If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Reuters)   Jobless claims jump, causing Jack Welch to soil himself in ecstasy   (reuters.com) divider line 29
    More: Interesting, jobless claims, Labor Department, soils, labor market  
•       •       •

1061 clicks; posted to Business » on 18 Oct 2012 at 11:07 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



29 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-10-18 10:46:54 AM
Columbus Day.
 
2012-10-18 11:16:04 AM
Despite the spike, a four-week moving average that smoothes out weekly volatility was down from a month earlier, suggesting the lackluster job market recovery remains on track.

Also:

dailydish.typepad.com
 
2012-10-18 12:19:36 PM
Recovery is recovery, regardless of speed. Anything north of zero is a good thing, so stop farking complaining. We avoided a society-ending crash, and are limping back into prosperity after being kneecapped. Things like this take time.
 
2012-10-18 12:28:14 PM

Kuroshin: Anything north of zero is a good thing


It would be impossible for the first-time unemployment claim numbers to be south of zero.

/Although with the seasonal adjustments, you never know...
 
2012-10-18 12:44:11 PM
It's pretty clear the previous set of numbers was erroneous. Welch and others had pointed out they couldn't possibly be correct (some claimed the numbers were gamed, which isn't likely the case; probably just a standard mistake), but they were attacked by those who wanted to make the case that the economy is picking up speed.

The economy is improving, but not at a fast rate and the jobs are seriously lagging. That's not news to anybody, and today's numbers bring that out. Stuff didn't get way better last week (as some claimed) unless it got way worse this week. Didn't happen.

Nothing really to see here beyond the numbers are where everybody expected all along.
 
2012-10-18 12:48:42 PM

akula: It's pretty clear the previous set of numbers was erroneous


If you're an idiot. NO ONE is questioning it outside of pundits.
 
2012-10-18 01:04:27 PM

SacriliciousBeerSwiller: akula: It's pretty clear the previous set of numbers was erroneous

If you're an idiot. NO ONE is questioning it outside of pundits.


Uh, you serious?

California is saying the previous numbers were due to delayed processing of applications. The truth is that the numbers last time were not an accurate reflection of reality. Hiring didn't suddenly pick up then shut down. It's been pretty stable... frustratingly low, but stable.
 
2012-10-18 01:10:43 PM

akula: It's pretty clear the previous set of numbers was erroneous. Welch and others had pointed out they couldn't possibly be correct (some claimed the numbers were gamed, which isn't likely the case; probably just a standard mistake), but they were attacked by those who wanted to make the case that the economy is picking up speed.

The economy is improving, but not at a fast rate and the jobs are seriously lagging. That's not news to anybody, and today's numbers bring that out. Stuff didn't get way better last week (as some claimed) unless it got way worse this week. Didn't happen.

Nothing really to see here beyond the numbers are where everybody expected all along.


Didn't Welch claim that the monthly unemployment report was cooked? This has farkall to do with that.
 
2012-10-18 01:19:21 PM

rumpelstiltskin: Didn't Welch claim that the monthly unemployment report was cooked?


Yes... but as I said, some claimed the numbers were gamed, it turns out it was more of a bureaucratic error. The assumption the numbers were cooked was because the seemingly improved numbers were being used by people for political ends instead of everybody saying "You know, this can't be right; we need more information before we break out the cake and blow jobs."
 
2012-10-18 01:29:16 PM

akula: rumpelstiltskin: Didn't Welch claim that the monthly unemployment report was cooked?

Yes... but as I said, some claimed the numbers were gamed, it turns out it was more of a bureaucratic error. The assumption the numbers were cooked was because the seemingly improved numbers were being used by people for political ends instead of everybody saying "You know, this can't be right; we need more information before we break out the cake and blow jobs."


What "bureaucratic error" has been identified in the Employment Situation Summary, released on October 5? This is what Jack Welch claimed was cooked.
 
2012-10-18 01:41:06 PM

rumpelstiltskin: akula: rumpelstiltskin: Didn't Welch claim that the monthly unemployment report was cooked?

Yes... but as I said, some claimed the numbers were gamed, it turns out it was more of a bureaucratic error. The assumption the numbers were cooked was because the seemingly improved numbers were being used by people for political ends instead of everybody saying "You know, this can't be right; we need more information before we break out the cake and blow jobs."

What "bureaucratic error" has been identified in the Employment Situation Summary, released on October 5? This is what Jack Welch claimed was cooked.


Scroll up. I linked to an article where California wasn't processing applications in a timely manner and ended up reporting an incorrect number. The first number was incorrect. Welch (like any political talking head) assumed improper motives on the part of the BLS and/or others; there's no need to assume malice when a simple foul up is more likely.
 
2012-10-18 01:51:06 PM

akula: rumpelstiltskin: akula: rumpelstiltskin: Didn't Welch claim that the monthly unemployment report was cooked?

Yes... but as I said, some claimed the numbers were gamed, it turns out it was more of a bureaucratic error. The assumption the numbers were cooked was because the seemingly improved numbers were being used by people for political ends instead of everybody saying "You know, this can't be right; we need more information before we break out the cake and blow jobs."

What "bureaucratic error" has been identified in the Employment Situation Summary, released on October 5? This is what Jack Welch claimed was cooked.

Scroll up. I linked to an article where California wasn't processing applications in a timely manner and ended up reporting an incorrect number. The first number was incorrect. Welch (like any political talking head) assumed improper motives on the part of the BLS and/or others; there's no need to assume malice when a simple foul up is more likely.


The error you reference has nothing to do with the Employment Situation Summary. It has nothing to do with Jack Welch's claims.
 
2012-10-18 01:52:11 PM
I'll just leave this here: New Jobs Data
 
2012-10-18 02:01:54 PM
Funny headline. As an aside, jack welch was one of the commenters during the "men who built America" show on the history channel te other night.

I had no idea he had such a severe Massachusetts accent.
 
2012-10-18 02:12:26 PM

rumpelstiltskin: akula: rumpelstiltskin: akula: rumpelstiltskin: Didn't Welch claim that the monthly unemployment report was cooked?

Yes... but as I said, some claimed the numbers were gamed, it turns out it was more of a bureaucratic error. The assumption the numbers were cooked was because the seemingly improved numbers were being used by people for political ends instead of everybody saying "You know, this can't be right; we need more information before we break out the cake and blow jobs."

What "bureaucratic error" has been identified in the Employment Situation Summary, released on October 5? This is what Jack Welch claimed was cooked.

Scroll up. I linked to an article where California wasn't processing applications in a timely manner and ended up reporting an incorrect number. The first number was incorrect. Welch (like any political talking head) assumed improper motives on the part of the BLS and/or others; there's no need to assume malice when a simple foul up is more likely.

The error you reference has nothing to do with the Employment Situation Summary. It has nothing to do with Jack Welch's claims.


akula, you seem to be repeating a mistake often made by observers, which is that you think that all the reports generated by the BLS are linked. You're referencing one report based on unemployment claims applications; the unemployment rate is based instead on a random survey of households (details on methodology here), and the "jobs created" number -- reported on the same date as the unemployment rate -- is based on a third survey of businesses.
 
2012-10-18 02:28:31 PM

OrygunFarker: I'll just leave this here: New Jobs Data


FTA: U.S. unemployment, as measured by Gallup without seasonal adjustment, is 7.3%

I am happy that the economy is improving, but we retail outlets, delivery companies and warehouses are ramping up for the holidays. These jobs won't exist come January 15.
 
2012-10-18 03:01:01 PM
Look, it's an Akula-class economicular hackmarine.
 
2012-10-18 03:03:17 PM
Fark headline: jobless claims jump ?

Its so patriotic for teabaggers to instantly quit work and apply for unemployment so that they can say Obama is evil and confirm the conspiracy.

/thats if teabaggers actually worked that is.
 
2012-10-18 03:39:30 PM

Arkanaut: rumpelstiltskin: akula: rumpelstiltskin: akula: rumpelstiltskin: Didn't Welch claim that the monthly unemployment report was cooked?

Yes... but as I said, some claimed the numbers were gamed, it turns out it was more of a bureaucratic error. The assumption the numbers were cooked was because the seemingly improved numbers were being used by people for political ends instead of everybody saying "You know, this can't be right; we need more information before we break out the cake and blow jobs."

What "bureaucratic error" has been identified in the Employment Situation Summary, released on October 5? This is what Jack Welch claimed was cooked.

Scroll up. I linked to an article where California wasn't processing applications in a timely manner and ended up reporting an incorrect number. The first number was incorrect. Welch (like any political talking head) assumed improper motives on the part of the BLS and/or others; there's no need to assume malice when a simple foul up is more likely.

The error you reference has nothing to do with the Employment Situation Summary. It has nothing to do with Jack Welch's claims.

akula, you seem to be repeating a mistake often made by observers, which is that you think that all the reports generated by the BLS are linked. You're referencing one report based on unemployment claims applications; the unemployment rate is based instead on a random survey of households (details on methodology here), and the "jobs created" number -- reported on the same date as the unemployment rate -- is based on a third survey of businesses.


Ah, ok... fark it all anyway. (throws up hands, stomps out...)
 
2012-10-18 03:58:42 PM
Like Jack Welch is going to create an ass scraper job under the Obama regime.
 
2012-10-18 04:27:46 PM
At Jack's age he probably soils himself for all kinds of reasons.
 
2012-10-18 06:19:08 PM
Because quite frankly I'm too lazy to look it up for myself, were revised numbers for the questionable week ever released? And if so, what were they?
 
2012-10-18 06:34:10 PM
What's up with the photo with that story? Is that unemployed people writing suicide notes before they jump?
 
2012-10-18 07:04:18 PM

rumpelstiltskin: akula: rumpelstiltskin: Didn't Welch claim that the monthly unemployment report was cooked?

Yes... but as I said, some claimed the numbers were gamed, it turns out it was more of a bureaucratic error. The assumption the numbers were cooked was because the seemingly improved numbers were being used by people for political ends instead of everybody saying "You know, this can't be right; we need more information before we break out the cake and blow jobs."

What "bureaucratic error" has been identified in the Employment Situation Summary, released on October 5? This is what Jack Welch claimed was cooked.


The total dark obamatons were wrong again.
 
2012-10-18 08:39:31 PM

Nadie_AZ: OrygunFarker: I'll just leave this here: New Jobs Data

FTA: U.S. unemployment, as measured by Gallup without seasonal adjustment, is 7.3%

I am happy that the economy is improving, but we retail outlets, delivery companies and warehouses are ramping up for the holidays. These jobs won't exist come January 15.


Yes, but the adjusted in his link was 7.7, which is a .1 improvement from a week and a half ago. Still good news.
 
2012-10-18 11:05:06 PM
The only number that counts is the one where I have a job or not.
 
2012-10-19 08:01:05 AM

Rapmaster2000: At Jack's age he probably soils himself for all kinds of reasons.


But who doesn't, right? Hahaha....


... right?
 
2012-10-19 08:30:15 AM
Jack Welch talkin' BS again? He didn't get his nickname "chainsaw" by lowering the unemployment rate.
 
2012-10-19 06:22:04 PM

Snarky Acronym: Jack Welch talkin' BS again? He didn't get his nickname "chainsaw" by lowering the unemployment rate.


Are u getting him confused with Al "chainsaw" Dunlap?
 
Displayed 29 of 29 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report