Jobless claims unexpectably rise, last week's count.

[Maple]

You would have thousght we would be seeing a decrease in jobless claims because of the Christmas season and temporary work. Not so, this recession is not over, not by a long shot. Real unemployment is at 18% when you count the people who have given up looking for work and those that have fallen off the unemployment role. How's that Hope and Change workin out for ya???

Initial Jobless Claims in U.S. Unexpectedly Increase (Update2) - Bloomberg.com

Dec. 17 (Bloomberg) -- More Americans than anticipated filed first-time claims for unemployment benefits last week, a reminder that the labor market will take time to strengthen and may weigh on the economic recovery.

Initial jobless claims rose by 7,000 to 480,000 in the week ended Dec. 12, from a revised 473,000 the prior week, Labor Department figures showed today in Washington. The number of people receiving unemployment insurance was little changed in the prior week, while those getting extended payments increased.

Federal Reserve policy makers yesterday said weakness in the labor market is restraining consumer spending, which accounts for about 70 percent of the world’s largest economy. Concerns over the lack of jobs prompted the central bank yesterday to reiterate a pledge to keep the benchmark interest rate low for an “extended period.”

“The level of new claims remains elevated,” said Steven Wood, president of Insight Economics LLC in Danville, California. “The labor market is improving, but remains soft.”

 

[Maple]

Business is NOT expanding and hiring.Noooooooooooooooooooooo, do you think they might be frozen in place by their concerns over Health care reform and Cap and Tax. lolololololol from the article:: IF YOU READ NOTHING ELSE READ THE LAST PARAGRAPH, they sure don't want to have to lay off any government workers. Oh Noooooooooooooooooo that would be a disastor. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Fed’s Concern

“Household spending appears to be expanding at a moderate rate, though it remains constrained by a weak labor market, modest income growth, lower housing wealth, and tight credit,” the Federal Open Market Committee said in a statement yesterday after meeting in Washington. “Businesses are still cutting back on fixed investment” and “remain reluctant to add to payrolls.” Deterioration in the labor market is “abating,” the Fed said.

The U.S. House yesterday passed legislation that would expand unemployment benefits and give state and local governments that are struggling with slow tax revenue funds to prevent them from having to fire employees.

 

[pinqy]

You would have thousght we would be seeing a decrease in jobless claims because of the Christmas season and temporary work.

Not really. The UI claims are SEASONALLY ADJUSTED, meaning the effects of the Christmas season etc are filtered out. The seasonally adjusted (official) numbers are: Week of Dec 5 = 473,000 and week of Dec 12 = 480,000, an increase of 7,000. The "real" numbers, not seasonally adjusted, are 662,737 and 555,344, a decrease of 107,393 So, yes they did go down because of the Christmas season and temp work, but that seems to be the only reason they went down, and not by as much as they should have. The underlying trend is an increase.

Real unemployment is at 18% when you count the people who have given up looking for work and those that have fallen off the unemployment role.

Whether or not someone has ever received, applied for, or been eligible for unemployment benefits has nothing to do with the unemployment rate. As for not including people who aren't looking for work, do you really think it makes sense to count stay-at-home spouses, retirees, and full time students as unemployed? Or people who have jobs as unemployed?

 

[Joe Steel]

Business is NOT expanding and hiring.Noooooooooooooooooooooo, do you think they might be frozen in place by their concerns over Health care reform and Cap and Tax.

No.

More likely, their concerned by the lack of sales.

 

[Neubarth]

You would have thousght we would be seeing a decrease in jobless claims because of the Christmas season and temporary work.

Not really. The UI claims are SEASONALLY ADJUSTED, meaning the effects of the Christmas season etc are filtered out. The seasonally adjusted (official) numbers are: Week of Dec 5 = 473,000 and week of Dec 12 = 480,000, an increase of 7,000. The "real" numbers, not seasonally adjusted, are 662,737 and 555,344, a decrease of 107,393 So, yes they did go down because of the Christmas season and temp work, but that seems to be the only reason they went down, and not by as much as they should have. The underlying trend is an increase.

Real unemployment is at 18% when you count the people who have given up looking for work and those that have fallen off the unemployment role.

Whether or not someone has ever received, applied for, or been eligible for unemployment benefits has nothing to do with the unemployment rate. As for not including people who aren't looking for work, do you really think it makes sense to count stay-at-home spouses, retirees, and full time students as unemployed? Or people who have jobs as unemployed?

Don't believe Pinko's lies. There are no seasonal adjustments. All that is is government manipulation of the hard data. One week they move it up and the next week they move it down with no logic behind the manipulation other than the desire of the administration to make people think that things are getting better when they are not.

