Jobless Claims Lowest Since January 2001

AP ^

[Lunatic Fringe]

WASHINGTON - The number of Americans filing new claims for unemployment benefits dropped for the third consecutive week last week, pushing jobless claims to the lowest level in more than three years.

The Labor Department (news - web sites) reported Thursday that the number of laid-off workers seeking jobless benefits fell by 6,000 last week to 336,000, a level that was last seen the week of Jan. 13, 2001, just before Bill Clinton (news - web sites) relinquished the White House to George W. Bush.

In other economic news, the government said inflation at the wholesale level jumped by 0.6 percent in January, the biggest increase in three months. That reflected in part the largest jump in energy prices since last March at the start of the Iraq (news - web sites) war. Outside of the volatile food and energy categories, the Producer Price Index (news - web sites) rose a more moderate 0.3 percent.

The release of the PPI (news - web sites) report for January was a month late as the Labor Department struggled to overcome difficulties in converting to a new classification system for the products it tracks for price changes.

The third straight weekly decline in jobless benefits raised hopes that a lengthy stretch of layoffs is coming to a close, setting the stage for businesses to finally begin rehiring laid-off workers.

President Bush (news - web sites), under attack by Democrats for what they say is the worst jobs record since Herbert Hoover, is counting on his three rounds of tax cuts to finally start generating new jobs.

The lack of significant new hiring has become a key issue in the current presidential race. Presumptive Democratic nominee Sen. John Kerry (news - web sites) contends Bush pursued a failed economic strategy of providing tax cuts skewed to the wealthy, which have done little to generate new employment.

Just 21,000 new jobs were created in February, as reflected by the Labor Department's survey of payrolls, as the country's job machine continued to fall badly below expectations. The unemployment rate remained at 5.6 percent last month. The overall rate remained stable only because 392,000 Americans gave up looking for work and were no longer counted in the labor market .

Bush, who has already endured a "jobless recovery" that has lasted far longer than the one that plagued his father, is counting on the tax cuts to finally begin generating jobs at a healthy clip so that voters will feel better about their economic prospects before they go to the polls in November.

The drop of 6,000 in the number of Americans filing unemployment benefits caught analysts by surprise. They had been expecting a slight increase after two weekly declines.

The drop left the four-week moving average of claims at 344,000, the lowest level for this barometer of the labor market since Jan. 27, 2001.

The 0.6 percent January increase in the PPI, which measures price changes in goods before they reach store shelves, followed a much more moderate 0.2 percent increase in December and was the sharpest jump since a 0.7 percent rise in October.

The January jump in wholesale prices was driven by a 4.7 percent rise in energy costs, the biggest monthly increase since a 4.8 percent rise in March 2002, as the U.S.-led Iraq war was beginning. Gasoline prices rose by 14.1 percent in January while home heating oil climbed 16.8 percent.

Food prices fell by 1.4 percent at the wholesale level in January, the biggest monthly drop since a 3.1 percent decline in April 2002. Big declines were recorded in the price of beef, lettuce, cauliflower, tomatoes, broccoli and spinach.

Outside of food and energy, the 0.3 percent increase in so-called core inflation was the biggest monthly rise since a 0.5 percent increase in October. The core wholesale inflation rate actually fell by 0.1 percent in December and was unchanged in November.

On Wednesday, the government reported that consumer prices in February were up 0.3 percent, a slight moderation compared to the 0.5 percent increase in January.

The Federal Reserve (news - web sites), which left a key interest rate at a 45-year low on Tuesday, said one reason it was able to do so was that inflation pressures remain at low levels.

[Jorge]

...but many of those who were unemployed went from high paying jobs to Fry Cook, Mall Security, or simply lost unemployment benefits.

Actually wages and salaries have been increasing according to Dept of Labor stats.

[wagglebee]

The Wall Street Journal reported last week that household wealth hit a record in 2003, it surpassed the record from 2000 when household wealth was artifically high due to the stock market bubble. Its sort of difficult to believe that this came from fry cooks and lost unemployment benefits. Maybe you should go to DU and spew this nonsense, they will eat it up.

[gogipper]

You know, we are becoming an internet-linked society and the constant repetition of unsubstantiated propaganda just isn't going to work when anybody can do a search and get the official data. It took me all of 5 minutes to find the government labor statistics site.

Wages may have decreased locally in your area ET, but we are talking about the entire country and the policies we need to benefit all Americans. At this link http://data.bls.gov/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet you can find a table which shows that average hourly income has soared from about 12 dollars an hour in 1996 (Clinton's first term) to 15.35 an hour now, and inflation has been low.

I don't have a link (yet), but recall that when employment was at 5.6 percent under Clinton everybody was yelling that employment that alarmingly low was going to bring on inflation. Now because its a republican president, 5.6 percent is the worst jobs situation since Herbert Hoover.

