I am simply never wrong. I told you a little more than 2 weeks ago tht the "drop in new unemplyment claims to 343,000 was TOTAL FICTION: created by the seasonal distortin of superstorm Sandy.
Last Thursday, I was shown to be right again, as the number nof new unemplyment claims "rose" at least 17,0000 (maybe 20,0000--when REVISED figure released tomorrow), to a "seaonsally adjusted" 361,000 9again, likely 364,000, after being REVISED tomorrow). For one of the few times in the last 3 YEARS, my own (pre-announced) "revisin of the 343,000 announced 2 Thursdays ago was less accurate than the media/Labor Dept. headline number of 343,0000. Last Thursday, the previus week's intitial 343,000 was revised upward only 1,0000: less thaan the most common 3,000 UPWARD revisin that usually occurs. It has been FOREVER since the uncrevised number of new unemplyment claims (to be announced tomorrow) has been revised DOWNWARD, revealing just how dishoenst our media and Labor Dept. are to accept the consistent ERROR in the headline number every week, year after year. Until a new patttern is firmly estalbishmed,as it has not been in more than 3 eyars, I will continue to REVISE the Labor Dept .number myself, IMMEDIATELY, by the same 3,0000. That means that last week's initial number of 361,0000 will likely be revised tomorrow to 364,000 or more.
It does not realy matter. The number of new unemplyment claims is significant ONLY OVER TIME, and shows the "labor market" has NOT IMROVEDE the entire year of 2012. The range from geginning to end was 351,0000-392,0000: ignoring the "temorary" distortions of Sandy and the FICTIONAL 342,0000 ne week, when the dishoenst Labor Dept LEFT OUT CALIFORNIA (or much of it), wihtout ever correcting the error (although acknowledging it). 364,0000, or even 361,0000, is essentially in the MIDDLE of the yearly range of 351,0000-392,0000. Nor has that "range' shown some sort of steady "improvement" at the end of the eyar. From mid-January to about mid-March, the range of new unemplyment claims was about 351,0000-365,0000. Last Thursday's initial number was at the TOP of that range early this year: again indicating NO "improvement" this entire year.
Dishonest Los Angeles Times? Their headline last headline last Thursday was: "New unemplyment claims rise 17,0000, but still relatively low." As I have shown you, that is a LIE. Yep I jsut called the Lost Angeless Times LIARS, and I =stand 100% behind that statement. In fact, I PREDICTED exactly this LIE. How can LA Times say number is "relatively low", when it iswell within the yearly range and would have been at the tOP of the February range? Easy. LA Tiemes, which DISCOUNTED Sandy-induced spikes to 451,0000, 416,0000 and 395,0000, is suggesting that 364,0000 (or 361,000) is "relatively low" when compared with those SPIKE numbers that the media said WERE NOT REAL. You jsut can't get any more dishoenst than that, and can't get any more dishoenst than the "journalists" of the disgraceful Los Angeles Times.
Year is "in the boks" now., and the whole YEAR was a FAIURE for Obama: NO IMPROVEMENT. No. It does not matter what happens tomorrow, or the following week. We still hae possible seasonal distrotins from Sandy (distortions which can go both ways), and HOLIDAY numbers are impossibly unreliable. So next two weeks don't even mean much (whether numbers go up or down). The YEAR is already in the books, and it was a FAILURE for the labor market and Obama. Any fluctuations in these last two weeks merely represent statistical "noise".
We really are not going to get much of a handle on 2013 until looking at the numbers over the weeks from mid-January to the beginning of April. Sure, we might get some idea of where we are gonig, starting in mid-January (away from holidays), but lat THREE eyars have shown sAE new "seasonal pattern": Misleading, APPARENT "improvement" in February, followed by apparent DETERIORATIN as we go into sprin and summer. 2012 was especailly notable in that regard, as there was NO real "improvement" even as we head into the end of this year. And we will not have any, since there is no way to know whether any suposed "improvement' these last two weeks is 'real'. or a result of distortins from both Sandy and the holiday season.
How did we end up with NO "improvement' in new unemlyment claims, and this supposed "improvement" int he unemplyment ate? Inconsistent numbers. I prefer the number of new unemplyment claims as a better indicator, even though it is hardly free frm manipulatin. There are simply more data pints, and somewhat less subjectivity in the weekly new unemplyment claims numbers.
Again, I have prepared you to look thorough the media LIES tomorrow. Tomorrow's number of new unemlyment claims is pretty meaningless, because of possible distortins. But expect the media to SAY that ONLY if the number is BAD. A "good" number will be "evidence" that the "labor market" is turning around--NOT.
We continue to be STUCK in a bad place, as far as JOBS are concerned.
P.S. No proofreaidng or spell checking (bad eyesight).