U.S. jobless claims drop to lowest level since April 2008

[News_Editor]

U.S. jobless claims drop to lowest level since April 2008

2011-12-23 09:35:57 GMT+7 (ICT)

WASHINGTON, D.C. (BNO NEWS) -- Initial claims for unemployment insurance in the United States dropped to 364,000 in the week ending December 17, a decrease of about 4,000 when compared to the previous week, the U.S. Labor Department (DOL) reported on Thursday.

Closing the year with a positive job market, the week's unemployment claims represent its lowest level since April 2008. The numbers come just a week after the jobless claims reached its lowest level since May 2008, according to the U.S. government.

The DOL report shows the 4-week moving average was 380,250, a decrease of 8,000 from the previous week's revised average of 388,250. In addition, the department revealed that the number of unemployed with unemployment insurance for the week ending December 10 also decreased by 0.1 percent to 2.8 percent when compared to the previous week's 2.9 percent rate.

There was also a decrease of 79,000 in the number of workers who claimed benefits under regular state unemployment programs, totaling 3,546,000 during the week ending December 10, according to the latest DOL report. The 4-week moving average was 3,631,750, a decrease of 40,000 from the preceding week's revised average of 3,671,750.

Meanwhile, the unadjusted, advance number of actual initial claims under state programs totaled 418,466 in the week ending December 17, a decrease of 17,256 from the previous week. There were 495,548 initial claims in the comparable week in 2010.

The highest insured unemployment rates in the week ending December 3 were in Alaska (6.3), Puerto Rico (4.5), Pennsylvania (4.2), Oregon (4.1), California (3.8), Idaho (3.6), Montana (3.6), Nevada (3.6), Arkansas (3.5), New Jersey (3.5), and Wisconsin (3.5).

The largest increases in initial claims for the week ending December 10 were in New Jersey (+3,068), Florida (+2,889), Massachusetts (+1,882), Iowa (+1,046), and Nebraska (+777) while the largest decreases were in California (-15,583), New York (-11,486), North Carolina (-11,251), Pennsylvania (-9,812), and Ohio (-5,771).

-- © BNO News All rights reserved 2011-12-23

[flying]

Folks need to look at who is being counted in these polls. Or I should say who is qualified to be counted.....

Better yet look at the amount now on food assistance.

The reality in the US is far different than the feel good news being reported.

Edited December 23, 2011 by flying

[Jingthing]

I agree the statistics are very misleading, BUT the statistics are calculated the same way no matter who is in power. Thus, quite obviously, this is stellar news for the President Obama reelection campaign.

[flying]

This is funny but true

[Jingthing]

Actually, that video was also VERY misleading. People lose their jobs and go on unemployment. To stay eligible for the money and the statistic all you have to do is make some minimal effort to look for work. In reality, in most cases, you never need to prove anything. If you are so stupid/lazy/proud as to refuse that money and not make a minimal effort even though you know it is hopeless, yes you won't get it and be off the statistics. Also, after the term of your unemployment insurance runs its course, then yes you go off the statistics. For unemployed Americans over 50 and under social security age many will never find work again and yes many will ultimately die of poverty related situations. This is millions of people, baby boomers actually, and they are basically being thrown under the bus. But the rules apply no matter what party is in power, and some kind of formula needs to be in place to gather statistics, so in that sense it is politically fair.

BTW, some heartless fascistic right winger republicans (boo!) have suggested that people lose their unemployment insurance eligibility if they can't pass drug tests!

Edited December 23, 2011 by Jingthing

[beechguy]

What's the problem with drug tests? I have to take one every time I accept a job.

[Jingthing]

What's the problem with drug tests? I have to take one every time I accept a job.

Not all employers require them. You have a choice to not apply to employers that require them. Unemployment INSURANCE is an entitlement that workers have EARNED. Most need that pittance just to survive. Whether unemployed people want to light up a doobie once in awhile is none of the government's business -- PERIOD. Why not just send the unemployed people to concentration camps? It would be quicker. It is so sickening how the right wing wants to punish and demonize poor people.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-tv/ryan-grim-discusses-orrin_b_621394.html

Edited December 23, 2011 by Jingthing

[beechguy]

I guess the difference is, I get job offers every week and I'm not sitting on my ass whining how I'm mistreated.

[Jingthing]

I guess the difference is, I get job offers every week and I'm not sitting on my ass whining how I'm mistreated.

Let me guess. You have had a good education and you are white and you are under 50. Yes? In that case, your chances are better. So that's great, you've got yours and you want to cut off basic funds to others who are suffering and have paid into the system before. Bless your heart.

There are always some people who are unemployed because they are unemployable. Now with such massive unemployment, it is obvious the vast majority are unemployed or underemployed because of lack of economic opportunities.

Edited December 23, 2011 by Jingthing

[Ulysses G.]

Thus, quite obviously, this is stellar news for the President Obama reelection campaign.

Another job well done!

[Jingthing]

In any case, he's better than Bush or McCain.