[Your Nightmare]

You need to either read more carefully or write more carefully, or both. If you think the report stated that only 21,000 jobs were created in February, you are wrong. If you think the report stated that those 21,000 were government jobs, you are wrong.


http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

I've read the report. The first sentence is: "Nonfarm employment was little changed (+21,000) in February, and the unemployment rate remained at 5.6 percent, the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor reported today." It seems to clearly state that only 21,000 jobs were created.

And if you go down to the employment numbers, add up all the non-government jobs and the total is exactly 0. It also list 21,000 new government jobs, which is the same as the total nonfarm increase. Again, it seems pretty clear that the increase in jobs in February was due to an increase in government jobs.

	Jan-04	Feb-04	Change
Construction	6,808	6,784	-24
Manufacturing	14,311	14,308	-3
Retail trade	14,936	14,949	13
Professional and business services	16,149	16,159	10
Education and health services	16,743	16,756	13
Leisure and hospitality	12,211	12,202	-9
Sum of Non-Government Jobs	0
Government	21,538	21,559	21

[Tribune7]

The main problem is that minimum wage is too high

The main problem is that the minimum wage exists. Well, not the main problem, but a problem,

[Tennessean4Bush]

I've read the report. The first sentence is: "Nonfarm employment was little changed (+21,000) in February, and the unemployment rate remained at 5.6 percent, the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor reported today." It seems to clearly state that only 21,000 jobs were created.

Maybe you think I am splitting hairs, but I think there is a larger point or two here: the report said the net increase was +21,000, not that only 21,000 jobs were created.

Now, this could mean several things including: 400,000 new jobs created and 379,000 jobs no longer needed. Everyone hopes that next time it is 800,000 new created and 400,000 no longer needed. However, productivity increases have been enormous so I think the no longer needed will continue to be high. There is a seismic shift going on in the economy and in businesses with regard to productivity, shifting from manufacturing to service-based economy, etc.

Focusing on the net differences (which is what the report and accompanying tables do) masks what is really going on, IMHO. Heck, there were probably 21,000 new businesses started across the nation in February.

I know I am sounding like a hair splitter, and I really probably owe kittymyrib an apology for writing such a dismissive post. But I really believe there is something going on that this report has not fully captured. I am not as anal as my last post might indicate and I do share the frustration many have as to why the jobs report is still lagging so far behind. We will know more over the next year or so, for sure. If it is truly as stagnant as this report indicates the 5.6 unemployment rate will begin to increase dramatically.

Happy posting to you both!

[raloxk]

"Good news, but many of those who were unemployed went from high paying jobs to Fry Cook, Mall Security, or simply lost unemployment benefits."


Blah blah blah...heard the same rhetoric from Libs back in the 1980s during Reagan.

[theDentist]

Hey, it's the monkey wrench in the works. Either accept it's there or ignore it.

You think I'm worrying about nothing? I hope you're right. I pray you're right.

[raloxk]

but your argument is what people have been saying since the early 1980s. Reagans great economic miracle wasexplained away by the left as saying we were a nation of hamburger flippers.

[theDentist]

It was particularly true in Clinton's early years too. There is truth to it now as well. Perhaps not as many as I believe, but there is truth to it. I think there are more than you want to believe. We'll have to agree to disagree.

[palmer]

Learned that a whole month ago, eh?

I was accused by this same experienced Freeper of being a Kerry supporter. I pointed out my tagline is satire but I didn't get an answer.

[raloxk]

actually is was very untrue during Clinton's years. We were have never been a nation of hamburger flippers. I can see you are an eternal pessimist

[CompProgrammer]

That's true - you did hear it during the Reagan years, but we didn't have the Internet then. We didn't have connectivity on a world-wide scale. We barely had connectivity between companies. The Internet has changed everything. It makes it possible to offshore all technical work. That just wasn't possible during Reagan's time.

[theDentist]

You assume I'm an eternal pessimist. You'd be wrong. And once again, I'll call a friend of mine and let her know she's not working as a cook, but still doing marketing for a high-tech company on 128 in Mass.

[raloxk]

"I'll call a friend of mine and let her know she's not working as a cook, but still doing marketing for a high-tech company on 128 in Mass."

There are always individuals such asyour friend even in good economic times. But personal stories dont make for a national trend

[theDentist]

I know several who are now working in lower paying jobs, not the work they studied for and received degrees to perform.

Unfortunately, there is no poll to determine how many lost their positions and took jobs for less than 1/2 they were making. We'll agree to disagree. But I maintain my assertion that this is an exposed achilles heel in Bush's Presidency.

[raloxk]

yes, it is the achilles heel of the Bush re-election chances. But whta you are describing is nothing new, it happens in all economic downturns.Each recession people act as though the problem with joblessness has never occurred before