Seeking Alpha

Initial Jobless Claims: +78K to 439K vs. 376K consensus, 361K prior (revised). Continuing claims...

Initial Jobless Claims: +78K to 439K vs. 376K consensus, 361K prior (revised). Continuing claims +171K to 3.33M.
Comments (32)
  • bbro
    , contributor
    Comments (9441) | Send Message
     
    look at the history of Katrina....
    15 Nov 2012, 08:31 AM Reply Like
  • emburns
    , contributor
    Comments (218) | Send Message
     
    That's such a cop-out excuse. So from now on, hurricane - fire everybody?
    15 Nov 2012, 08:49 AM Reply Like
  • Angel Martin
    , contributor
    Comments (1298) | Send Message
     
    bbro, did the consensus estimates of this weeks claims include an adjustment for Sandy?

     

    bloomberg had the consensus forecast at 376K with the highest estimate at 390 ?

     

    http://bloom.bg/itq0bI
    15 Nov 2012, 09:12 AM Reply Like
  • bbro
    , contributor
    Comments (9441) | Send Message
     
    I pity the poor economists that were charged with guessing this weeks numbers...some last week had the number at 385 it came in at 355..some this week said 375 it came in at 439...either way it took about 5 to 6 weeks ( I think ) for the Katrina numbers to wash out in 2005...
    15 Nov 2012, 09:18 AM Reply Like
  • Matthew Davis
    , contributor
    Comments (3717) | Send Message
     
    So it was a hurricane, and not the anticipation of Obamacare? I find this excuse as bad as the 7.8% unemployment number, truly insulting our intelligence. Although, 47% of us bought the argument because the country has officially put the blinders on and taken a leap of faith that many of us shake our heads at in disbelief.

     

    Next year, our taxes go up in our paychecks, then, most of us will be reduced to part-time work or outright fired due to health care costs, and you will still be required to pay up, either get insurance on a part time job or pay the man $900, and if you think $900 is gonna stay there for long you are crazy. Once they see no one can afford healthcare, and the $900 won't cover the expenses of the programs, taxes will go up further. In 4 years, it will be such a fiasco, we will need a real clean up, and its a shame that the guy we need won't be there in another 4 years.
    17 Nov 2012, 05:50 AM Reply Like
  • DOGS THAT BARK
    , contributor
    Comments (130) | Send Message
     
    Your comparing the costliest hurricane in U.S. history/catagory 5)... to a catagory 1/tropical storm for most part.

     

    Let me give you hint...what your looking at in the future is under 30 hours/part time jobs.
    15 Nov 2012, 08:51 AM Reply Like
  • OptionManiac
    , contributor
    Comments (3304) | Send Message
     
    Costliest has nothing to do with it. Wide-spread more so. Think NYC population density compared to New Orleans. Think Long Island residents unable to get to work. Think New Jersey with its heavy population density. Gulf coastline can't come close to it.
    15 Nov 2012, 09:04 AM Reply Like
  • wigit5
    , contributor
    Comments (3981) | Send Message
     
    'Not getting to work' isn't the same as 'not having work' OptionManiac. So I don't think those who have jobs but are unable to get to those jobs are included in the jobless numbers....

     

    Could be wrong but it wouldn't make sense the way I see it to include employed people who are essentially just off until power/transportation is restored.
    15 Nov 2012, 09:10 AM Reply Like
  • OptionManiac
    , contributor
    Comments (3304) | Send Message
     
    Businesses destroyed - no work to go to.
    15 Nov 2012, 11:04 AM Reply Like
  • bbro
    , contributor
    Comments (9441) | Send Message
     
    California ( a non Sandy state) showed improvement...
    15 Nov 2012, 08:57 AM Reply Like
  • surfnspy
    , contributor
    Comments (415) | Send Message
     
    Temp holiday help?
    15 Nov 2012, 09:12 AM Reply Like
  • Tricky
    , contributor
    Comments (1583) | Send Message
     
    bbro -- serious question, as I know you study the innards of these reports and are familiar with the processes.

     

    I can readily see how the storm would have an impact on hiring. But it is less readily obvious how it would drive active firings/layoffs, if that's what leads to initial jobless claims.

     

    And I don't dismiss "if the infrastructure was so bad, how did they get to the unemployment office".

     

    Thanks in advance for thoughts and insights.
    15 Nov 2012, 04:41 PM Reply Like
  • OptionManiac
    , contributor
    Comments (3304) | Send Message
     
    Businesses destroyed.
    18 Nov 2012, 05:25 PM Reply Like
  • schatzl
    , contributor
    Comments (391) | Send Message
     
    It's asinine to base economic numbers on a prefect climate. The UK pulls off similar shenanigans. If it snows for 2 days, be sure to claim anything negative on the weather.
    15 Nov 2012, 09:11 AM Reply Like
  • jhooper
    , contributor
    Comments (5481) | Send Message
     
    When the Soviets took over grain production after the revolution, grain production in the first few years, didn't reach the levels it was before the revolution. Guess what they blamed it on? The weather. Funny thing was, it never got back to the production levels it was supposed to reach, as such, they apparently had bad weather for the next 70 years.

     

    Its going to be a long, hard, cold winter.
    15 Nov 2012, 09:25 AM Reply Like
  • kwm3
    , contributor
    Comments (2453) | Send Message
     
    Those revolutions have a way of culling the herd--fewer mouths to feed, less production necessary.
    15 Nov 2012, 12:04 PM Reply Like
  • Bill L.
    , contributor
    Comments (682) | Send Message
     
    This morning's premarket technical update: http://seekingalpha.co...

