Jobless claims fall to the lowest level since 1969

Washington Examiner ^ | July 19, 2018 | Joseph Lawler

[GonzoII]

New claims for unemployment benefits fell 8,000 to 207,000 in the second week of July, the Department of Labor reported Thursday morning, the lowest such number since 1969.

Forecasters had expected new jobless claims to edge up to around 220,000. Instead, fewer people sought unemployment insurance than anytime in 48 years.

Thursday's benchmark is especially impressive given that the labor force is twice as large as it was in late 1969.

Then, the unemployment rate was 3.5 percent, Richard Nixon was president, and "Na Na Hey Hey Kiss Him Goodbye" was the top song in the country.

Low claims are a sign of a healthy labor market. They indicate that layoffs are rare and that job creation is strong.

Claims have stayed historically low in recent months, signaling that the jobs market is going to get better even with unemployment, at 4 percent, already near the lowest it has been in decades.

Thursday’s results are likely to reassure Federal Reserve officials that they right to pursue tighter monetary policy, and may even lead them to begin accelerating the pace of interest rate hikes.

[semimojo]

I am trying to understand the disparity between the jobless claim number being about 200K, and the welfare/food stamp recipient number being about 39 million.

They're completely different things.

One is the number of people who made their initial claim for unemployment in June, 2018. Basically those people who lost jobs last month.

It says nothing about the total number of unemployed people.

The second represents everyone of any age who is elegible for food stamps/welfare, including a significant number of people who are actually working but have low-paying jobs.

[lonevoice]

Yes! And this is music to my ears, too:

"Thursday’s results are likely to reassure Federal Reserve officials that they right to pursue tighter monetary policy, and may even lead them to begin accelerating the pace of interest rate hikes."

[rb22982]

I only care about the 25-54 LFPR and to a lesser extent the 18-24. The LFPR for the elderly is way lower (like less than 25% of the 25-54 group) and the % of our population is more and more skewed elderly. But yes, I’d like the LFPR to increase as well. SSDI reform would probably do the trick.

[Deplorable American1776]

I thought those jobs won’t be coming back according to Zero. I know it isn’t retailing jobs...a local Home Depot did away with cashiers.

[Deplorable American1776]

What do you get if you put Maxine and Cortez in Room #10?

Answer: An IQ lower than the room number... 😀

[confederatecarpetbag]

This is all Russia’s fault. Damn Russkies