February 6, 2014

Initial Unemployment Claims (020614); 331K SA, Raw Claims Down Over 8% From Same Week Last Year

Filed under: Economy,Taxes & Government — Tom @ 7:56 am

Predictions:

Seasonal adjustment factors:

  • Week ended Feb. 1, 2014 — 107.2
  • Week ended Feb. 2, 2013 — 107.6

Raw claims:

  • Week ended Jan. 25, 2014 — 357,656, up a few thousand from last week’s initial reading, changing the seasonally adjusted figure from 348K to 351K
  • Week ended Feb. 2, 2013 — 388,442

For the prediction to come true, raw claims will need to be 359,000 or less (359K divided by 1.072 is 335K, rounded). That would be about 7.5% lower than last year. That should be doable. Raw claims coming in above 359K would not be a favorable omen heading into tomorrow.

The report will be here at 8:30.

HERE IT IS:

SEASONALLY ADJUSTED DATA

In the week ending February 1, the advance figure for seasonally adjusted initial claims was 331,000, a decrease of 20,000 from the previous week’s revised figure of 351,000. The 4-week moving average was 334,000, an increase of 250 from the previous week’s revised average of 333,750.

… UNADJUSTED DATA

The advance number of actual initial claims under state programs, unadjusted, totaled 355,224 in the week ending February 1, a decrease of 2,432 from the previous week. There were 388,442 initial claims in the comparable week in 2013.

After next week’s revision, the seasonally adjusted number will likely be very close to the prediction.

There’s not a lot to say here, except that stabilization in the 330s, if that’s what is really happening, really isn’t that impressive as a harbinger of the kind of higher job growth Mark Zandi of Moody’s said he expects this year (225K per month average for the whole year) — and even that average job-growth number isn’t acceptable in the circumstances.

Share

6 Comments

  1. I don’t know what’s more surprising, the 331K initial jobless claims or Steve Liesman knocking down the presumptive weather excuse for tomorrow’s jobs numbers.

    Comment by steveegg — February 6, 2014 @ 8:34 am

  2. Isn’t Liesman the guy who routinely tries to interrupt Santelli with Keynesian gibberish when Santelli’s making good points?

    Comment by Tom — February 6, 2014 @ 8:40 am

  3. Yes, but perhaps because his computer was on the fritz during the 8:30 economic release (mostly good except for the December trade balance), he actually pointed out that the week of the 12th was the one “good” weather week of the month.

    Comment by steveegg — February 6, 2014 @ 8:45 am

  4. Ooh, that’s actually a good point. He’s used up his annual quota.

    Comment by Tom — February 6, 2014 @ 8:55 am

  5. [...] from about a year ago are here, here, and here), but Thursday’s adjusted claims figure of 331,000 and the 348,000 from a week earlier went unlabeled (as seen here and here, [...]

    Pingback by BizzyBlog — February 8, 2014 @ 3:44 pm

  6. [...] from about a year ago are here, here, and here), but Thursday’s adjusted claims figure of 331,000 and the 348,000 from a week earlier went unlabeled (as seen here and here, respectively). [...]

    Pingback by Political Rift » As Press Pretends Seasonally Adjusted Figures Are What Really Happened, Economy Really Lost 2.87 Million Jobs in January — February 8, 2014 @ 4:25 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.