     

    -Bill L.
    15 Nov 2012, 09:28 AM Reply Like
  • GotLife
    , contributor
    Comments (1268) | Send Message
     
    Next bad report - Paula Broadwell's impact
    15 Nov 2012, 09:29 AM Reply Like
  • surfnspy
    , contributor
    Comments (415) | Send Message
     
    That was funny.
    15 Nov 2012, 09:36 AM Reply Like
  • wigit5
    , contributor
    Comments (3981) | Send Message
     
    I hear she's touching a lot of things lately....
    15 Nov 2012, 10:04 AM Reply Like
  • Roadstar Biker
    , contributor
    Comments (66) | Send Message
     
    Do you people have any idea of the scope of destruction that took place in NJ and parts of NY? NJ's coastal infrastructure was wiped-out, taking with it the businesses and jobs that were located there. Trite partisan blovating merely reveals either a profound ignorance or callous disregard of what these people are experiencing.

     

    Anyone who thinks that much destruction isn't going to impact economic stats has no business commenting on this site. Seeking Alpha is supposed to be a grown-up's only site.
    15 Nov 2012, 11:55 AM Reply Like
  • yourpal
    , contributor
    Comments (18) | Send Message
     
    Seems to me that if they couldn't get to work they would have equal difficulty getting to an open claims office to place a claim. Whataya think?
    15 Nov 2012, 12:55 PM Reply Like
  • Roadstar Biker
    , contributor
    Comments (66) | Send Message
     
    What do I think? I think it would be interesting to see what you would do if your home and business was flooded, the streets clogged with debris and the power company was predicting weeks before you see any electricity. What would you do to make sure you kept your family fed and sheltered?
    15 Nov 2012, 02:42 PM Reply Like
  • OptionManiac
    , contributor
    Comments (3304) | Send Message
     
    FEMA set up claims tents where the people were.
    18 Nov 2012, 05:26 PM Reply Like
  • anonymous#12
    , contributor
    Comments (552) | Send Message
     
    NO recession.

     

    All Econ data pointing to stronger growth ahead.
    15 Nov 2012, 03:48 PM Reply Like
  • WMARKW
    , contributor
    Comments (10275) | Send Message
     
    Well Anon.....at least you are optimistic. IMHO we'll not see more than 1.5% GDP growth for a couple more years (probably 4-6).
    15 Nov 2012, 04:03 PM Reply Like
  • anonymous#12
    , contributor
    Comments (552) | Send Message
     
    Why 4-6 years? Would appreciate your views.
    15 Nov 2012, 04:16 PM Reply Like
  • WMARKW
    , contributor
    Comments (10275) | Send Message
     
    Because the problems we have re: balance sheet recession MAY not be capable of being resolved within that time. I say, MAY because the options we have facing us right now (generally considered to be contractionary by me, eg. reduce spending, increase taxes) will surely not lead to job growth and expansion within at least that time frame. And....depending on the actions taken at the Federal level, MAY take longer to overcome.

     

    I ask myself some of these questions:
    1. What can/will the government do that will help things right now?
    2. Do they have the "ability" to make wise decisions about how to implement growth actions (if they do, why haven't they - thus they do not)
    3. How long will it take the average Joe to recover from the current recession? Can the average Joe.
    4. What will drive employment gains?
    5. What will drive real wage gains?
    6. What systems are in place to provide for improved quality of workforce?
    7. How will the financial markets support economic growth, wage growth and financial recovery?
    8. What will happen to improve the lot of homeowners?
    9. How will the EU affect the US economy?
    10. What positives are there on the horizon? (energy for example)
    11. Is there anyone - anywhere at Federal / State level who is working to get a handle on "spending".
    12. Is there any reason to consider current policy initiatives as supporting economic growth?
    13. Is there any reason to suggest the USA will "reduce" its military footprint (thus defense spending)
    14. What reverses trends of declining workforce participation?
    15. What happens if interest rates rise?
    16. Is there any reason to consider that the American people will work to achieve greater unity or the opposite.
    17. Have I seen the government perform any function with skill, efficiency and cost effectiveness?
    18. What are states doing to set the example to the Federal governent.

     

    Ok that's enough for now. To each of those questions, I get a predominantly negative response (of course, I am talking to myself)
    15 Nov 2012, 04:33 PM Reply Like
  • jhooper
    , contributor
    Comments (5481) | Send Message
     
    It's definitely time to start thinking hard about 16. Bigger and bigger unions are typically more beneficial to a minority that gains power to exploit the super majority. This provides the inenctives to the super majority to keep breaking things up to break that power.
    15 Nov 2012, 10:44 PM Reply Like
  • schatzl
    , contributor
    Comments (391) | Send Message
     
    Absolutely. It is in the nature of the bureaucratic beast to centralise administration. Less accountability, less democratic legitimisation, more power and more funds siphoned off from the majority to feed the beast . This is where Europe is likely heading and I don't like it.
    16 Nov 2012, 03:56 AM Reply Like
  • anonymous#12
    , contributor
    Comments (552) | Send Message
     
    Interesting question #16. No one talks about that and it is a big problem.

     

    Thanks.
    15 Nov 2012, 04:44 PM Reply Like
  • Petrarch
    , contributor
    Comments (671) | Send Message
     
    disregard these data - this is a non event

     

    P
    15 Nov 2012, 10:51 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Tools
Find the right ETFs for your portfolio:
Seeking Alpha's new ETF Hub
ETF Investment Guide:
Table of Contents | One Page Summary
Read about different ETF Asset Classes:
ETF Selector

Next headline on your portfolio:

|