It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

U.S. jobless claims fall, revisit 1973 level

page: 1
3
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 14 2016 @ 06:52 PM
link   


WASHINGTON, April 14 (Reuters) - - The number of Americans filing for unemployment benefits unexpectedly fell last week, revisiting a level last seen in 1973 as the labor market continues to strengthen despite a sluggish economy.

Initial claims for state unemployment benefits decreased 13,000 to a seasonally adjusted 253,000 for the week ended April 9, the Labor Department said on Thursday. That matched the level for early March, which was the lowest since November 1973.

U.S. jobless claims fall, revisit 1973 level

First of all. Thanks Obama!

So... jobless is lowest for 30++ years... How are you gonna keep crying about the economy. Between this and the high stock market... world economy's growth...

I just don't get where are the complaints are coming from!?



+4 more 
posted on Apr, 14 2016 @ 06:59 PM
link   
The way they count joblessness is by how many people are actively seeking work. So if you say "# it I can't find a job after five years so I quit!" you are no longer counted. The number looks good but is a poor indication of how robust the economy is.



posted on Apr, 14 2016 @ 07:03 PM
link   
a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

No, the way they count is the people who are filing for unemployment help...



posted on Apr, 14 2016 @ 07:05 PM
link   
a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF
That's what I don't like. Unemployed ought to be total amount of people eligible for the workforce regardless if actively seeking.



posted on Apr, 14 2016 @ 07:07 PM
link   
a reply to: reddragon2015

and they keep counting them until they drop from the rolls because they are no longer able to receive the benefits. so after they stop receive those benefits and stop filling out their looking for work paperwork they are no longer counted and the "number of unemployment" drops lol



posted on Apr, 14 2016 @ 07:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tiamat384
a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF
That's what I don't like. Unemployed ought to be total amount of people eligible for the workforce regardless if actively seeking.


Exactly.

For all we know these people have gone gone completely belly-up and have lost their home and access to a telephone. They are no longer able to seek work at that point. They are either selling drugs, sex or standing in the soup line.



posted on Apr, 14 2016 @ 07:11 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA
But then just imagine how horrible the economy would appear? With so many on welfare not even trying to find work(which is why I'm against too large a welfare program). Or people as you said simply unable to say they are looking for work. I mean, they could be looking, but why bother reporting that they're looking through the newspapers?



posted on Apr, 14 2016 @ 07:12 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA

Trump will fix it.



posted on Apr, 14 2016 @ 07:21 PM
link   
a reply to: roaland

It's doesn't matter how they count them as long as it's the same... I don't get ur logic.



posted on Apr, 14 2016 @ 07:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Tiamat384

The economy is also measure by how much people spend as well... lol



posted on Apr, 14 2016 @ 07:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: reddragon2015
a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

No, the way they count is the people who are filing for unemployment help...

Isnt that exactly what the poster posted ? They have abandoned looking for a job through the unemployment office. You do know everyone has to resign up , yes ?

And , these numbers also reflect the amazing amount of foreign workers here on H1Bs. The worst part ? The US worker has been layed off and has to train these people. Then , after the numbers of these are counted and they are trained , they return back to their home country.

Yes , thanks Obama for the screwed up country this one has became under your watch.



posted on Apr, 14 2016 @ 07:22 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA

some people can work but doesn't need too, so why would you count those as jobless? Jobless is people who want jobs and is seeking but haven't found one.



posted on Apr, 14 2016 @ 07:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: reddragon2015

First of all. Thanks Obama!

So... jobless is lowest for 30++ years... How are you gonna keep crying about the economy. Between this and the high stock market... world economy's growth...

I just don't get where are the complaints are coming from!?


Don't be so naive. That's disgusting.

Unemployment claims are those people who are filing for unemployment benefits. Unemployment benefits run for X number of weeks, then they run out and if you are not employed, you no longer count. In order to qualify for unemployment benefits a person must be "able, available, and looking for work." That's in the law. If you are unemployed and not doing that, you are not counted as being "in the labor force." In effect, the statistic counts those who have recently lost their jobs.

