Seeking Alpha

Initial Jobless Claims: -25K to 370K vs. 380K consensus, 395K prior (revised). Continuing claims...

Initial Jobless Claims: -25K to 370K vs. 380K consensus, 395K prior (revised). Continuing claims -100K to 3.20M.
Comments (15)
  • bbro
    , contributor
    Comments (9322) | Send Message
     
    New Jersey,New York and Pennsylvania were 15.7% of jobless claims on October 21st....30.4% on November 11th..and 25.5% on November 18th...20.4% on November 25th
    6 Dec 2012, 08:37 AM Reply Like
  • mrdirt
    , contributor
    Comments (416) | Send Message
     
    The decrease was all in NJ. -24k but then again that was a short
    week due to Thanksgiving.
    6 Dec 2012, 08:42 AM Reply Like
  • GaltMachine
    , contributor
    Comments (1135) | Send Message
     
    bbro,

     

    Do the jobs that were "lost" show up anywhere as rehires?

     

    I don't quite understand why the storm would result in firings/permanent layoffs unless the employing business completely disappears. It's very expensive in time, effort, training, and cost to hire and fire employees for a temporary situation. Maybe I am missing something about how this system works.

     

    Thanks.
    6 Dec 2012, 08:43 AM Reply Like
  • Interesting Times
    , contributor
    Comments (10165) | Send Message
     
    GALT

     

    You not missing anything. I am from NY and i know a lot of people from Staten Island still went to work! SANDY is just one big excuse to play off of..Sure some local stores are gone, but give me a break.

     

    Most people were not laid off, and everything from shopping to employment is being blamed on Sandy.

     

    Tired of this excuse..Did Sandy only cause 180k new jobs in November as well? How about my METS? Is it Sandys fault?
    6 Dec 2012, 09:37 AM Reply Like
  • bbro
    , contributor
    Comments (9322) | Send Message
     
    Remember these are initial jobless claims...you need to follow the
    continuing claims for these individual states to see if these job losses
    stay permanent ( not a perfect way but one method)
    6 Dec 2012, 09:41 AM Reply Like
  • jwbrewer
    , contributor
    Comments (317) | Send Message
     
    NSA vs SA - interesting divergence.
    6 Dec 2012, 08:57 AM Reply Like
  • bbro
    , contributor
    Comments (9322) | Send Message
     
    Seasonal factor this week is 1.347...Seasonal factors for rest of year...
    12/01/2012 134.7
    12/08/2012 124.9
    12/15/2012 110.9
    12/22/2012 125.9
    12/29/2012 133.4
    6 Dec 2012, 09:39 AM Reply Like
  • GaltMachine
    , contributor
    Comments (1135) | Send Message
     
    bbro,

     

    You follow Gallup's unemployment data so this was interesting and surprising:

     

    http://bit.ly/TUk9C5
    "WASHINGTON, D.C. -- U.S. unemployment, as measured by Gallup without seasonal adjustment, was 7.8% for the month of November, up significantly from 7.0% for October. Gallup's seasonally adjusted unemployment rate is 8.3%, nearly a one-point increase over October's rate."

     

    That's a pretty staggering rise on a historical basis for this report at this time of year. Maybe they are oversampling storm areas?
    6 Dec 2012, 09:42 AM Reply Like
  • bbro
    , contributor
    Comments (9322) | Send Message
     
    I do follow this statistic every day but I look at the change year over year....lots of noise in the month to month change...their methodology is different from the BLS but the statistics have merit ( I think) looking at year over year...
    6 Dec 2012, 09:59 AM Reply Like
  • Lakeaffect
    , contributor
    Comments (973) | Send Message
     
    Take the Gallup numbers with a grain of salt. It is not common knowledge that they changed the sample for the President's job approval one month prior to the election. It resulted in a two point bump in the rating, from under 50% to over 50%. The change, while disclosed on Gallup's website, was buried in the downstream media reports. The change was not retro-actively applied to the prior approval ratings, as, per Gallup, there was no way to accurately portray the impact on the historical numbers. I'll not speculate on the "Why" behind such a change in the sampling, at that particular time.

     

    Reference: http://bit.ly/REmpSi
    6 Dec 2012, 10:12 AM Reply Like
  • bbro
    , contributor
    Comments (9322) | Send Message
     
    Agreed the political sampling was terrible especially when they switched to their likely voter model...I don't know if the whole service should be thrown out based on that error.
    6 Dec 2012, 11:27 AM Reply Like
  • Lakeaffect
    , contributor
    Comments (973) | Send Message
     
    given their track record, what's to say that the Gallup unemployment rate in October was not supressed, or pressed downward?

     

    in addition to seasonal adjustments, must we now develop a "pandering adjustment" for the numbers?
    6 Dec 2012, 04:42 PM Reply Like
  • Interesting Times
    , contributor
    Comments (10165) | Send Message
     
    How about our whole government? Do you think these are the only numbers they are fooling around with?

     

    Time for a huge change, and time to prepare for a huge market correction....Kicking the can down the road will one day disappear.

     

    Your worst fear should be that Asia crashes and closes up, and our markets either open with no bids or we have a holiday !!!
    6 Dec 2012, 11:30 AM Reply Like
  • Petrarch
    , contributor
    Comments (634) | Send Message
     
    numbers are good and right in line - eexpect further decline next week
    6 Dec 2012, 12:18 PM Reply Like
  • Lakeaffect
    , contributor
    Comments (973) | Send Message
     
    or tomorrow.
    6 Dec 2012, 04:43 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:

|