BREAKING: US Jobless Claims Rise 'More than Expected' This Week, Up By 24,000 to 399,000

FOX Nation ^ | 1/12/2012 | MarketWatch

[nhwingut]

WASHINGTON — The number of Americans filing initial claims for regular state unemployment benefits rose by 24,000 to a seasonally-adjusted 399,000, the Labor Department said Thursday.

Economists surveyed by Dow Jones Newswires expected claims to rise by 8,000 to 380,000 in the week ended Jan. 7. Claims from the prior week were revised up to 375,000 from 372,000.

The average of new claims over the past four weeks increased by 7,750 to 381,750.

[Reeses]

Note the 24,000 jump is actually a jump of 27,000. They compared this week’s unrevised number with last week’s revised number to put the best polish on Barky’s turd. If a Republican were in office, even a crypto-socialist like Mittens, all the spin would be in the other direction. I hate the MSM.

[who knows what evil?]

According to SGS; if you include part-timers seeking full-time work and long-term discouraged workers who have given up; the REAL rate is 22.4%.

22.4%...the media doesn't have the nads to float that out there without a Republican in the White House. Shame the candidates don't have the nads to run with THAT number...

[Jeff Chandler]

.

.

.

.

[andy58-in-nh]

The BLS has been fudging unemployment numbers for a long, long time now. The idea here is to keep the headline number under 400K, which would be seen as a big red flag. Of course, this week's number will in fact be revised upward next week to something over 400K, but by then, the headline will be forgotten.

The claims number is nearly always revised upward, something that you might find amusing if you know anything about probability statistics. Try running a binomial distribution (coin flip scenario) to see what is the probability of a previous week's number being revised upward 51 of 52 times, as it was last year. The result includes a decimal point with a whole lot of leading zeros....

[wbill]

the odds of needing to be adjusted upward every week of the year

You noticed this too, hunh?

I wouldn't expect the numbers to be correct. I wouldn't expect them to err on the "positive" side, every single time, either. Proof positive that someone is fudging the numbers.

[Tribune7]

It’s an enviro-whacko thing. They think recycling headlines saves the planet.

[wbill]

If I'm remembering my statistics correctly, the probability of a coin flip coming up "heads" 51 out of 52 times (which as you say is comparable to the numbers being revised upwards 51 out of 52 times.....) is 1 in approx 2.2 Quadrillion.

You'd be thousands of times more likely to hit the Powerball.

[KarlInOhio]

I wouldn't expect the numbers to be correct. I wouldn't expect them to err on the "positive" side, every single time, either. Proof positive that someone is fudging the numbers.

Ideally it would be a nice bell curve of adjustment amounts centered around zero. Half above, half below, most relatively close with a few outliers. It would be interesting to keep track of them for a year just to see what the actual distribution looks like. It is probably a bell curve but centered around some average number of increased claims for the adjustment. An oddball outlier might even be negative - but it would be rare.

If I get some time this weekend I'll try to track down all of these weekly reports and make a chart.

[andy58-in-nh]

The binomial probability of 51 hits out of 52 trials, with a 50% probability for each trial with a probability mass function is: 0.000000000000011546.

I don't know about you, but 'm playing the Lottery tonight. ;-)