Raising ‘a Fuss and a Holler’ About the Labor Market

It seems that young American men had quite a productive summer in the labor market—well, if you consider a busy work schedule a sign of a hot summer.

There’s been a noticeable uptick in the number of native-born men in their early twenties gaining employment—more than any of the past five summers. They made strides in construction even as foreign-born worker numbers in that sector were declining. Interestingly, this group also showed a greater likelihood to participate in the labor force and a decrease in unemployment rates.

This development is somewhat of a twist for those who claim there’s been no improvement in employment for native-born workers. It’s especially curious given that some of the data backing that claim comes from an economist who’s part of that argument.

Earlier in the month, we challenged the assertion that all the job growth in the Trump era was only benefiting women. Various commentators had suggested this was a disaster for the Trump administration, which they believed was trying to create a “male breadwinner economy.” Others appeared to think it would harm Trump politically if men weren’t seeing any benefits in the job market.

So, we highlighted the hidden gains being made by American-born men, while also noting that the Trump administration seemed quite fine with job growth among women. From January 2025 to August 2026, data showed native-born male employment climbing while foreign-born male employment was on the decline, balancing out the overall numbers. A small net gain sometimes masks larger shifts beneath the surface.

Konczal Constructs and Then Disassembles a Straw Man

Mike Konczal, a former high-ranking economist in the Biden administration, has responded—kind of. However, his response doesn’t really address our main point about rising employment for natives coupled with falling numbers for foreign workers. Instead, he seems to be countering a different argument that he assumes we’re making.

“In reaction to my recent post about women gaining 101% of net payroll jobs under Trump, commentators argued it was primarily tied to immigration, claiming native-born male workers were simply taking jobs that had been held by deported immigrants, resulting in no net new jobs. This turned out to be completely fabricated; it never happened—it’s a fiction,” Konczal asserts, then he goes on for thousands of words and numerous charts attempting to defend his stance against this imagined claim.

But the real fiction seems to be on Konczal’s side. We never argued that native-born men were simply filling roles left vacant by deported immigrants. Our point was more straightforward: the shift in workforce demographics had concealed the employment progress for native-born men. Which jobs they obtained or who previously held them was never part of our argument.

Rather unfortunately, Konczal doesn’t stop with knocking down this straw man. He also claims, “there is no employment or wage-growth boom for native-born workers in this data. I can’t find it.”

His main support for this assertion rests on examining the employment rates of native-born workers in the prime age bracket—those aged 25 to 54. He notes that their employment rate has been weakening. His analysis of the construction sector shows minimal change in the proportion of prime-age native-born adults working in that field, leading him to dismiss any potential benefits as an “urban legend.”

That’s a valid point when focusing on prime working-age men. But what about the younger men who don’t fit into his prime-age category?

Working All Summer, Just to Try to Earn a Dollar

We revisited the Census Bureau’s household survey data and calculated the employment rates for native-born men aged 20 to 24. Using the same survey and population weights as Konczal, we counted the employed individuals as a portion of the total population in that age group, including those not working.

The employment rate for this group averaged 71.1% from June to August, up from 68.2% last summer and 69.6% during the summer of 2024. It surpassed every summer in our review spanning 2021 to 2026.

The improvement became more pronounced as the summer progressed. Compared to the previous year, the employment rate increased by 1.9 percentage points in June, 3.2 points in July, and 3.7 points in August. Additionally, there was an increase in labor-force participation while the unemployment rate dropped.

The eight-month average echoes similar findings. From January to August, there were improvements compared to 2025. Consequently, the labor market has indeed strengthened for young men.

The Construction Crew Missing from the Chart

This summer was particularly fruitful for young men entering the construction industry. Around 938,000 native-born men aged 20 to 24 found work in construction this summer, compared to 802,000 last summer and 704,000 in summer 2024. Conversely, foreign-born employment in construction, encompassing workers aged 16 and older, fell from approximately 3.69 million in summer 2024 to 3.27 million this summer.

These native gains hold strong against Konczal’s preference for employment rates over raw numbers, which he believes are skewed by measurement issues. The share of native-born men aged 20 to 24 employed in construction rose from 7.48% in summer 2024 to 9.43% this summer, surpassing the 7.98% recorded in summer 2023.

Interestingly, his own supplementary data includes native-born individuals aged 16 to 24, blending gender. Their construction employment rate increased from 2.69% in 2024 to 3.23% in 2026, also exceeding the 2.95% recorded in 2023.

This comparison accounts for January through August across all years, using his definitions, weights, and methods, detailing that, by his own calculations, young native workers became more inclined to work in construction.

Who Cares About Young Men, Anyway?

While there are sensible reasons for examining prime-age employment, findings related to these workers don’t replace the broader picture of all native-born workers. Young people searching for their first job may respond differently to available positions in construction or food service than those with established careers and distinct wage expectations. Excluding younger men is important, particularly when the discussion revolves around who might benefit from roles vacated by departing workers or a tighter labor market due to fewer foreign workers.

It’s worth noting that these are survey estimates, just like Konczal’s, and smaller groups carry increased sampling uncertainty, so we should proceed with caution regarding our findings.

There is a compelling reason to focus on opportunities for young men. Within the framework of the Easterlin Baby Boom we’ve mentioned before, their economic prospects, weighed against their desired living standards, influence choices about marriage and starting families. A construction job that leads to steady earnings, skill development, and the confidence to form a household could have implications far beyond just the latest employment report. After all, the baby boom was influenced by the opportunities and prospects for young men emerging from a strong economy following the Great Depression and WWII.

As it stands, the evidence suggests young native-born men had a robust summer, with construction emerging as a key area of progress. Unless you’re channeling the narrator of Eddie Cochran’s famous “Summertime Blues”—who lamented having to work instead of enjoying the summer—it was a pretty good time to be a young American man.