U.S. unemployment claims climb to four-month high of 218,000

[mahatmakanejeeves]

Source: MarketWatch

Home Economy & Politics Economic Report

Economic Report

U.S. unemployment claims climb to four-month high of 218,000

Last Updated: May 19, 2022 at 8:45 a.m. ET
First Published: May 19, 2022 at 8:37 a.m. ET
By Jeffry Bartash

Jobless claims hover near 54-year low

The numbers: New U.S. jobless claims rose to a four-month high of 218,000 last week, but most of the increase appeared tied to just a few states such as Kentucky and California. The number of people applying for unemployment benefits was still extremely low.

Applications for unemployment benefits climbed by 21,000 from 197,000 in the prior week, the Labor Department said Thursday.

Economists polled by the Wall Street Journal forecast initial jobless claims to total a seasonally adjusted 200,000 in the seven days ended May 14.

Applications for unemployment benefits fell to a 54-year low of 166,000 in March and have hovered around 200,000 since the beginning of the year.

Big picture: The labor market is still extremely strong. Job openings are at record high and many companies complain they can’t find enough workers.

{snip}

Read more: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/u-s-unemployment-claims-climb-to-four-month-high-of-218-000-11652963872

[mahatmakanejeeves]

1. From the source:

https://www.dol.gov/ui/data.pdf

News Release

Connect with DOL at
https://blog.dol.gov

TRANSMISSION OF MATERIALS IN THIS RELEASE IS EMBARGOED UNTIL
8:30 A.M. (Eastern) Thursday, May 19, 2022

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE WEEKLY CLAIMS

SEASONALLY ADJUSTED DATA

In the week ending May 14, the advance figure for seasonally adjusted initial claims was 218,000, an increase of 21,000 from the previous week's revised level. The previous week's level was revised down by 6,000 from 203,000 to 197,000. The 4-week moving average was 199,500, an increase of 8,250 from the previous week's revised average. The previous week's average was revised down by 1,500 from 192,750 to 191,250.

The advance seasonally adjusted insured unemployment rate was 0.9 percent for the week ending May 7, a decrease of 0.1 percentage point from the previous week's unrevised rate. The advance number for seasonally adjusted insured unemployment during the week ending May 7 was 1,317,000, a decrease of 25,000 from the previous week's revised level. This is the lowest level for insured unemployment since December 27, 1969 when it was 1,304,000. The previous week's level was revised down by 1,000 from 1,343,000 to 1,342,000. The 4-week moving average was 1,362,250, a decrease of 22,500 from the previous week's revised average. This is the lowest level for this average since January 24, 1970 when it was 1,361,000. The previous week's average was revised down by 250 from 1,385,000 to 1,384,750.

{snip}

UNADJUSTED DATA

{snip}

The total number of continued weeks claimed for benefits in all programs for the week ending April 30 was 1,371,448, a decrease of 68,885 from the previous week. There were 15,970,923 weekly claims filed for benefits in all programs in the comparable week in 2021.

{snip the rest of the ten-page news release, until the end}

Weekly Claims Archives
Weekly Claims Data

U.S. Department of Labor news materials are accessible at http://www.dol.gov. The Department's Reasonable Accommodation Resource Center converts Departmental information and documents into alternative formats, which include Braille and large print. For alternative format requests, please contact the Department at [phone] (voice) or [phone] (federal relay).

U.S. Department of Labor
Employment and Training Administration
Washington, D.C. 20210
Release Number: USDL 22-943-NAT

Program Contacts:
Kevin Stapleton: [phone]
Media Contact: [phone]

[Tomconroy]

2. I'm wondering if there will be a recession where people

Aren't laid off because it's too hard to find workers now.

[IronLionZion]

3. Yeah, I've been wondering how that would work in a labor shortage

Wages have gone up recently but I hope they don't go back down because of recession. And prices are high because of various reasons but the Fed is trying to bring them down through raising interest rates.

I guess we'll see. Many companies are cash rich so should be able to survive a short recession.

[NickB79]

15. Same here. There are 11 million empty positions

Is it possible to have a recession where those empty jobs act as a buffer against job losses?

[former9thward]

16. Many of the positions are entry level.

People who have a few years under their belt will not want to take entry level positions. So if we get a recession I think we could have the unemployment rate go up while their are unfilled openings.

[progree]

4. Another week where the lowest continuing claims in over 50 years didn't make the headlines

From #1 (the BLS itself) -

The advance number for seasonally adjusted insured unemployment during the week ending May 7 was 1,317,000, a decrease of 25,000 from the previous week's revised level. This is the lowest level for insured unemployment since December 27, 1969 when it was 1,304,000.

Did I just say "Another"? Ooops.

I see it is included in the MarketWatch article at the very bottom:

The number of people already collecting unemployment benefits, meanwhile, fell by 25,000 to 1.32 million in the week ended May 7. That’s the lowest level since 1969.

