 16.9%, an increase of 0.4 percentage points compared to the same period in 2025. During the same period, the unemployment rate for the labor force aged 25-29, excluding students, also rose to 7.7%, 0.5 percentage points higher than the previous year, reaching the highest level on record. Beyond short-term distortions from the Lunar New Year holiday, structural mismatches in youth employment supply and demand persist. Data from Zhaopin indicates a divergence in the current employment structure: the employment rate for vocational college graduates is rising; conversely, the employment rate for those with master's and doctoral degrees has declined significantly, hitting a new low in recent years, increasingly challenging the traditional belief that "higher education leads to more stable employment." This may be related to the fact that AI is currently primarily replacing entry-level knowledge-based and clerical positions such as copywriting, basic analysis, graphic design, programming, and administrative support—roles that are mainstream career paths for highly educated graduates. Vocational college graduates, however, are more concentrated in hands-on, technical, and service-oriented physical jobs, which are less directly impacted by AI, thus creating this employment contrast.
2. Domestic demand contributes 84.7% to GDP. In the first quarter of 2026, China's GDP grew by 5% year-on-year, marking the highest growth rate in five consecutive quarters. Among the economic data, the most attention-grabbing and controversial figure is the contribution rate of domestic demand to economic growth, which reached 84.7%, a significant increase of nearly 30 percentage points compared to the previous year. This number stands in stark contrast to the general public's perception of the economy, as a sense of economic chill persists, with weak consumption and sluggish private investment showing no significant improvement. Online communities have engaged in heated discussions on this topic. This weekly report aims to explain how this seemingly "better-than-expected" domestic demand contribution rate was formed. To understand the 84.7% domestic demand contribution share, one must first clarify the core definition used in official statistics. Domestic demand, as defined by the National Bureau of Statistics, primarily consists of two major components: consumption and investment, while external demand corresponds to net exports of goods and services. The contribution rate of the three demand components measures the pull each component's constant-price increment has on overall economic growth. Consumption and investment are classified as domestic demand, and net exports represent external demand; the sum of their contribution rates is fixed at 100%. The share of a single demand component depends not only on its own growth rate but is also influenced by countervailing fluctuations in the other two components, leading to significant volatility in quarterly data. As shown in the chart, when aggregated over a longer period, domestic demand's contribution to the economy has consistently remained above 70%. The core reason for the disconnect between the seemingly strong domestic demand data and the actual public sentiment lies within the detailed data. The per capita consumption expenditure of residents, which most closely reflects public daily life, grew by only 2.6% in real terms in the first quarter—this is the key indicator reflecting the true temperature of public consumption. During the same period, the real growth rate of per capita disposable income was 4.0%, lower than the overall GDP growth of 5%. The fact that residents' income growth is not keeping pace with the broader economy directly suppresses daily consumption willingness and capacity. More notably, the gap between the income growth rate of 4% and the consumption growth rate of only 2.6% has largely translated into increased household savings, sufficiently indicating a strong public risk-aversion sentiment and persistently high precautionary savings tendencies, with an overall mindset of reluctance to spend and cautious consumption remaining unshaken. Why does consumption hold significant weight in the domestic demand contribution? The core reason is that the domestic demand caliber in GDP accounting is broader; besides the commonly understood household consumption, it also includes substantial government consumption expenditure, which is not disclosed separately on a quarterly basis. This component of spending, while not detailed in statistics, may have been a key variable in the consumption sector this quarter.
3. Warsh: Will absolutely not become Trump's puppet. This week, Federal Reserve Chair nominee Kevin Warsh attended a Senate confirmation hearing. During the hearing, Warsh's statements regarding Federal Reserve independence and the direction of monetary policy became the central focus and raised core questions for the markets. If Warsh's nomination is confirmed and he assumes the role of Fed Chair, where will he lead the Fed, given his past public criticism of the Fed's failure to curb inflation and his alignment with Trump's stance? What changes might the Fed's independence and market authority face? Based on his statements and core viewpoints during the hearing, the following key points can be summarized. First, Warsh's core monetary policy stance. As early as April last year, Warsh publicly criticized the Federal Reserve, attributing the failure to control inflation in recent years solely to the Fed itself. During the hearing, he proposed a strategy of "proceeding with interest rate cuts and balance sheet reduction concurrently." This combination may seem contradictory, but in reality...
Comments