What happened to all of the doom and gloom economic threads?

[RobDownSouth]

Wal Mart hires 50,000, wow all those high paying jobs.

Long term unemployed doofuses (doofi?) such as yourself and your Vetteman really can't afford to look down your nose at such jobs.

You two cannot use your "bad economy" excuse any longer to explain your chronic unemployment.

 

[koalabear]

Long term unemployed doofuses (doofi?) such as yourself and your Vetteman really can't afford to look down your nose at such jobs.

You two cannot use your "bad economy" excuse any longer to explain your chronic unemployment.

Who said they were bad jobs, besides you idiots in the collective of stupid.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Who said they were bad jobs, besides you idiots in the collective of stupid.

Pay attention. I didn't call them "bad jobs".

 

[Busybody]

"The methods to count these numbers are invalid"

This is just getting stupid. After expectations of a rebound in initial claims from 367K last week (naturally revised higher to 369K), to 370K (with the lowest of all sellside expectations at 355K), the past week mysteriously, yet so very unsurprisingly in the aftermath of the fudged BLS unemployment number, saw claims tumble to a number that is so ridiculous not even CNBC's Steve Liesman bothered defending it, or 339K. Ironically, not even the Labor Department is defending it: it said that "one large state didn't report some quarterly figures." Great, but what was reported was a headline grabbing number that is just stunning for reelection purposes. This was the lowest number since 2008. The only point to have this print? For 2-3 bulletin talking points at the Vice Presidential debate tonight. Everything else is now noise. It is also sad that the US "economy" has devolved to such trivial data fudging on a week by week basis, which makes even the Chinese Department of Truth appear amateurish by comparison. Needless to say, Not Seasonally Adjusted initial claims jumped by 26K to 327K in the past week but who's counting. Finally, what is the reason for ongoing QEternity if the employment situation is now back to normal. Finally, in completely ignored news, because who needs global trade when you have toner cartridge, and generally ink, the US trade deficit in August rose by 4.1% to $44.2 billion, on expectations of a deterioration to $44.0 billion. Then again nobody talks about the US trade deficit during presidential debates so all good here.

 

[Busybody]

It's not a new tactic..

no, its not

we heard that from 2001-2008

 

[koalabear]

Pay attention. I didn't call them "bad jobs".

You shouldn't, pig snout, since you have no job and live off the government.

 

[Busybody]

Pig Snout!

Insulting pigs.....WHY?

 

[mercury14]

Pay attention. I didn't call them "bad jobs".

Koala did.

 

[RobDownSouth]

You shouldn't, pig snout, since you have no job and live off the government.

I've got a good job and don't live off the government.

You've got me confused with your Vetteman again.

 

[mercury14]

I've got a good job and don't live off the government.

You've got me confused with your Vetteman again.

Where is Vette today?

 

[phrodeau]

Where is Vette today?

He's on the unemployment thread.

 

[unregistered]

 

[Busybody]

Finishing up on the sale of my classic Vette.

I did hear a blurb on the TV about how California failed to report 15 to 25 thousand jobless filings. A Democrat state attempting to help the Democrat get re-elected, no doubt.

I posted that

From above..... Ironically, not even the Labor Department is defending it: it said that "one large state didn't report some quarterly figures." Great, but what was reported was a headline grabbing number that is just stunning for reelection purposes.


Utter BULL SHIT

 

[unregistered]

 

[mercury14]

Finishing up on the sale of my classic Vette.

I did hear a blurb on the TV about how California failed to report 15 to 25 thousand jobless filings. A Democrat state attempting to help the Democrat get re-elected, no doubt.

Well here's the report: http://www.dol.gov/opa/media/press/eta/ui/eta20122035.htm#.UHcdnVEw-So

It says California had an increase of +2,069 claims. Not sure how anyone is suggesting that Cali didn't report.

 

[Adre]

Merc, if you keep posting facts how is Vette going to get by with his hearsay? "I heard a blurb..."

 

[mercury14]

I dunno, Vette. What am I misreading here? There's no note in the LD report that says that a state failed to report and if one didn't report I don't see how we can say it's California since California's jobless claims are right there for us.