These so-called continuing claims are reported with a one-week lag.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

6. Another way of looking at it is that he alludes to the low level right up at the top.

Last Updated: May 19, 2022 at 8:45 a.m. ET
First Published: May 19, 2022 at 8:37 a.m. ET
By Jeffry Bartash

Jobless claims hover near 54-year low

The numbers: New U.S. jobless claims rose to a four-month high of 218,000 last week, but most of the increase appeared tied to just a few states such as Kentucky and California. The number of people applying for unemployment benefits was still extremely low.

You have to give me credit for working that in.

[progree]

7. I took the last sentence to be referring to initial claims since that is what he's talking about

in the first 2 sentences -- as I read it he is saying that initial claims -- "new U.S. jobless claims" -- are at a 4-month high, but still near a 54 year low.

Jobless claims hover near 54-year low

The numbers: New U.S. jobless claims rose to a four-month high of 218,000 last week, but most of the increase appeared tied to just a few states such as Kentucky and California. The number of people applying for unemployment benefits was still extremely low.

My point was that he doesn't get to continuing claims at all until near the very end, which are not near a 54 year low but are at a 52 1/2 year low (Dec. 69). Before then, it was all about initial claims being near a 54 year low but also at a 4 month high

[mahatmakanejeeves]

8. Sorry, my bad. Thanks. NT

[progree]

9. De nada. Thanks for writing 😁

[mahatmakanejeeves]

10. Hahahaha. Thanks. NT

[maxsolomon]

5. "4-month high" makes it sound like bad news.

This part of the economy is chugging along.

[clementine613]

11. New Unemployment High. Thanks, Rethugs!

Your policies did this. Fix it.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

12. Ummm, take another look at the article, please. Thanks. NT

[clementine613]

13. Are you saying it's NOT the Rethugs fault? That's they're right?

n//t

[mahatmakanejeeves]

14. There's another way to interpret my comment. NT

[Tomconroy]

17. Jobless claims and unemployment are actually in great shape.

But a lot of things are saying a recession is coming: climbing interest rates, stock market, way too high gas prices.
But I do think employers will be reluctant to let people go for a change.
So maybe it will be a little different this time. We'll see.

[progree]

18. Q1 GDP came in negative too (-1.4% ann rate) ... but a 2nd and 3rd estimate are yet to come

2nd estimate in late May. 3rd and final estimate in late June. So it could go positive.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10142909216

Edited to add - nobody considers one negative quarter a recession, but two back-to-back negative quarters is an informal definition of a recession, so I've read and heard. Ultimately, the National Bureau of Economic Research is the official arbiter of when recessions begin and end, but they can sometimes take a year or longer (IIRC) to call a recession, so the informal definition could very well be all we have before the mid-term election ... if Q1 stays negative in subsequent estimates and Q2 comes out negative as well (first estimate in late July, 2nd in late August, 3rd and final estimate in late September). Q3's first estimate is in late October.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/111622439#post3

[Tomconroy]

19. You never know. But it feels like one is coming. Not the financial craziness

Of 1999 and 2006 though. Some people think the stock market was wacked plus housing prices. But I don't think stock p/e s were that far off. I bought a house in 2012, the bottom of the market. It's gone up a lot but not to an insane level. Companies everywhere are begging for jobs. It's different.

[progree]

20. Some gloomy stuff on stock market valuations --

# Vanguard economic and market outlook: 2022 (very detailed explanation of why they think returns over the next 10 years will be low, e.g. 3.3% on U.S. equities, 1.9% on U.S. bonds) , Vanguard, 12/16/21
https://advisors.vanguard.com/insights/article/series/vanguardeconomicandmarketoutlook

# Schwab’s 2022 Long-Term Capital Market Expectations (6.4% for U.S. large cap stocks, 6.9% for U.S. small cap stocks, 2.3% for U.S. investment grade bonds, and 2.5% inflation), 3/1/22
https://www.schwab.com/resource-center/insights/content/schwabs-long-term-capital-market-expectations

# Stock market gains depend on profit margins rising, and they’re already impossibly high, Mark Hulbert, MarketWatch, 4/2/22
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/stock-market-gains-depend-on-profit-margins-rising-and-they-re-already-impossibly-high/ar-AAVKWct?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=96857cbf9874431699370cb07c64e1fa

I haven't absorbed it all, in fact I haven't read much of the Vanguard one, but anyway this is the case for market valuations being excessive.

I've always felt that high P/E ratios are justified because there isn't any easy-to-buy-and-sell-and-manage competition to stocks -- bond yields suck -- but I fear that bond yields will eventually rise to the point that they are perceived as serious risk-adjusted competition. And then it will be a whole new ballgame.

=========================================

I posted some more stuff in #18 just as you posted, so you might not have seen it, in case you are interested -- the GDP estimate dates between now and the midterm elections --

[Tomconroy]

21. Thanks! I'll give it a serious look when the effects of my happy

hour martini wear off.

[progree]

22. Take your time -- I collected those about 3 months ago and am meaning to take a serious dive into it

but had some other stuff come up and take priority, as usual. But its getting closer to the top of my stack, any day now