« | »

Last Week’s Jobless #s Revised Up Again

From an unquestioning Associated Press:

Unemployment claims drop sharply to 434K

Fewer people apply for unemployment benefits; claims reach second-lowest level for year

Christopher S. Rugaber, AP Economics Writer, On Thursday October 28, 2010

WASHINGTON (AP) — Fewer people applied for unemployment benefits last week, the second drop in a row and a hopeful sign the job market could be improving.

The Labor Department said Thursday that initial claims for jobless benefits dropped by 21,000 to a seasonally adjusted 434,000 in the week that ended Oct. 23.

It was the second-lowest number for claims this year. The only time it was lower was during the July 10 week, and that week was affected by the Independence Day holiday when state unemployment offices were closed…

(By the way, the AP’s alternative headline for this article is: "Unemployment Claims Drop Unexpectedly."

And we have this from an equally amazed Reuters:

Jobless claims drop to three-month low

WASHINGTON | Thu Oct 28, 2010

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – New claims for unemployment benefits fell last week to a three-month low, hinting at some improvement in the listless labor market.

Initial claims for state unemployment benefits dropped 21,000 to a seasonally adjusted 434,000, the lowest since the week ended July 10, the Labor Department said on Thursday. That was the second straight decline in claims.

Analysts polled by Reuters had forecast claims edging up to 453,000 from the previously reported 452,000. The government revised the prior week’s figure up to 455,000

To its credit, Reuters actually reported that once again the government has revised last week numbers upward. The AP did not bother to mention that fact, even though Department Of Labor’s own press release mentions the word "revised" numerous times.

Indeed, the Department Of Labor’s press release presents a number of curious things:

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE WEEKLY CLAIMS REPORT

October 28, 2010

In the week ending Oct. 23, the advance figure for seasonally adjusted initial claims was 434,000, a decrease of 21,000 from the previous week’s revised figure of 455,000.

Last week we were told the figure was 452,000. So it has been revised upward by 3,000 new claims.

The 4-week moving average was 453,250, a decrease of 5,500 from the previous week’s revised average of 458,750

Which was also revised upward. (Under Mr. Obama, the revisions have always been upward.) But here is where it gets especially curious:

The advance number of actual initial claims under state programs, unadjusted, totaled 405,639 in the week ending Oct. 23, an increase of 11,678 from the previous week

According to the Labor Department’s own press release, last week’s number was 391,737. So there would seem to have been 13,902 new claims.

The advance unadjusted number for persons claiming UI benefits in state programs totaled 3,742,003, an increase of 25,405 from the preceding week

Again, the Labor Department press release said that "the advance unadjusted number for persons claiming UI benefits in state programs totaled 3,686,287." Which by our math would mean there there was an increase of 55,716 this week. Which is more than twice what they are reporting.

But those discrepancies aside, how is it possible for the number of new state claims to go up from last week, and yet we are told that the number of new jobless claims has gone down?

How does any "adjustment" change that?

This article was posted by Steve on Thursday, October 28th, 2010. Comments are currently closed.

6 Responses to “Last Week’s Jobless #s Revised Up Again”

  1. oldpuppydixie says:

    You obviously know nothing of Haavahd accounting practices. The business school adheres to the “shill for the dems, attack the republicans” method, popularized by Miss Fwank and Chrissy Dodd.

  2. Petronius says:

    Details, schmeetails.

    Who cares about numbers?

    Who cares about jobs, unemployment, dollars, foreclosures, the economy, national bankruptcy, and all that other stuff?

    We need to get back to the issues.

    To things like “witch,” “whore,” “Aqua Buddha,” “punish our enemies,” “bitch,” “burn in hell,” “if they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” “shove it” and other Democratic talking points.

    • Rusty Shackleford says:

      You’re distracting me. Excuse me while I go downtown to get more of my free money. (I’m a victim, you know)

  3. proreason says:

    Is a pattern developing here?

    As a climate scientist, I need at least 2 or 3 data points to predict more than 3 billion years into the future.

  4. arb says:

    They should simply use a new word – upwardspectedly.


« Front Page | To Top
« | »