IBJNews

  • Home

Jobless claims drop more than expected

Associated Press
March 25, 2010
Keywords
Economic Recovery, Economy, Employees, Employment, Government & Economic Development, Hiring, Unemployment
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

New claims for unemployment benefits fell more than expected last week as layoffs ease and hiring slowly recovers.

The Labor Department said first-time claims dropped by 14,000 to a seasonally adjusted 442,000. That's below analysts' estimate of 450,000, according to Thomson Reuters.

But most of the drop resulted from a change in the calculations the department makes to seasonally adjust the data, a Labor Department analyst said. The department updates its methods every year. Excluding the effect of those adjustments, claims would have fallen by only 4,000.

The four-week average of claims, which smooths volatility, dropped by 11,000 to 453,750, the lowest since September 2008, when the financial crisis intensified.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Only for the rich
    JoJuly 23, 2010 9:13 AM
    This week I received a billing statement from the government regarding my unemployment benefits. It said "that I owe for the $25 stimulus" that I had received weekly from them. There was a glitch in their system and the state wants it back.
    I have been receiving unemployment for approx 4 mos after losing a job where I had been employed for almost 7 years.
    Then, in the national news this morning, the newscasters are talking about the banking bail out. Executives have received over 1.5 billion in bonuses!! Why is the government not making them pay it back?? Our system is broken. This has been an eye opening and very upsetting experience for me.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • More Ponzi accounting
    enron.accountantMarch 25, 2010 11:03 AM
    Only in America can 400k-500k jobs being lost a month be bullish for the market and economy.
    Animal spirits and confidence must be restored at all costs even if the means are fraudulant and illegal.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

ADVANCED SEARCH
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ

  1. These higher rates Co. e about only because physicians are now hospital employees. otherwise physicians couldn't charge these rates and share the windfall with the hospital. Community/rural hospitals probably not buying physicians practices and thus weren't getting the windfall anyway.

  2. The incentive for poor people to get themselves off public assistance and "no longer be poor" is even with help...they're STILL POOR! Being poor, even with some assistance, isn't all that pleasant. (I speak from experience) It's a stubborn myth that poor people, who are on public assistance, are sitting in the lap of luxury. You should try living on just those "freebies" that you mentioned and see how meager they actually are. By the way, I didn't mean you had to buy/own a puppy...just pet one. :)

  3. As near as I can tell the minority has ZERO constitutional obligation to offer a quorum to the majority. A requirement for quorum was inserted into the constitution so that tyrannical majorities could not simply shove through odious and objectionable legislation (which is exactly what they did.) By allowing a tyrannical majority to charge fines against the minority for exercising their constitutional prerogative to deny quorum the court as made a mockery of constitutional governance in the state of Indiana.

  4. The voters elected the Reps to make a vote not walk out on the vote. They had to the right to exercise their opinion and vote "no" to the bill. Let me ask you this if you walked out of your job for 5 straight weeks would you get paid? Would you even have a job to go back to? If any elected official walks out on the people they should be arrested for stealing tax dollars from the public. They were elected to do a job and not leave when the job gets stuff.

  5. I have been to several of their locations in Pennsylvania and always go in for 1 item and leave with a basket full of things. I'm very happy they decided on Indiana, now if only they would put the other store in eastside.

ADVERTISEMENT