Skip to comments.It's Thursday... Jobless Numbers Revised Up
Posted on 05/17/2012 1:28:20 PM PDT by Kaslin
RUSH: You remember last week -- you may not, but I do. And I'm here to tell you and to remind you. Last week there were headlines trumpeting that jobless claims were down 1,000 and the unemployment rate fell from 8.2 to 8.1%. They were honest and said it's not because new jobs are being created; it's because people are leaving the workforce and there's a smaller universe of people working and jobs available against which to compare the unemployed and get your percentage. Jobless claims down 1,000. Big news. The trend continues. But like always, it turns out to have been untrue. The fact of the matter is those claims had to be revised upward.
"New US claims for unemployment benefits were unchanged last week, according to government data on Thursday that will do little to ease concerns about a recent slowdown in jobs growth. Initial claims for state unemployment benefits held steady at a seasonally adjusted 370,000, the Labor Department said. The prior week's figure was revised up to 370,000 from the previously reported 367,000." So there was not a 1,000 claim decrease. There was a 3,000 increase in unemployment claims. Jobless claims did not fall by a thousand last week as originally reported. They were up. And today's number next Thursday will be revised up again. That's how you know it's Thursday. The jobless claims are always up.
Last week's AP headline: "US applications for unemployment aid dipped to 367,000." Reuters: "Jobless claims fall, trade gap widens." So essentially we had a net increase of 2,000 claims for unemployment. They said we were down a thousand; they had to revise it up three, so we had a net increase of 2,000 new claims for unemployment, new people signing up for unemployment, 2,000 new people. From one week to the next, a lie, totally exposed. So there was no good news last week. And remember how everybody reacted to it last week. It went both ways. Those who wanted to be happy that the number went from 8.2 to 8.1 were, but then cold water was thrown on that. It had to be reported that the number went down because there are fewer people in the labor force, not because any jobs were being created.
The AP story today: "US unemployment aid applications stay at 370,000." No, no, no. No, AP is lying. Last week's AP report had 'em at 367,000. For AP to be honest with their original reporting, this headline would say: "US unemployment aid applications increase by 2,000." "The number of people seeking unemployment benefits unchanged last week, suggesting steady gains in the job market." It suggests no such thing. That's an out-and-out lie. The number of people seeking unemployment benefits was unchanged last week, suggesting steady gains in the job market? Steady gains? The applications for unemployment insurance went up last week, not down. And it wasn't just last week. The numbers have been revised up 17 weeks in a row. They had been revised up 62 out of the last 63 weeks. That's how you know it's Thursday. Unemployment claims will be revised upwards.
I remember making this exact same argument about three months ago and having some smarmy little FReeper jump down my throat because I "obviously" didn't understand how unemployment figures were calculated. Guess neither does Rush! LOL
So, if they revise this week’s numbers up next week, in order to show a decline next week, then we not only didn’t stay the same we actually lost jobs.....
Claims 3 weeks ago: 365k
Claims 2 weeks ago: 367k
Claims last week: 370k
These are the pre-revision claims.
(for the 153rd week in a row)
Bump for later.
-- Rush Limbaugh
Tomorrow the unemployment rate will be published, and I have a bet with a co-worker it will be below 8.1%. I have relatively good confidence, too. Why? Because last weekend, long term unemployment benefits ran our for nearly 300,000 Californians.
Those people will have fallen off the rolls, no longer counted as “unemployed”. Still, expect the stat to be headline news.
revised up 62 out of last 63 weeks.