 

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]

 

[Busybody]

Did you not read Turner's post?

yes, he does

he just PRETENDS that he doesnt see shit that doesnt make his shit smell rosy

you know, Like Obama's website with his plan, fer instance

 

[mercury14]

Traders on the floor of the NYSE believe the numbers are as I stated them. Just now saw an interview on FOX Business. The numbers will no doubt be adjusted upwards in days to come when the extent of California's numbers are known. Let's revisit the subject then.

So did Cali report or not? Cali is in the report so I'm thinking they reported. Maybe I'm reading something wrong though since I'm not accustomed to reading these things.

 

[Busybody]

yes, he does

he just PRETENDS that he doesnt see shit that doesnt make his shit smell rosy

you know, Like Obama's website with his plan, fer instance

Tee Hee

 

[mercury14]

Ok here we go. It looks like all states reported their weekly numbers but one did not report their quarterly re-filings. These aren't new claims but unemployed folks have to re-file continuation claims to keep their benefits and those get counted as entirely new claims - even if the person just made their initial claim a few days prior, it counts as a second new claim. But then the Labor Dept adjusts its numbers for this phenomenon.

That state will just report late and have those numbers tacked onto next week's figures, making next week look like new jobless claims spiked.

Why Jobless Claims May Not Be as Good as Market Thinks
CNBCBy Kelly Evans | CNBC – 3 hours ago

For the second time in a week, a government unemployment report is sowing confusion-and may not be as positive as the markets think.

First it was last Friday's August payrolls report, which showed an unexpectedly large drop in the unemployment rate, that spurred confusion (and conspiracy theories). Now, a sharp drop in the pace of new jobless claims has also left people scratching their heads.

The Labor Department on Thursday said the number of people filing jobless claims last week dropped by a seasonally adjusted 30,000-a pretty sharp decline, and one that left the total number of filings at a four-year low of 339,000.

Financial markets immediately rallied on the news.

(More From CNBC: Stocks Rise After Jobless Claims Hit 4-Year Low)

While the government didn't note any unusual factors in the release itself, a Labor Department official did tell news agencies covering the release about a quirk which partly accounted for the larger-than-expected drop.

As Dow Jones reported: "A Labor Department economist said one large state didn't report additional quarterly figures as expected, accounting for a substantial part of the decrease."

The wording of that statement, along with the accompanying headlines, left the impression that one major state didn't turn in its figures.

Here's what actually happened. The state did report weekly jobless claims but did not process and report its quarterly claims number (when many people have to reapply for benefits for technical reasons as opposed to being newly laid off). As a result, there wasn't the expected spike in claims that normally happens at the start of the quarter.

It is unclear why that happened or how unusual that is. What is clear is that the expected spike in claims around the start of each quarter was smaller this time than usual. Coupled with the seasonal adjustment (that expected a bigger increase), that pushed down the headline figure.

(More From CNBC: The 12 Most Underrated US Jobs in 2012)

In other words, the drop of 30,000 last week had more to do with the lack of expected re-filings at the start of the fourth quarter than with any particular improvement in labor market conditions.

That also means that the decline which usually follows the spike won't be as pronounced this time around, so the headline tally of jobless claims is likely to rebound next week.

All told, these two weeks' worth of jobless claims will end up being more noise than signal. That may frustrate those who follow the series closely for clues into the health of the U.S. labor market. Coupled with last week's payrolls report, it is also likely to fuel perception that labor market figures in general can't be trusted.

The Labor Department appears to have had little choice in this matter, however; it couldn't estimate what the one large state would or should have reported. Still, it may have been able to avoid more confusion had it more clearly articulated that in its weekly press release.

And now, there is one state's labor department with plenty of explaining to do.

 

[RobDownSouth]

I dunno, Vette. What am I misreading here? There's no note in the LD report that says that a state failed to report and if one didn't report I don't see how we can say it's California since California's jobless claims are right there for us.

He's getting his talking points from a single Fox Business speculative article.

"Only California" can have a material impact on unemployment numbers, therefore True Believers like my Vettebitch accept this as an article of faith.

The backstory is that the US Labor Department told California to get its act together on seasonal hiring, because CA was responsible for an inordinate amount of readjustments in later weeks.

True Believers like my Vettebitch see this as some sort of dark conspiracy, not to mention BLACK HELICOPTERS!

 

[unregistered]