Skip to comments.Drop in Unemployment Could Have Little Impact on Default Numbers: Analysts
Posted on 12/05/2009 5:18:33 AM PST by TigerLikesRooster
Drop in Unemployment Could Have Little Impact on Default Numbers: Analysts
12/04/2009BY: CARRIE BAY
he unemployment rate dropped in November, the U.S. Labor Department reported Friday, as companies shed the fewest number of jobs since the recession kicked in two years ago. Government statistics show that last month, the jobless rate edged down to 10.0 percent, falling from the 26-year-high 10.2 percent hit in October.
Only 11,000 jobs were lost in November, the Labor Department said. Economists had forecast a loss of as much as 130,000, consistent with the average of 135,000 job cuts seen in the prior three months. The employment market still has a long way to go, though, to recover from the damage done since the start of the recession in December 2007, when the jobless rate was 4.9 percent.
The growing consensus within the mortgage industry is that unemployment is now the primary driver pushing delinquency numbers higher, so the upbeat November labor report is likely a hopeful sign that the pace of loan deterioration could subside sooner rather than later. But analysts at Amherst Securities Group say their research tells a different story.
The firm is a holding company for financial firms working with institutional investors of mortgage-related assets, and a study from its head of residential debt, Laurie Goodman, says borrowers who have been hit hard by falling home prices and owe more than their home is worth are more likely to fall behind on their mortgage payments than homeowners who lose their job.
According to Goodman, borrowers who are underwater with combined loan-to-value (LTV) ratios greater than 120 percent pose a higher delinquency risk.
(Excerpt) Read more at dsnews.com ...
The unemployment statistics are obviously broken. Logically, if 10,000 jobs (net, I assume) are lost how can the unemployment percentage drop? 1984 Gov’t math.
Exactly, why anyone trusts any numbers coming from this government in light of how diligently they are investigating climate fraud is beyond me.
Not to mention we have no idea where the TARP money went there is no accounting of it.
Or the money they are dumping into the sinking ships GM and Chrysler.
They are probably manipulating the hell out of everything hoping to hide the economic problems long enough to keep the democrats in power in 2010.
Come January, there will be a triple whami. 1) The seasonal workers will get axed. 2) The retail stores that had a horrible Christmas season will have layoffs of full-time workers + some will simply close their doors. 3) Although they won't be reflected in the unemployment numbers, there will be a fair amount of college graduates (graduating after having to take an extra semester) that will not have a lot of success finding a job.
My favorite aspect of the media’s reporting of this “economic miracle” was their shameless assertion that the really good news was that so many of these new jobs were temp positions that usually lead to permanent positions. ROFLMAO . . . how
dumb do they think we are?
“...since the recession kicked in two years ago.”
This must be the new talking point. I see it in EVERY article I read on this mess. They’ll cover Barry’s arse until the day he’s gone!
Bush’s Fault! *SMIRK*
The top level numbers are still inconsistent mathematically. I realize this has been going on as long as there has been a Dept of Labor, but believe that they need to get their top story straight.
The whole mess needs to be dropped off at Reid and PElosi's front doorsteps.
It is chilling.
I’m sure that was the intention when they introduced new metrics by which recessions were defined . . . so they could retroactively declare the event and in the process indemnify their precious O’ Duce if he got into office.
Another freeper mentioned yesterday (not sure if it is accurate, but it made me take notice) that any businesses that laid off folks before Dec 31 of this year would be on the hook for 92 weeks of unemployment insurance. They said that it resets in Jan, back to the 26 weeks that is the norm. If that is the case, it would seem to me, that it would be prudent for employers to wait to drop the axe until after Christmas. It would be much less expensive in terms of continuing to pay employees for another few weeks to get to the 26 weeks of UI. What say you,freepers?