Jobless Claims 187,000
Comments
-
It's called "full employment".
Now spin it as a disaster to benefit Orange Jesus.
-
https://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea38.htm
Does unemployment rate count people not looking for work?
The unemployment rate measures the share of workers in the labor force who do not currently have a job but are actively looking for work. People who have not looked for work in the past four weeks are not included in this measure.
I'm sure these numbers are quite a bit higher in real life and commies not cooking books.
-
Oh, well if you’re sure I guess that settles it.
-
https://www.marketwatch.com/livecoverage/jobs-report-for-january-employment-growth-seen-slowing-in-report-vital-to-fed-outlook
The spike in wages, however, has left more than a few economists unconvinced.
Other measures of worker compensation, including the more reliable employer cost index, show a pronounced deceleration in pay.
What happened in January? Cold weather prevented more people from working than usual, mostly in lower-paying service jobs.
If those people aren't counted, hourly earnings could be skewed by higher-paid employees.
"January saw stronger than expected wage growth, probably because winter weather shortened the average workweek for lower-paid hourly workers," said chief economist Bill Adams of Comerica Bank.
If Adams and other skeptics are right, the wage gains in January are likely to unwind in February.
-
Per a lender I know and trust.
The 353k number is an “adjusted” number. The BLS uses an obscure formula to adjust for population changes and seasonal factors among others. But look at the raw non-adjusted numbers: they were DOWN by 2,635,000! That’s some aggressive adjusting!
The BLS also released its Household Survey, which includes 20,000 phone surveys. The Household Survey showed job LOSSES of 31,000 in January.
The Household Survey also showed Average Hourly Earnings rising by .6% to 4.5% year-over-year. But earnings rose for the wrong reasons: it was because the average weekly hours worked fell. That’s just math: If you divide the same salary by fewer hours, you get higher wages reported. In truth, Average Weekly Earnings (wages taken home) were flat, at 3%.
-
I put this link in the "other" thread but it fits here also.
https://www.businessinsider.com/layoffs-sweeping-us-these-are-companies-making-cuts-2024
-
Yes we call them democrat voters normally. One must break the definition code to discover things.
-
I see you still can't math.
If the economy "added more jobs than expected!!"
But unemployment didn't change...
2+2=5 comrade.
-
