Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Jobless claims drop but remain at elevated levels
Yahoo News/AP ^ | June 24, 2010 | Christopher S. Rugaber, Ap Economics Writer

Posted on 06/24/2010 6:32:04 AM PDT by Mad Dawgg

WASHINGTON – Initial claims for jobless benefits fell by the largest amount in two months last week, but remain above levels consistent with healthy job growth.

Despite the drop of 19,000, claims are at about the same level they were at the beginning of the year. The stubbornly high level of requests for jobless aid is a sign hiring remains weak even as the economy recovers.

The Labor Department said Thursday that new claims dropped to a seasonally adjusted 457,000. That's slightly below economists' forecasts of 460,000, according to Thomson Reuters.

First-time requests for unemployment insurance have been stuck at about 450,000 since the beginning of this year. New claims dropped steadily last year after reaching a peak of 651,000 in March 2009. Claims need to fall closer to 425,000 to signal sustained job growth, many economists say.

The four-week average dipped by 1,500 to 462,750, the first drop in six weeks.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Business/Economy
KEYWORDS: bhoeconomy; democrats; economy; jobs; obama; unemployment
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last
To: skeeter

new claims dropped to a seasonally adjusted 457,000. That’s slightly below economists’ forecasts of 460,000

Does anyone else find this line totally ridiculous?


I do

The whole article is ridiculous, as it is each month.


21 posted on 06/24/2010 7:08:41 AM PDT by DontTreadOnMe2009 (So stop treading on me already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

>>>BS! Just last year the “economist” were claiming it would have to drop below 250,000 claims to start seeing creation.

I think your “economist” is way off. In the past 30 years (that’s 1560 weeks), weekly initial claims have been under 250,000 only 64 times and only 3 times since 2001.


22 posted on 06/24/2010 7:08:51 AM PDT by NC28203
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: The Sons of Liberty
>>>"New claims" means that nearly half a million more people lost their jobs, and the key word is "adjusted" which basically means that they made it whatever they thought they could get away with for the best spin. There may be many more whow were "adjusted" out of the statistics.

FYI, the unadjusted number was 421,000.
23 posted on 06/24/2010 7:11:44 AM PDT by NC28203
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: NC28203; The Sons of Liberty

>>>I think your “economist” is way off. In the past 30 years (that’s 1560 weeks), weekly initial claims have been under 250,000 only 64 times and only 3 times since 2001.

That was NSA, so a number of those weeks may have included holidays. Looking at the SA numbers, claims have never been below 250,000 in the past 30 years.


24 posted on 06/24/2010 7:14:41 AM PDT by NC28203
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: NC28203

What are the numbers for those that have exhausted their benefits and just given up?


25 posted on 06/24/2010 7:18:38 AM PDT by The Sons of Liberty (The 0bama regime represents an "Clear and Present Danger" to FREEDOM - Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: NC28203

My bad.

I reread some past articles and I stand corrected. The economy needs to create 250,000 jobs to make a dent in the unemployment rate.


26 posted on 06/24/2010 7:18:54 AM PDT by tobyhill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill
“Claims need to fall closer to 425,000 to signal sustained job growth, many economists say.” BS! Just last year the “economist” were claiming it would have to drop below 250,000 claims to start seeing creation.

This number keeps moving. Not more than 2 months ago it was 400,000. When Lord Vader "Evil BUSH" was president is was in the 300,000s.

27 posted on 06/24/2010 7:19:01 AM PDT by frogjerk (I believe in unicorns, fairies and pro-life Democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg
people who used up benefits and have not found jobs..who counts them?
28 posted on 06/24/2010 7:23:02 AM PDT by dalebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk
Years ago, "full employment" was considered to be 4% -- some folks thought you couldn't really get lower than that.
Under Clinton, "full employment" was considered to be 5%. Times had changed, and some folks thought that you couldn't really get lower than that.
Under Bush, an unemployment rate of 4.6% was considered a "jobless recovery", indicative of "the worst economy since Hoover".
Under Obama, an unemployment rate of 9.8% is a sign that the recovery is in full swing.
29 posted on 06/24/2010 7:24:54 AM PDT by ClearCase_guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg

“new claims dropped to a seasonally adjusted 457,000...”

Can someone tell me what “season” it is that requires nearly half a million people a week getting laid off?!


30 posted on 06/24/2010 7:25:30 AM PDT by Common Sense 101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Sons of Liberty

>>>What are the numbers for those that have exhausted their benefits and just given up?

Can’t really determine from the weekly claims number. Continuing claims for the week ending June 12 decreased to 4.548 million from 4.593 million previously, but we don’t know how many founds jobs and how many had their benfits expire.


31 posted on 06/24/2010 7:32:30 AM PDT by NC28203
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg

That is, of course, until the figures are later revised upward.


32 posted on 06/24/2010 7:41:30 AM PDT by RKBA Democrat (How many children are enough? One more....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

I have seen that before. There’s a difference in terms of how you are counting the numbers...monthly or weekly or something.

I can’t remember which, but the reason for the difference is a different “gauge” so to speak, so there’s a different number.


33 posted on 06/24/2010 8:10:42 AM PDT by rwfromkansas ("Carve your name on hearts, not marble." - C.H. Spurgeon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg
"...in May: 431,000 jobs were added nationwide, but the private sector accounted for just 41,000 and Census hires 411,000.

I can't find the article at the moment, but in our state, there were 5,200 new jobs for May .... 4,800 of those were census workers.

Do the math. BWHAHAHA!

34 posted on 06/24/2010 8:11:31 AM PDT by Daffynition (There is no other cheese.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg
new claims dropped to a seasonally adjusted 457,000.

What seasoning did they adjust it with?

Salt?....a little Pepper, some Oregano, or maybe a dash of Adobe seasoning? What seasoning? What's the recipe?

35 posted on 06/24/2010 8:15:17 AM PDT by libertarian27 (Ingsoc: Department of Life, Department of Liberty, Department of Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg

They don’t let George W Bush get away with, If we had not taken out Saddam he would have launched 911 type attacks on us in America but they endorse Obama’s crap that the economy would have been worse off if he did not implement that failed recovery package.


36 posted on 06/24/2010 8:35:48 AM PDT by Typical_Whitey (Our nation has a choice, Vote or Die.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg

No, no and no. The revised report will reveal that unemployment rate unexpectedly remained the same or went up. This report is meant only to get a DOW bump for the day. ANALysts will ignore the revised, but true, report when it is inevitably reported.

Just like the looming car wreck of Greece, Spain, Portugal and the EU in general is somehow a daily—not continuing—event.

Mindless, utterly mindless.


37 posted on 06/24/2010 8:37:36 AM PDT by dools007
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg

Total spin job...and it will be revised upward in a couple of weeks when it will no longer be news. Welcome to Soviet style public information.


38 posted on 06/24/2010 9:12:02 AM PDT by Scott from the Left Coast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FormerACLUmember
(By the way, unemployment was 4.5% under Bush)

But...but...but.....democrats are for the working man!

39 posted on 06/24/2010 9:16:18 AM PDT by massmike (...So this is what happens when OJ's jury elects the president....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg

Why did unemployment claims drop? In part, because California has ended extended unemployment benefits!


40 posted on 06/24/2010 9:19:55 AM PDT by bsf2009
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson