U.S. jobless claims near 44-year low

[amenx]

The number of Americans filing for unemployment benefits fell to near a 44-year low last week, pointing to further tightening of the labor market even as economic growth appears to have remained moderate in the first quarter.

The stronger labor market and rising inflation could push the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates this month. Several Fed officials have in recent days suggested the U.S. central bank could increase borrowing costs soon.

"The jobs market is strengthening and we are near full employment. The Fed is worried that the jobs market will overheat and that is fanning the discussion of a March rate hike," said Ryan Sweet, senior economist at Moody's Analytics in Westchester, Pennsylvania...

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-economy-idUSKBN1691S9

Good going Obama! Lets see if Trump can at least maintain that during his term.

 

[Sea Ray]

Trump's already paying off!

 

[umbrella39]

Bring ma cool jerb back!!! I don't think that even Trump can derail the progress Obama made. Time will tell...

 

[PokerGuy]

Hey that's great.... until you also see that the number of people on assistance is the highest ever, the number of people in poverty is high and rising, home ownership level in the US is at the lowest level since 1965 etc etc.

So basically, fewer people are filing for unemployment which is great, but overall things aren't very rosy. And no, I don't blame that on obummer, just saying things are not as wonderful as a low unemployment number would suggest. What that suggests is that more people have jobs, but they are lower wage jobs that are not paying enough.

 

[PokerGuy]

Trump's already paying off!

 

[ivwshane]

Hey that's great.... until you also see that the number of people on assistance is the highest ever, the number of people in poverty is high and rising, home ownership level in the US is at the lowest level since 1965 etc etc.

So basically, fewer people are filing for unemployment which is great, but overall things aren't very rosy. And no, I don't blame that on obummer, just saying things are not as wonderful as a low unemployment number would suggest. What that suggests is that more people have jobs, but they are lower wage jobs that are not paying enough.

I'll take a citation for the poverty rate being high AND rising, a citation for the number of people on assistance being the highest ever, as well as declining wages.

Thanks

 

[Thebobo]

I'll take a citation for the poverty rate being high AND rising, a citation for the number of people on assistance being the highest ever, as well as declining wages.

Thanks

Does a link from Breitbart or infowars count?

 

[ivwshane]

Does a link from Breitbart or infowars count?

Sure, so long as they have a citation to their claims. But I'd prefer if he quoted the relevant part as I won't even give them the page view.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

So how many people who would like to find work are without a job? That includes those who have no real hope as well.

 

[sandorski]

If "People on Assistance" means people receiving SS, then ya. Everyone knew that would be the case 30+ years ago.

 

[Jhhnn]

Hey that's great.... until you also see that the number of people on assistance is the highest ever, the number of people in poverty is high and rising, home ownership level in the US is at the lowest level since 1965 etc etc.

So basically, fewer people are filing for unemployment which is great, but overall things aren't very rosy. And no, I don't blame that on obummer, just saying things are not as wonderful as a low unemployment number would suggest. What that suggests is that more people have jobs, but they are lower wage jobs that are not paying enough.

So the answer, obviously, is to deregulate finance, gut federal enforcement agencies & give the Jerb Creatin' Investor Class a whopping tax cut!

And don't forget to cut the school lunch program & others to save money!

 

[bshole]

Hey that's great.... until you also see that the number of people on assistance is the highest ever, the number of people in poverty is high and rising, home ownership level in the US is at the lowest level since 1965 etc etc.

So basically, fewer people are filing for unemployment which is great, but overall things aren't very rosy. And no, I don't blame that on obummer, just saying things are not as wonderful as a low unemployment number would suggest. What that suggests is that more people have jobs, but they are lower wage jobs that are not paying enough.

It is so depressing that lower paid workers qualify for aid. 50% of fast food workers, child care workers and home care workers are on public assistance. We should quit listening to the top 1% and their hacks telling us how bad raising the minimum wage is and just do it. Our effective minimum wage is 1/3 to 1/4 of what it was in the 60s.

How about industry think about innovation for once and stop with this relentless march to pay their employees less to pay themselves more.

 

[Thebobo]

It is so depressing that lower paid workers qualify for aid. 50% of fast food workers, child care workers and home care workers are on public assistance. We should quit listening to the top 1% and their hacks telling us how bad raising the minimum wage is and just do it. Our effective minimum wage is 1/3 to 1/4 of what it was in the 60s.

