So don't thank him, thank the business cycle.

... and I may be wrong but these numbers don't include folks who have dropped off the Unemployment roles and are just kinda ... floating.

Oh and woo hoo yay, bring on the minimum wage jobs! You'll starve and be homeless, but you have a JOB! Thanks Right-To-Work governors!

always measure it. That is what is lowest in 15 years. Apples to apples

Sad that you just can't admit that Obama's policies, with other things, is bringing the economy back.

Yes, there are minimum wage jobs. That is where any recovery starts. If you look at the higher paid jobs they have rebounded recently.

This number has nothing to do with the unemployment rate that is released monthly.

k and r..Thanks Obama...

"They don't count you if your benefits have run out!"

This, at least the headline number, is a metric of initial claims;people who just started asking for benefits (and BTW yes the better known headline UE rate does indeed include you even if your benefits have expired)

"There's nobody left working to lay off!"

Other than the 147 million people working, 3 million more than a year ago

"Everybody just got minimum wage McJobs instead!"

Which doesn't explain why median income is rising slowly, and for nonsupervisory (no Bill Gates in a bar excuses either) workers is well above $20/hr. Hours worked sre rising slowly too. If the median is rising, more jobs must be being filled above it than below it, QED.

"They're fudging the numbers to make Obama look good! It's all lies!"

Which begs the question of why he let himself look bad for years, and why a workforce of many hundreds of people spanning the political gamut are in silent conspiracy to help one Dem who cannot run again, all\ without a single even Enquirer-level expose.

EDIT - serves me right for breaking off to answer emails in the middle of a post - we got a couple of these posted already in the interim!



Admittedly not a tough prediction, as we've seen every single one of them raised to even the most tepid of welcome news on the jobs front.

Ordinarily, the Bureau of Labor Statistics releases that information on the first Friday of the month. That is, you would expect April's figures to be released tomorrow. Due to the lack of time to compile and assess the information, the BLS won't be releasing the data until next Friday.

"The Employment Situation for April is scheduled to be released on Friday, May 8, 2015, at 8:30 a.m. (EDT)."

I hope to be here for that.

In fact if I were forced to guess, and guess is all it is, I'd venture that increase in jobseekers nudges U3 up to 5.6 even though number employed will surely rise.

That and $1.99 will get you a cup of coffee.

night in the office to get the report ready for tomorrow (assuming all the data has come through). Stop trying to make what is obvious into something that it isn't.

Conspiracy much?

Hate Obama much?

Basically saying everyone is going to claim conspiracy since they are pushing the release back a week. I think that is standard SOP for the BLS in this situation though where the first Friday of the month is the first day of the month.

all I'm doing is alerting my thousands of fans people who have nothing better to do than to wait for the BLS's monthly employment report that there won't be a post Friday morning because of the delay.

good news for the corporate subsidy called food stamps.

if you want to buy into the income inequality economy that's your problem and I don't believe everything Obama's yes men say.

This metric is one of initial claims. People just recently laid off or otherwise separated from employers who want to start getting benefits.

The only way minimum wage part time jobs would even apply in reducing this number is if

1) people got their metaphorical pink slips (aside question; has anybody recently actually received a slip of pink paper in this case?) and instead of filing a claim like a normal person to get the ball rolling and THEN start looking for work, they chose to stop by McDonalds on the way home to fill in an application.

2) They were hired on the spot, and decided that a minimum wage part time job was better than receiving benefits and having time to look for a full time job in their own trade or profession (and even if you got 30 hours at minimum wage, barely part time still, this would only make financial sense even assuming you LIKED working essentially for free if you were previously paid under 22000 a year), and so did not bother to file an application at all. If you made more than that before becoming unemployed, which the vast majority do, your benefits, in a less-than generous RW state I checked based on a web search (MO) would exceed that 30 hours at min wage, even assuming no deductions on wages.

So your suggestion relies on there being huge swathes of low wage workers who would rather clean out grease traps for 30 hours a week rather than file for benefits that would be the same income, were capable of being immediately hired for these jobs, and who made that decision before filing an application. In other words they would have to be either terminally bored or terminally stupid low income people who were nevertheless impressive enough to be hired immediately.


Not all that likely really.

sheep will be sheep.

but I refuse to buy into the hype.

Thanks Obama!!!!!

If he's going to get blame for everything bad then he should get credit for the good.

that Obama had nothing to do with this. No President controls the economy.

(You know the GOP is going to say it's because they got the majority in Congress.)