For the third consecutive week, initial unemployment claims have inched lower, reinforcing the larger impression that the job market continues to steadily improve. The new figures from the Department of Labor point to the second lowest level for new claims since July, though Superstorm Sandy may have skewed the results.
Applications for U.S. unemployment benefits dropped by 8,000 to a seasonally adjusted 355,000 in the week ended Nov. 3, a number that was distorted by hurricane Sandy. Initial claims from two weeks ago were unrevised at 363,000, based on more complete data collected at the state level, the Labor Department said Thursday. Economists surveyed by MarketWatch expected claims to decline to 365,000, but they warned that the storm could make the data unreliable for a few weeks.
To reiterate the point I make every Thursday morning, it's worth remembering that week-to-week results can vary widely, and it's best not to read too much significance into any one report.
In terms of metrics, when jobless claims fall below the 400,000 threshold, it's considered evidence of an improving jobs landscape, and when the number drops below 370,000, it suggests jobs are being created rather quickly. We've been below the 370,000 threshold four of the last six weeks, and nine of the last 15 weeks.
And with that, here's the chart showing weekly, initial unemployment claims going back to the beginning of 2007. (Remember, unlike the monthly jobs chart, a lower number is good news.) For context, I've added an arrow to show the point at which President Obama's Recovery Act began spending money.
Leave a Comment:
This is fascinating. 171,000 new jobs in October and 355,000 new unemployment claims. That makes a net loss of 184,000 jobs.
And somehow you're proud of this?
Morning Shooter
The rise in unemployment claims means that people are returning to the labor force, like it or not things are improving slowly I'll grant but steadily and undeniably.
On a side note I owe you an apology. You were right and I was wrong about the numbers in the Bloomberg article (I was reading something else at the time and got muddled, not an excuse just an explanation), but I still stand by the philosophical point I was making, and in the context of the current discussion I think it's particularly relevant.
Shooter, I have to hand it to you, you certainly are a stubborn troll.
I guess we're gonna have to get used to you whining and complaining for quite some time, as your party and your philosophy have been total failures, and the American people aren't buying republican snake oil any longer, as evidenced by the overwhelming democratic victories on Tuesday.
Hosw does it feel to be on the wrong side of history?
Citizen
Play nice. Shooter performs an important function around here. He keeps us from getting to complacent in our thinking and reminds us why what we believe is important. Dissent is important to democracy. Besides as opposition goes he at least trys to be cogent and live in closer proximity to reality than other truly genuine trolls I can think of.
It ain't over 'til it's over.
Every public officeholder swears an oath of office. Ask yourself, 'What's the point of ANY additional pledge?' Follow the money.
Any officeholder who genuinely believes in representative government should have already publicly denounced the Teaparty/Taliban's efforts to disenfranchise Americans.
If you stood in line to vote, write your STATE legislators an invitation to the 21st century. Washington state voters had their ballots weeks before election day.
The Teaparty/Taliban are still afraid of women making decisions. (John 8:3-11)
Trickle down not only doesn't spur economic growth, it stifles it. It’s what led to the American and French revolutions.
"Corporations are people" = "He with the most gold rules"
Oh, Sh**ter, you are a caution. The 171,000 jobs is the NET total.
But then you probably knew that, being more evil than ignorant.
Things are going to start getting much better here in a couple of months and significantly better in the spring, and for the worst of reasons: Sandy
As soon as reconstruction begins in earnest there is going to be spikes in demand for all kinds of building materials, cars, appliances, you name it. That is going to affect manufacturing jobs, retail and construction jobs, pretty much every sector of the economy to some degree.
true.
for your edification...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window
"Sandy Money" will be a one time event- much like the Census employment figures.
For sustained growth we need long term investment. Calling President Eisenhower. . .
(Here's a question for the GOP: If you could borrow a trillion dollars at ZERO (okay, .06%) Interest, and embark on a ten year "project" that would create 20 million jobs, would you do it? 20 million jobs at $50 K/year= a Gazillion tax dollars.
I am not making a case that sandy was a good thing and would personaly much rather had it not be this way at all. I am mearly stating a simple reality.
In this case to go with shooters parable and continue the metaphore. This is not an issue of a mere six francs and one window. In this case as shooter reasonably pointed out the jobs report while improving over time is still lackluster. There are far to many glaziers, carpenters, masons and other trades still unemployed. This situation will definately affect that and for a long time to come.
The problem with blindly running to the Parable of the Broken Window is that sometimes forcing money to be spent is beneficial. For the parable itself, if those six francs would otherwise sit in a box under a bed for the next half century then they aren't doing anyone any good.
Leave it to Shooter to link to a wiki article about a 19th century economist... how fitting.
That's so.... republican of you.
No doubt the BLS is releasing spurious numbers just to make Mitt Romney feel bad.
When I was in third grade and first read about The Great Depression and all of the government programs and public works programs that followed; and the political fallout that lead to the 22nd amendment I was struck by how irrational party politics is and how damaging it can be to the democratic process. Only FDR could have saved America and it took 4 terms to do it. The American people wanted him as President and the chose him. I have never since learning of it felt that the 22nd amendment was a constitutionally legal action. The American people a free to choose who they want as President except who they really want as President. We would have had at least a third term of Reagan, and even if he did get the occasional happy ending we might still have Clinton and not be in the mess we're currently in. I don't think 4 more years will do the job. Maybe if the mid-term elections go the Democrats way after 2 more years of pure obstruction that has been promised in a way that those too invested in the rhetoric to actually hear the subtext can believe was an attempt at reaching across the isle. Since we the people will be not be allowed to choose who I'm fairly certain we would want in 4 years, the Democrats need to pick a successor now so they can pave the way for continued recovery. I expect to see the repaving of America and public works repairing America's crumbling bridges. Because if we do bring in the manufacturing jobs we anticipate, we'll need to move the products they make. I doubt that once they get to see the reality of Obamacare (I use the term only because the President has embraced it), and the horror story lies the right has spread fail to come to pass, we will have it in some form for the foreseeable future. I guess my point is; if you see obstruction continue in the next 2 years, get out and motive the electorate to oust any GOP Congressman or shore up Democratic incumbents in your state. I was a Republican in the 80's, I shifted to Independent in the 90's and GW coupled with the writing on the wall in 2002 as the rhetoric of GOP talk radio became more intolerant and pseudo-Fascist, I became a registered Democrat. I would like to live to see 4 parties in America. Or maybe just 3 where moderates from both sides tell the extremists to go play with themselves in the corner and let reason reign.
The 22nd Amendment is often referred to as the Republican Party's revenge on FDR. The best part? It was passed and went into effect shortly before the election of Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1952.
Had it not been for the 22nd Amendment, and had he been willing, Gen. Eisenhower could have run in 1960 and would probably have won.
That's the GOP for you - fighting yesterday's battles and losing today's...