How about industry think about innovation for once and stop with this relentless march to pay their employees less to pay themselves more.

We could learn a lot about wages from other countries. But we are to great again to think we can't be anything but the best at everything.

 

[PokerGuy]

I'll take a citation for the poverty rate being high AND rising, a citation for the number of people on assistance being the highest ever, as well as declining wages.

Thanks

The number of people that receive some form of assistance continues to rise. This article has shows the trendline for the percentage of people receiving federal benefits of some sort.

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2012...f-of-u-s-lives-in-household-getting-benefits/

Note that this is not to say that every benefit is bad or anything like that, just showing that the percentage of people who get at least some sort of public assistance is rising. I'm assuming this has gone up significantly since then because of the people getting obummercare subsidies since then.

Since assistance programs have only grown over the years, it's safe to assume that the current high mark is also the highest ever, though I can't say I've seen stats for the great depression or other long ago times.

With regard to wages, I didn't say wages were declining. I said if the unemployment number is low and yet the number of people in the "poverty" or "low income" categories now hovers around 50% of the country, it signals that the wages for that bottom 50% of the country have not kept up with the cost of living, which means they've been stagnant. We've recently seen some upticks in wages, but I don't know if that reflects wages on the higher side of the spectrum rising or wages rising for the lower 50%. Regardless, the point is 50% of the population is either in poverty or "low income". Not exactly a healthy situation, regardless of a low unemployment number.

With regard to the poverty level, the latest number here is 13.5%. Definitely high, but that shows it going down from '13 to '15, not up. I'm assuming that's the impact of obummercare handouts. I don't know if 2016 will be higher or lower than 13.5%, but since the census bureau hasn't released 2016 data yet, I'll happily retract the "rising" part of my comment.

The unemployment number is low, but anyone who thinks that shows a robust economy and rosy picture is nuts.

 

[PokerGuy]

So the answer, obviously, is to deregulate finance, gut federal enforcement agencies & give the Jerb Creatin' Investor Class a whopping tax cut!

And don't forget to cut the school lunch program & others to save money!

I know you're just spouting off the usual lefty drivel, but the poverty rate generally correlates with the economic cycle. Those at the top of the food chain are not impacted by a downturn in the economy nearly as much as those at the low end who don't have the same buffers. Anything we can do that improves the economy will help the poverty rate.

 

[ivwshane]

The number of people that receive some form of assistance continues to rise. This article has shows the trendline for the percentage of people receiving federal benefits of some sort.

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2012...f-of-u-s-lives-in-household-getting-benefits/

Note that this is not to say that every benefit is bad or anything like that, just showing that the percentage of people who get at least some sort of public assistance is rising. I'm assuming this has gone up significantly since then because of the people getting obummercare subsidies since then.

Since assistance programs have only grown over the years, it's safe to assume that the current high mark is also the highest ever, though I can't say I've seen stats for the great depression or other long ago times.

With regard to wages, I didn't say wages were declining. I said if the unemployment number is low and yet the number of people in the "poverty" or "low income" categories now hovers around 50% of the country, it signals that the wages for that bottom 50% of the country have not kept up with the cost of living, which means they've been stagnant. We've recently seen some upticks in wages, but I don't know if that reflects wages on the higher side of the spectrum rising or wages rising for the lower 50%. Regardless, the point is 50% of the population is either in poverty or "low income". Not exactly a healthy situation, regardless of a low unemployment number.

With regard to the poverty level, the latest number here is 13.5%. Definitely high, but that shows it going down from '13 to '15, not up. I'm assuming that's the impact of obummercare handouts. I don't know if 2016 will be higher or lower than 13.5%, but since the census bureau hasn't released 2016 data yet, I'll happily retract the "rising" part of my comment.

The unemployment number is low, but anyone who thinks that shows a robust economy and rosy picture is nuts.

So the best you could do is to show that people on assistance was increasing back in 2011, six years ago? Lol ok.

I'll take the rest of your post as conceding that what you wrote was wrong.

 

[Sonikku]

Thanks, Trump.

 

[JSt0rm]

fake news.