Fed Officials Cut Forecasts for Unemployment Rate

[jpak]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aFbDgcAh3l9I

Nov. 24 (Bloomberg) -- Federal Reserve officials trimmed their forecasts earlier this month for the U.S. jobless rate in 2010 and 2011 as the economy rebounded while keeping their outlooks “broadly similar” to previous projections.

Fed governors and regional-bank presidents predicted the unemployment rate will range from 9.3 percent to 9.7 percent in next year’s fourth quarter, down from the June projection of 9.5 percent to 9.8 percent, according to minutes of the Federal Open Market Committee’s Nov. 3-4 meeting released today.

Chairman Ben S. Bernanke and other policy makers on Nov. 4 said they would keep interest rates “exceptionally low” for an “extended period.” The statement by the FOMC suggested a decision to raise rates will hinge on changes in the labor market, inflation and inflation expectations.

<snip>

For the current quarter, the median estimate range was 9.9 percent to 10.1 percent, little changed from June forecasts. For 2011, Fed officials projected the jobless rate will decline to a range of 8.2 percent to 8.6 percent in the fourth quarter, and in 2012 will drop to a range of 6.8 percent to 7.5 percent. It was the first time the central bank disclosed such projections for 2012.

<more>

[Robb]

1. Bearing in mind they forecast us to be at 5% now, last year. nt

[jpak]

2. link? Who are "they" and what "5%" dd they forecast?

:evilgrin:

[Nye Bevan]

16. .

http://money.cnn.com/2008/02/11/news/economy/economic_outlook/index.htm?postversion=2008021116

But the report projects the full-year unemployment rate will rise to 4.9% in 2007, up from 4.6% each of the last two years. And it expects the unemployment rate will stay at the 4.9% rate in 2009 before starting to retreating slightly to 4.8% in each of the following four years.

"They" = President's Council of Economic Advisors

"What 5%" = "Unemployment rate of 4.9%".

:evilgrin:

[galileoreloaded]

3. Too bad they are revising the rate up .6% via the birth/death model in Feb.

http://www.reuters.com/article/GCA-Economy/idUSTRE5AI56420091119

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. government is having a tough time guesstimating how many small businesses failed in this recession, casting doubt on the reliability of vital data on employment and economic growth.

The formula the U.S. Labor Department designed to help it deliver timely, thorough monthly employment reports broke down in the heat of the financial crisis, miscounting the number of jobs by an estimated 824,000 in the year through March.

The most likely culprit is the so-called "birth-death" model, which the Labor Department uses to estimate how many companies were created or destroyed."

These revisions will be calculated in in Febuary, and they are good for another .6% on the U-3.

Nice thought though...

[jpak]

4. Good News bad - Bad News good

Pathetic Sad Sackery

*yawn*

[AllentownJake]

5. They projected 10.3% as a high estimate for the 4th quarter of 2009

As long as it doesn't go up more than .1% they are right.

Just as a side note the December 2008 projection was 7.6% for this quarter in 2009. So they have 2 more months to drop unemployment by 2.6%, well actually a little more since it is a rolling 3 month average.

[jpak]

6. Cheer leading for high unemployment?

:shrug:

[AllentownJake]

8. Pointing out these projections are probably full of shit

The unemployment rate could be 5% next November, who the hell knows what can happen.

Their January projection of this year for October 2009 was 7.1-7.6%.

These guys aren't able to project unemployment in these conditions. If you go under the assumption of past performance is an indicator of potential future results. Nostradamus, they aren't.

[jpak]

10. If it doesn't fit the Doomer "Obama Must Fail" meme...them grapes are sour

too bad

[AllentownJake]

11. Yes because these guys have been so accurate about predicting that number in the past

But you can call me a doomer and a gloomer instead of responding to the fact and I emphasize fact they have gotten it wrong, every single time they projected it. Hell they are about to be wrong for the 4th quarter of 2009 and they projected it a little more than a month ago.

:rofl:

[jpak]

13. Actually, they forecast unemployment to be 10+ percent in the 3rd quarter

and they were right

[AllentownJake]

14. well good for them

They still got it wrong in the 2nd and 1st quarter and the 4th quarter of 2008. Seeing that unemployment was sitting at what 9%+ in June. Like I said, if unemployment is up over .3% in November and December, they were wrong.

Of course in the Margin of error they can argue they were right. Heck if unemployment went down to 9.3% right now they were still within the margin

:rofl:

[Cant trust em]

7. Don't worry.

Even if they hit that goal there will be some reason to blow those numbers off.

[AllentownJake]

9. Unemployment drops to 7.6% for November and December

I will personally write a formal letter of apology to Tim Geithner, Larry Summers, and Ben Bernake for every bad thing I have ever said about them.

The projections are simply that, projections, no one knows what 2010 will bring, and in the past year, these projections have erred heavily optimistic.

[jpak]

12. 7.6% - straw man much?

Only this is certain - 2010 is the Year of (((DOOM)))

Darkness will fall upon the land.

The living will envy the dead!

All is lost!

:evilgrin:

[AllentownJake]

15. We aren't arguing doom and gloom

We are arguing whether the Federal Reserve has any clue about what the hell they are talking about with unemployment numbers.

[orwell]

17. Long term unemployment predictions?

Good luck with that...

By the way, I hear we'll all be unemployed on Dec. 22, 2012... :)