But there are many issues with the numbers. For example, underemployed workers. If you have a factory job that pays $30.00 an hour, lose it due to offshore outsourcing, then in desperation land a job at a retail establishment for the minimum wage, you are "employed." If you have a Master's Degree in English and work at McDonald's part time, you are "employed."

The government uses several statistics that are far different than just people who have filed for unemployment. One, for example, is called "Discouraged workers." Guess what that means? People who have given up entirely.

U-1 = Persons unemployed 15 weeks or longer, as a percent of the civilian labor force

U-2 = Job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs, as a percent of the civilian labor force

U-3 = Total unemployed, as a percent of the civilian labor force (official unemployment rate)

U-4 = Total unemployed plus discouraged workers, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus discouraged workers

U-5 = Total unemployed, plus discouraged workers, plus all other persons marginally attached to the labor force, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force

U-6 Total unemployed, plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force

Now, when the government reports "unemployment numbers," which U-Number do you think they are reporting? They are reporting UI claims: Those claiming benefits under insured employment. This is the LOWEST unemployment number there is, and it simply does NOT count the total unemployed in the nation, which is AT LEAST four times that number.

But they report it and idiots say, "Thanks, Obama!"

You couldn't get more clueless than that.

Edit to add: I once worked for the Unemployment Compensation Division for my state. I've been to school on this stuff.









edit on 4/14/2016 by schuyler because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 14 2016 @ 07:28 PM
link   
a reply to: reddragon2015

Here you go. Visit this site and it will explain to you the hokey math the Govt. uses to come up with their "unemployment numbers" It's a farce.

ShadowStats




posted on Apr, 14 2016 @ 07:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: TEOTWAWKIAIFF
The way they count joblessness is by how many people are actively seeking work. So if you say "# it I can't find a job after five years so I quit!" you are no longer counted. The number looks good but is a poor indication of how robust the economy is.


No it's the way they do is by surveying 60,000 households.

They have no idea what their talking about.

However the labor force participation rate has actually been increasing be last few months and Obama has nothing to do with it.

www.bls.gov...


There are about 60,000 eligible households in the sample for this survey. This translates into approximately 110,000 individuals each month, a large sample compared to public opinion surveys, which usually cover fewer than 2,000 people. The CPS sample is selected so as to be representative of the entire population of the United States. In order to select the sample, all of the counties and independent cities in the country first are grouped into approximately 2,000 geographic areas (sampling units). The Census Bureau then designs and selects a sample of about 800 of these geographic areas to represent each state and the District of Columbia. The sample is a state-based design and reflects urban and rural areas, different types of industrial and farming areas, and the major geographic divisions of each state.

edit on 4/14/2016 by onequestion because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 14 2016 @ 07:30 PM
link   
a reply to: reddragon2015
So the higher unemployment wouldn't make it appear horrible? Go take that lol



posted on Apr, 14 2016 @ 07:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: reddragon2015
a reply to: MALBOSIA

some people can work but doesn't need too, so why would you count those as jobless? Jobless is people who want jobs and is seeking but haven't found one.


Can you explain that statement for humble me ? Explain the concept of someone that has lost their job , yet doesnt need to work. I cant wrap my mind around that idea.



posted on Apr, 14 2016 @ 07:33 PM
link   
a reply to: watchitburn

The government tells us how the honkey math they use right on he BLS website.



posted on Apr, 14 2016 @ 07:34 PM
link   
a reply to: reddragon2015


U.S. jobless claims fall, revisit 1973 level


Filing a jobless claim to get unemployment is only good for one year. After that the claim ends, so the number of claims fall.

So falling claims as a measure of unemployment isn't as accurate picture of how many people are actually out of work.

What is more telling is the number of people that have filed and still aren't employed after a year. That number is the highest ever.

Thats not a complaint, thats a fact.

Yah, its RT. You thought US gubment tells US the truth?



posted on Apr, 14 2016 @ 07:36 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

That's not how they calculate the unemployement number.

Jobless claims are totally different however.
edit on 4/14/2016 by onequestion because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
3
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join