[beechguy]

You would be partly correct, I'm white but well over 50, and not nearly educated as I would like to have been. But I did some technical training on my own dime, while others being compensated by government funds wouldn't stick around long enough to get their certifications. I would not be surprised if they weren't in an unemployment line someplace. Also, it probably helped that I was willing to relocate for employment and advancement, not o mention pissing in a cup when requested.

Anyway, time to start the Christmas Holiday, have a good weekend.

[Scott]

The problem with drug tests, like other restrictions, is that they are costly and often produce a false positive. Do you want to add another level to the bureaucracy? Do you want to find out who has taken cold medication or eaten a poppy seed roll? They are claiming a benefit that is due to them. Unemployment benefits are not welfare. It is a type of employment insurance policy..

[Ulysses G.]

They are claiming a benefit that is due to them. Unemployment benefits are not welfare. It is a type of employment insurance policy..

I agree. If it were about welfare, I might feel differently.

[koheesti]

I guess the difference is, I get job offers every week and I'm not sitting on my ass whining how I'm mistreated.

Let me guess. You have had a good education and you are white and you are under 50. Yes? In that case, your chances are better. So that's great, you've got yours and you want to cut off basic funds to others who are suffering and have paid into the system before. Bless your heart.

So, if your chances aren't as good for getting another job (because of race, age & education) how is doing drugs going to help your chances of finding another job? Shouldn't that money be used for something else when you don't have work (food, rent, job hunting)? Sounds like these people have their priorities messed up.

I was unemployed 6 months of this year and didn't take unemployment. So I guess I was never counted in the stats?

Edited December 24, 2011 by koheesti

[flying]

Having been self employed all my life I never had a chance for Unemployment.

I learned early in life to save for rainy days.

But still....this is yet another area that is not counted by the UE polls & it is a large segment.

[Scott]

I find your post to be a bit inflammatory. I don't think anyone, at least in this thread, is advocating that people should take drugs. The point is, some politicians are advocating testing for drugs. Drug tests are notoriously unreliable and expensive. Eating a poppy seed bun can show a positive test for heroin. Cold medicines can show a positive for amphetamines etc.

You are also testing people who have a right to collect unemployment because they and their employer have paid into on their behalf.

As far as the statistics are concerned, there are a number of ways that statistics are compiled. Most reports are about the number of jobless claims for unemployment. In that statistic, you would probably not be counted. In some of the more comprehensive, but less well publicized compilations, such as the number of businesses reporting lay-offs, you might.

[koheesti]

I find your post to be a bit inflammatory. I don't think anyone, at least in this thread, is advocating that people should take drugs. The point is, some politicians are advocating testing for drugs. Drug tests are notoriously unreliable and expensive. Eating a poppy seed bun can show a positive test for heroin. Cold medicines can show a positive for amphetamines etc.

You are also testing people who have a right to collect unemployment because they and their employer have paid into on their behalf.

If you are directing this at me, let me point out that I did not reply to the guy (you) who pointed out the problems with drug testing. I was replying to the guy saying "Whether unemployed people want to light up a doobie once in awhile is none of the government's business -- PERIOD." Are there any false positives that would point to someone smoking pot?

Just for the record I think most if not all drugs should be legalized. However, if you are out of work and need money to support yourself and your family, maybe you should focus more on getting a job and less on getting high. When I was younger I would stop drinking completely when I was unemployed. It was a way of motivating myself further. This past year, I just cut back a lot.

[Steely Dan]

Hmm, I think in areas where people are operating dangerous machinery, driving cars or flying planes drug tests should be mandatory, but frankly many menial unskilled jobs are so dehumanizing that a spliff at the end of the day should not make any difference to their work performance. As for the unemployed I think the same principles should apply instead of using a sledgehammer to crack a nut by testing everyone.

[Scott]

Koheesti, no problem. I am simply trying to clarify the matter and express my concern about drug testing in this program. Your position about drug and alcohol use would be advice that certainly wouldn't hurt a lot of potential applicants. Also, I am making a simplified explanation of the different types of statistics on people who are out-of-work.

I do think I am getting off-topic and I don't want to have to start deleting my own posts!

[IMA_FARANG]

This happens every year,

If those in charge want to see "good economic news" they produce such ..... male cattle excretement.....for the "beer swilling swine" to suck up.

In fact, such a decline is almost always due to temporary hiring for the holidays....and most people filling those jobs now are temporary workers, who will find themselves unemployed after the holidays.

Been that way for years....but some americans are still to dumb to figure it out.

I am not a profit center

I am not a "cashpoint"

I am a Human Being

I Ocupy Wall Street

We are the 99%

@OWS

Edited December 24, 2011 by IMA_FARANG

[Credo]

No, some of us are not to dumb to figure it out. The unemployment figures are published every month.

[snarky66]

^{There is only one way these munbers make sense. Thhat is if Obama's policeies have destroyed millions of jobs & thus can no longer be counted. Which I am 100% sure is the correct answer. Score another one for the self appointed "4th greatest President in history" soon to be consigned to the rubbiush heap of history.}

[elgato]

They are claiming a benefit that is due to them. Unemployment benefits are not welfare. It is a type of employment insurance policy..

I agree. If it were about welfare, I might feel differently.

Totally agree about denying welfare payments, but I thought this thread was about unemployment benefits statistics.