Initial jobless claims fall below 400,000 for first time in 2 years!

[Statistical]

Go Obama economic expansion! Go!

http://money.cnn.com/2010/12/30/news/economy/jobless_claims/




The number of Americans filing for their first week of unemployment benefits fell below 400,000 for the first time in more than two years, pointing to continued improvement in the job market.

The number of initial claims fell to 388,000 in the week ended Dec. 25, down 34,000 from an upwardly revised 422,000 claims filed the week before, the Labor Department said Thursday. That's the lowest level of claims since the week ending July 12, 2008, when there 385,000 initial filings.

The 4-week moving average of initial claims -- a number that tries to smooth out week-to-week volatility -- was 414,000, down 12,500 from the previous week.

"It's impressive to finally see unemployment claims fall below 400,000," said Stuart Hoffman, chief economist with PNC Financial Services, who said that if there was a magic number for unemployment claims, 400,000 would be it.

[dkf]

1. Good news!

Its been a long time coming

[InkAddict]

2. Revisions coming as holiday help and corporate New Year's

Resolutions take shape, however, 99er's falling off the edge will also shape the numbers...(sigh for fudgy factors)

[Statistical]

3. Claims are seasonally adjusted.

Myth 1:
The number is only good because December, May, etc is a good month for employment.

Truth:
Claims are seasonally adjusted. So the raw data is corrected by the average change for that month in last 30 years. Decembers are always good. The number going down means the change was BETTER than the average December.

Myth 2:
99er falling off cause the numbers to drop.

Truth:
99er have no effect on initial jobless claims or U-3.
The number today is INITIAL jobless claims. Someone already on UI has no effect on initial jobless claims. Someone filing initial jobless claim is making their FIRST claim for UI as in they just were laid off or terminated.

Although overall unemployment number (U-3) isn't the topic for this post often 99er are claimed to change that number. This is also false. U-3 is based on employment not benefits. You can be getting no benefits (terminated for punching your boss, or a 99er, or didn't work enough to qualify for benefits) and are still unemployed for the purposes of U-3 (and U-4, U-5, U-6 too).

[lunatica]

8. But the count is still about those losing jobs, not those getting jobs

What does that say statistically?

The way I see it the unemployment numbers have to start tapering off eventually even in an economy that's nose diving. Simply because there are jobs that continue no matter how the economy fares. Jobs are finite. You can't keep losing them forever.

[Statistical]

9. True however initial claims never go to 0.

Even in a robust healthy growing economy there is some initial claims. Usually around 200K to 250K a week.

People are terminated, company A loses marketshare to company B, thus company A reduces employment and people file initial claims.


I am not saying it is rainbows and unicorns. I am simply saying that in every recession initial claims need to stabilize before you see the large U-3 (existing unemployed) decline. One doesn't happen without the other.

[lunatica]

12. OK. But a stable economy has jobs the unemployed can fill doesn't it?

During normal times people have lots of jobs they can apply for if they don't like the one they have or are fired. In a healthy economy being laid off is not the number one reason for losing jobs, and those people who are fired or quit their jobs never make it into the employment statistics because they don't get unemployment compensation. The numbers right now are about people being laid off which is very alarming. And how many of those who get new jobs are getting similar jobs or better jobs?

I hope this makes sense. It's confusing to me. It seems we're looking at things with one set of rules when in reality the rules are different now. The government is counting the unemployed with a faulty count which doesn't take important facts into account. It's also not counting the loss of income for people when they do find jobs. These factors are very important because they are trending towards a different statistical outcome which will impact the country in ways the government isn't even bothering to measure.

[daa]

24. Truth = claims are revised UP the following week the last year.nt

[TexasObserver]

4. It is good news.

You should post this in the Stock Market Watch thread in LBN.

[Dulcinea]

5. Good to hear.

But what about all those people who are currently unemployed?

[Statistical]

7. If you are fall out of a plane....

Step 1) Figure out how to stop falling
Step 2) Figure out how to get back to the plane.

Until the economy stops bleeding jobs there will be little relief for existing unemployed.

U-3 is a lagging indicator. Initial jobless claims is a leading indicator. U-3 has never (and likely never will) improve before initial claims improve.

[Trey9007]

6. Good news.....

"Hoffman is even more optimistic, with a forecast of 150,000 job gains during the month. He also expects the November and October figures will be revised higher."

I hope he's right...

[Statistical]

10. The stealth unreccers out in force. No comments, no rebutals.

Just this fear that other people might see some good news if the rec count gets too high.

:)

[Mudoria]

11. Good news brings them out in force

[TexasObserver]

15. Some people can't stand hearing good economic news.

That's simply the fact here.

[SidDithers]

16. I was a stealth recc'er this time...

and now I've gone and outed myself :)

Sid

[Statistical]

17. Well care to explain? You know "discuss" on this board of discussion.

[SidDithers]

18. Nope. Thought it was good news, and worthy of a rec...nt

Sid

[Statistical]

23. Oops reading fail on my part. I thought you said unrec. n/t

[jtown1123]

25. Because this isn't really great news. It just means less people are losing jobs

but the millions unemployed for years are still not being hired. We may have permanent 10% unemployment.

[UrbScotty]

26. Yep! (nt)

[supernova]

13. How much is people no longer able to get UI?

There are a lot of people without work who have no benefits left. I'm one.

[Statistical]

14. Has nothing to do with that.

This is initial claims.

Someone making their initial claim for UI since becoming unemployed.
Neither someone continuing benefits or not continuing benefits will affect that.

Also benefits has nothing to do with overall unemployment number either.
One can be unemployed and not get benefits. For example if you hit your boss and got fired you will be unemployed (included in U-3) but you certainly won't get benefits. Same thing with 99er, people who haven't yet filed for benefits, people who didn't work enough to get benefits, people who have never started working (college students).

[Scurrilous]

19. K & R

:thumbsup:

[NickB79]

20. I wonder how long it will last, now that the stimulus package is running down

And the GOP is feeling cocky again and blocking any attempts to keep the recovery going.

[NNN0LHI]

21. Recommended

[taught_me_patience]

22. Excellent news! n/t