« | »

Prior Week’s Jobless Claims Were Up By 9K

From an unquestioning Reuters:

Jobless claims fall to 4-year low in latest week

March 29, 2012

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – New claims for unemployment benefits fell to a fresh four-year low last week, according to a government report that showed ongoing healing in the labor market.

Initial claims for state unemployment benefits fell 5,000 to a seasonally adjusted 359,000, the lowest level since April 2008, the Labor Department said on Thursday.

Last week the Department of Labor and our one party media reported that new jobless claims were down by 5,000. In fact, last week’s AP’s headline and lead from Charles Rugaber was: "US jobless aid requests hit 4-year low — The number of people seeking unemployment aid in the U.S. fell to a four-year low last week, bolstering the view that the job market is strengthening."

In reality, none of that was true. The number of new claims has been revised up, and by a whopping 16,000. Which means that in reality jobless claims actually went up the prior week by 9,000 claims.

But neither the AP nor Reuters nor any of the other media outlets will print a retraction of their headlines about jobless claims going down.

The report included revisions for claims data from 2007 based on updated seasonal adjustment calculations. New seasonal adjustment factors were also introduced for 2012.

Why do these claims numbers have to be ‘seasonally adjusted’ in the first place?’ This is not like the monthly unemployment rate, which is based on a poll. This is an actual hard number. The number of claims is what it is. The ‘seasons’ should have no bearing on it at all.

In fact, this week’s ‘not seasonally’ adjusted new claims number went up. (As it almost always does.) According to the Department Of Labor, the previous week’s unadjusted number of claims totaled 315,636. This week’s unadjusted claims totaled 319,349. So the unadjusted number of new claims went up by 3,713.

So we might have just answered our own question as to why they ‘seasonally adjust’ these numbers.

The prior week’s figure was revised up to 364,000 from the previously reported 348,000. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast a claims reading of 350,000 for last week

A Labor Department official said there was nothing unusual in the state-level data and only two states – Alaska and Hawaii – had been estimated

So how come the Department Of Labor has to revise its numbers by so much, week after week? These jobless claims are processed by computers. Why is it so hard to count them accurately, and right away? And how come the errors always favor the Obama administration?

Again, we might have just answered our own question.

Meanwhile, the Associated Press is reporting:

US weekly unemployment aid applications decline

CHRISTOPHER S. RUGABER
March 29, 2012

WASHINGTON (AP) — The number of people seeking U.S. unemployment benefits dropped last week, the latest evidence that the job market is strengthening.

The Labor Department says weekly unemployment benefit applications fell 5,000 to a seasonally adjusted 359,000. That’s the smallest number of applicants since April 2008

Note that the AP does not even bother to mention the revision of the prior week’s number by a whopping 16,000 claims.

The department also made its annual revisions to the past five years of unemployment benefit data. The revisions significantly increased the number of unemployment benefit applicants in recent months. But the downward trend remains intact

Reuters mentioned this revision, but did not bother to report that they were "significantly increased the number of unemployment benefit applicants in recent months." Apparently, they didn’t think that was news.

Luckily, the AP assures us that "the downward trend remains intact."

It’s like magic.

This article was posted by Steve on Thursday, March 29th, 2012. Comments are currently closed.

2 Responses to “Prior Week’s Jobless Claims Were Up By 9K”

  1. Rusty Shackleford says:

    This has become tiresome. However, it certainly establishes very clearly, among many other things, that the media is off-the-rails in so many ways. I stopped paying any attention to MSM years ago and coming here, along with other blogs and sources informs me to my satisfaction.

    Steve’s tireless efforts exposing left-wing bias is critical. I mean, I knew it was bad, but I had no idea how bad until I came here, to Newsbusters and other sites. I haven’t watched a mainstream TV news broadcast in some years. I refuse. When they changed the style of reporting where every single item was a “news piece” or some dramatic narrative where new TV reporters would introduce the story, then cut to the cobbled together editorial bit, then back to themselves, complete with all the fake “gravity” of it all…it just turned me off. I guess that’s what gum-chewers tend to like. “Tell me a stawwy” like a little kid. I just want the facts.

    But the printed news media went in the same direction, always skewing the story to their desired effect to “stir the emotions” but they don’t count on people like me whose emotions are stirred alright. Stirred in a way that puts me off. I don’t buy newspapers or magazines anymore. Wonder if they’ve figured out yet why their circulation is down….

    Why would I voluntarily buy something as if to say, “Please, lie to me..I want to be completely filled with emotional garbage for the whole day”? However, with a certain segment of the population, this works out for them very well.

  2. Astravogel says:

    I am reminded of the 19th Century British officers
    who were cashiered for “fiddling the Company accounts.”
    Sadly, those days are long gone.


« Front Page | To Top
« | »