In a shocking development

[Elvado]

initial jobless claims drop this week according to the Obama administration. In a non-shocking development that same administration estimated the numbers for 7 of the 50 states. They wouldn't fudge the numbers to try and look good, would they? Not the most ethical, transparent administration in history.

[ksf42001]

I know, it's obviously the Administration's fault that the Labor Day government holiday prevented those states from reporting on time. Also, the department of labor only estimated 5 of the 7 states, since California and Virginia submitted their own estimates...

[Elvado]

Seldom right and wrong again. 9 States failed to report actual numbers. CA and VA estimated theri own, leaving the administration to estimate the other 7. Is it any surprise that given 7 states to play with, the numbers went down?

[TC]

Unless you're going to show us that the estimates for those states were responsible for the drop, this is just your typical poo-flinging. The estimates you are complaining about are for the month of August, but the weeklies are down too.

[Elvado]

Right. It is certainly out of line to suggest number-fudging with this crowd. The first drop in how many weeks coincides with the first time the Department of Labor estimates the numbers for 7 out of 50 states. I know, it's just me and the black helicopters again.

[Boz]

They can re-arrange the deck chairs of these numbers all they want. Unemployment figures still suck, and will continue to suck for some time. There's no spinning it.

It's like the recent rash of polls just after the holiday weekend -- strangely almost all conducted by Democratic pollsters -- indicating how close some mid-term races are getting. Not really buying it.

It is too late for little adjustments or manipulations here and there to have any significant impact on November. The only thing that is going to alter the face of the upcoming elections will be major events.

Individually? Yes, minor or local things may tilt races here and there. But there's little doubt that this will be a wave election (and based for the most part on national issues). The size of the wave remains TBD.

So says Captain Obvious.

[TC]

Sept 10, 2010 8:04:52 GMT -5 Elvado said:

Right. It is certainly out of line to suggest number-fudging with this crowd. The first drop in how many weeks coincides with the first time the Department of Labor estimates the numbers for 7 out of 50 states. I know, it's just me and the black helicopters again.

No, it's worse than black helicopters, it is an unwillingness to accept basic math. Were you SFS or something?

If the numbers are down because of the 43 states that submitted, then there's no problem. If the numbers are down because there were 7 radically lower estimates for the states that did submit and that skewed the overall numbers you have a point.

You've submitted no evidence to prove that the 7 estimated states are responsible for the drop, you are just throwing around the fact that 7 states did not submit and estimated numbers were used. I don't think you actually know if what you are arguing is true or not, but that doesn't stop you from making the argument.

[Elvado]

What I am stating is that based upon the conduct of this Administration to date, it would not surprise me in the least if these numbers were fudged to get some good news out there ahead of Barry O's campaign blitz. Are you telling me it never crossed your mind? If so, I'd like to sell you a bridge in Brooklyn and tickets to Barry's second inaugural.

[SirSaxa]

Sept 10, 2010 8:48:10 GMT -5 Elvado said:

What I am stating is that based upon the conduct of this Administration to date, it would not surprise me in the least if these numbers were fudged to get some good news out there ahead of Barry O's campaign blitz. Are you telling me it never crossed your mind? If so, I'd like to sell you a bridge in Brooklyn and tickets to Barry's second inaugural.

I have never read a more absurd post on this board.

[Boz]

Sept 10, 2010 16:54:28 GMT -5 SirSaxa said:

I have never read a more absurd non-hifigator post on this board.

Fixed it for you.

Let's not say anything we can't take back, yeah? We're all Hoyas after all.
;D

Good weekend all.

In a surprising twist for me, I think I am going to get pretty damn drunk.

Starting..........now.

[Buckets]

The BLS figures always gets revised upwards. Here's a nice chart.

One could of course base an entirely reasonable theory around the inadequacies of seasonal adjustment around a holiday, as well as in an economy with fewer summer temp jobs (especially construction). This theory would be corroborated by the fact that the exact same thing happened last year (a week in which seven states did not submit data, and seasonally adjusted figures were later revised from 550,000 to 556,000, FYI).

But I like the one where the president personally fudges the numbers better.

[SirSaxa]

The new weekly jobless claims report is in (Sept. 16th)

The new number? 450,000.
That is down slightly from last week's original report of 451K, although that was revised upward... to 453K.

CNBC: Jobless Claims Hold Steady

Excerpt:
Initial claims for state unemployment benefits slipped 3,000 to a seasonally adjusted 450,000, the lowest since the week ended July 10, the Labor Department said.

Analysts polled by Reuters had forecast claims rising to 460,000 from the previously reported 451,000 the prior week, which was slightly revised up to 453,000 in Thursday's report.

A Labor Department official said data for only two states had been estimated for last week's report. The four-week average of new jobless claims, considered a better measure of underlying labor market trends, dropped 13,500 to 464,750.

[EasyEd]

Thank God the jobs picture has improved so much. Guess we don't need that jobs bill.