Communist China is doing the same thing. Telling the people that they are in a fantastic economic recovery when all the outside indicators are that the Chinese economy has contracted by over 20 percent. To find out what is really happening in China, look at the shipping. They simply are not shipping product like they used to. They have over two hundred million unemployed and those people are getting restless.

 

[Neubarth]

Business is NOT expanding and hiring.Noooooooooooooooooooooo, do you think they might be frozen in place by their concerns over Health care reform and Cap and Tax.

No.

More likely, their concerned by the lack of sales.

American sales are not keeping up with the rate of inflation in this country. More and more layoffs are coming.

 

[pinqy]

There are no seasonal adjustments. All that is is government manipulation of the hard data. One week they move it up and the next week they move it down with no logic behind the manipulation other than the desire of the administration to make people think that things are getting better when they are not.

So you stand by the idea that last week was better than the previous week with 107,000 fewer people claiming UI rather than the "government lie" of 7,000 more? I assume with the large drop you'll stop saying UI claims are skyrocketing.

But explain again how "lying" and claiming there was an increase in claims rather than the actual decrease is supposed to make people think things are getting better.

 

[Maple]

Business is NOT expanding and hiring.Noooooooooooooooooooooo, do you think they might be frozen in place by their concerns over Health care reform and Cap and Tax.

No.

More likely, their concerned by the lack of sales.

American sales are not keeping up with the rate of inflation in this country. More and more layoffs are coming.

That's a good one and I beleive I know where those tents are going up.

 

[saveliberty]

Jobless claims unexpectably rise, last week's count. Unexpectedly rose? I expected it. I expect it is headed to 11% by early March.

 

[Neubarth]

There are no seasonal adjustments. All that is is government manipulation of the hard data. One week they move it up and the next week they move it down with no logic behind the manipulation other than the desire of the administration to make people think that things are getting better when they are not.

So you stand by the idea that last week was better than the previous week with 107,000 fewer people claiming UI rather than the "government lie" of 7,000 more? I assume with the large drop you'll stop saying UI claims are skyrocketing.

But explain again how "lying" and claiming there was an increase in claims rather than the actual decrease is supposed to make people think things are getting better.

I keep on pointing out the same things to you and you consistently ignore what I have posted and make up your own crazy crap. You consistently amaze me with your gross stupidity. The week after Black Friday there were more layoffs than normal. That was to be expected. Thanksgiving week there were less layoffs, and that was to be expected for two reasons. Everybody knows that the minor fluctuations are of no importance. It is, as I have said thousands of times for the dunderheads like you THE DIRECTION OF THE UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE CLAIMS, AND THEY HAVE GONE FROM 400 K TO 650 K SINCE SEPTEMBER. THAT, while the obama professional lying groupies were claiming that it was going from 650 K to 450 K.

THE DIRECTIONS WERE OPPOSITE AND WERE FAIRLY CONSISTENTLY SO. LIE AFTER LIE AFTER LIE AFTER LIE, JUST LIKE YOU.

Again, your comments are nothing but lies heaped upon more lies and in no way related to what I have posted for the past quarter of a century about the gross inaccuracy of the DOL and the damned BLS.

I keep on telling you that the exact numbers (give or take a half dozen thousand) are of no specific importance, as it is what the damned lying Obama sons of bitches do with the data that matters. Fluctuations from week to week because of holidays and holiday sales periods do not matter. It is the overall trend of the data. The Satanic Obama Sacks of Excrementt have been foisting nothing but lies upon the public. Obama is the most criminally minded son of a slut that the world has ever seen. I will be very glad to see him removed from office in a few weeks.

Now, they know that the UI claims have gone up by almost a quarter of a million while they have been saying that they were going down by a fifth of a million since September 12th. That is horrific deliberate dishonesty and has nothing to do with your insane "seasonal adjustments." Nothing but lies from the Federal Government and lies from you trying to make gross distortion of the data look like improvement in the economy, just like all the millions of other lies from this corrupt administration and their sycophant minions.

Consider that damned lie the other day about 8.9 percent improvement in house sales in the "continuing improving economy." You can conduct surveys of people in the street and well over ninty percent of the people who have an opinion will tell you that they believe that housing sales were improving and that we are almost back to normal.

It is lying sycophant scumbags like you who propagate that kind of crap so naive investors can be fleeced of their savings. We need to take all the openly corrupt people like those politicians and put them before firing squads. No mercy. Public executions for treason against the American people. It is about time.

