Monthly average of unemployment claims falls to 15-year low

[Omaha Steve]

Source: AP-Excite

By CHRISTOPHER S. RUGABER

WASHINGTON (AP) — The number of people seeking U.S. unemployment benefits ticked lower last week, pushing down the four-week average of applications to its lowest level since April 2000.

Weekly applications fell 1,000 to a seasonally adjusted 264,000 last week, the Labor Department said Thursday. That is just above a 15-year low reached three weeks ago. The average, a less volatile figure, dropped 7,750 to 271,750, the lowest in 15 years.

Applications are a proxy for layoffs, so their very low level is evidence that Americans are enjoying solid job security. It is also a sign employers are confident enough in the economy to keep their staffs, despite signs of sluggish growth.

"Claims continue to show no sign of the labor market weakening — if anything, the opposite," Jim O'Sullivan, chief U.S. economist at High Frequency Economics, said in a note to clients.

FULL story at link.



In this April 22, 2015 photo, Bianca Medici, left, a corporate recruiter for CDM Media, speaks with job applicants during a National Career Fairs job fair in Chicago. The Labor Department releases weekly jobless claims on Thursday, May 14, 2015. (AP Photo/M. Spencer Green)

Read more: http://apnews.excite.com/article/20150514/us--unemployment_benefits-59d6937416.html

---

[underpants]

1. Obamacare is just creating jobs so it can REALLY crash the economy

Thanks Obama

[postulater]

2. Lower wage jobs, higher corporate profits.

[JoePhilly]

5. Data?

[Drunken Irishman]

6. Here's the data....

Probably not the data the poster is looking for, though.

[groundloop]

7. Thanks for that information..... it appears the economy is truly getting its act together

Granted, it's not happening as fast as many people (myself included) would like, but it is happening. in my personal experience I know that the number of calls I've been getting from headhunters/recruiters is way up lately. It stands to reason that if companies are in enough need of people in my profession that wages should finally start going up.

[postulater]

9. $0.20 per hour. Sorry, I was wrong. That is quite an increase.

Over a week, you could buy a couple loaves of bread with that.

I was just reporting anecdotes from my experience with people who have been unemployed and can't find work in their field so they take a job making 10, 20 or more thousand less just to pay the bills. Maybe that is why the $0.20 increase, I don't know.

Or maybe it is just that I live in Wisconsin and it just seems like everything is going to hell.

Or maybe I was just thinking like this:
http://www.aflcio.org/Corporate-Watch/Paywatch-2014

I'm no economist but I don't notice much in the way of improvement.

[JoePhilly]

11. First, you claimed "lower wages" and were wrong.

You need low UE to get wages to increase.

If companies don't have to compete for workers, wages decrease as people compete for too few jobs.

Get UE down for a while, and they go up.

[Drunken Irishman]

12. lol - it's typical of wage growth.

Wage growth doesn't increase by dollars - but cents and always has.

Wages are at the highest they've been since 2006.

[Beauregard]

15. And prices?

$1.00 in 2006 has the same buying power as $1.16 in 2015.

http://inflationdata.com/Inflation/Inflation_Calculators/Inflation_Rate_Calculator.asp

[Drunken Irishman]

17. And in May, 2006, the average wage was $10 an hour.

Today, wages are 10.55 - so, a .55 cent increase, which outpaces inflation.

[Beauregard]

18. Source?

[Drunken Irishman]

19. This...

[SpankMe]

3. I blame Obama. n/t

[Dem2]

4. Less layoffs is a bad thing

It must be true, I heard it on Fox News.

[winstars]

8. Thanks Obama!!!!

[Jimbo S]

10. When I was layed off June, 2009

the number was pushing 600,000.

Now that people are showing increased job security, more are apt to start seeking to flip jobs. That's how wages increase. Someone quits for a better paying job, that opening needs to be filled in a gradually tightening labor market.

[Psephos]

13. what a pantload

100 million working age Americans have no job.

The participation rate (percentage of working age people who actually have jobs) is the lowest it's been for thirty years, nearing 62%

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000

Look at that graph. It shows an uninterrupted linear decline. The actual US unemployment figure is closer to 15%, but the government cooks it by not counting people they claim have given up looking for a job, and by including people with part-time jobs (even one hour/week).

They depend upon most people reading the headline figure on a news site and cheering the Good News(TM), counting on mass innumeracy.

Look around with your own eyes, if you want to see what reality is. I see big problems.

[whatthehey]

14. Working age? 16 and over?

Last edited Fri May 15, 2015, 02:28 PM - Edit history (2)

So the massive explosion in people over 65 in the last few years means they all should still be toiling away, along with their HS sophomore grandchildren?

U4 and above count anyone who has made any attempt to get a job in a year. If somebody hasn't done so they don't want a job, pure and simple. There is NO excuse for not trying in a whole fricking year. Not (non-SSDI) disability, criminal record, race or age, if you actually want/need to earn a living. There are plenty of such folks working (I'm one at 50+with a significant handicap) and others trying to get jobs. Not trying once in a year means you have not the slightest desire to work.

U6 counts those part timers, and is also declining.

[Fumesucker]

16. Things are looking up now that the Republicans have taken over Congress

Wait.. What?