The simple dunces like you who lie all the time need to be put away. We do not need scum like you out in the open on this good earth . Just think, you could accidentally lead the forefront of the badly needed population reduction program that this planet needs. Think about it and be a leader for once for the good of humanity.

 

[Neubarth]

Jobless claims unexpectably rise, last week's count. Unexpectedly rose? I expected it. I expect it is headed to 11% by early March.

Actual unemployment right now is over 22 percent. We are in one hell of a Depression.

 

[saveliberty]

Jobless claims unexpectably rise, last week's count. Unexpectedly rose? I expected it. I expect it is headed to 11% by early March.

Actual unemployment right now is over 22 percent. We are in one hell of a Depression.

I hear you. The unemployment you speak of is around 17-18% last I saw. 22% sounds about right for the March period I mentioned. DC counting will be 11%.

 

[smithfix]

Knowing the current situation of our economy is very crucial. We have to be vigilant as to secure jobs. I hope for a very soon recovery from recession.

I direct you to the thread, "How can it exsist?", on this forum a few days ago.
No one seems to be able to answer that question so; if it can't exsist how can it recover?

 

[Toro]

The trend is still down.

 

[Toro]

Knowing the current situation of our economy is very crucial. We have to be vigilant as to secure jobs. I hope for a very soon recovery from recession.

Bernard is a spammer. He is here to sell you gold coins.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

You would have thousght we would be seeing a decrease in jobless claims because of the Christmas season and temporary work.

Not really. The UI claims are SEASONALLY ADJUSTED, meaning the effects of the Christmas season etc are filtered out. The seasonally adjusted (official) numbers are: Week of Dec 5 = 473,000 and week of Dec 12 = 480,000, an increase of 7,000. The "real" numbers, not seasonally adjusted, are 662,737 and 555,344, a decrease of 107,393 So, yes they did go down because of the Christmas season and temp work, but that seems to be the only reason they went down, and not by as much as they should have. The underlying trend is an increase.

Real unemployment is at 18% when you count the people who have given up looking for work and those that have fallen off the unemployment role.

Whether or not someone has ever received, applied for, or been eligible for unemployment benefits has nothing to do with the unemployment rate. As for not including people who aren't looking for work, do you really think it makes sense to count stay-at-home spouses, retirees, and full time students as unemployed? Or people who have jobs as unemployed?

There you go again....more lies and spin....it's clearly stated in your links that PEOPLE WHO ARE NOLONGER SEEKING EMPLOYMENT ARE REMOVED FROM THE FIGURES.....how about some honesty from you instead of lies and bullshit Obama talking points.

 

[saveliberty]

pingy,

I do take exception to your statement, "Whether or not someone has ever received, applied for, or been eligible for unemployment benefits has nothing to do with the unemployment rate."

The questions asked by the Census Bureau to compile unemployment figures, are very similiar to what it takes to qualify for unemployment benefits. Falling off the unemployment rolls is about equivalent of falling off the count.

 

[Toro]

There you go again....more lies and spin....it's clearly stated in your links that PEOPLE WHO ARE NOLONGER SEEKING EMPLOYMENT ARE REMOVED FROM THE FIGURES.....how about some honesty from you instead of lies and bullshit Obama talking points.

Pinqy made the same arguments when Bush was in power. His explanations of the statistical methodologies have nothing to do with politics.

 

[Toro]

pingy,

I do take exception to your statement, "Whether or not someone has ever received, applied for, or been eligible for unemployment benefits has nothing to do with the unemployment rate."

The questions asked by the Census Bureau to compile unemplyment figures, are very similiar to what it take to qualify for unemployment benefits. Falling off the unemployment rolls is about equivalent of falling off the count.

You miss the point.

How the unemployment rate is defined is done so in a very methodical manner, and has always been such. He is telling you how it is defined. Whether or not you agree with it is a different matter altogether.

 

[pinqy]

There you go again....more lies and spin....it's clearly stated in your links that PEOPLE WHO ARE NOLONGER SEEKING EMPLOYMENT ARE REMOVED FROM THE FIGURES.....how about some honesty from you instead of lies and bullshit Obama talking points.

Where was I dishonest? If you're not looking for work, you're not unemployed. That's been the definition since the survey started. And to be technical, no one is "removed from the figures," there's no list. It's a rotating sample survey and individuals are categorized by their response. The population used is the adult civilian non-institutional population. Under that, you're either employed (you have a job), Unemployed (you don't have a job and are trying to get one), and these two are the labor force. Anyone not looking for work is not in the labor force. What exactly are your objections to that?

As for Obama talking points, the methodology hasn't changed under Obama...everything is calculated the same way it was under Bush and Clinton.