New Unemployment Claims Shrink to 3-Year Low
EmailNew unemployment claims sank to a three-year low last week.
The number of Americans filing new jobless claims fell by 19,000 to 366,000 for the week ending Dec. 10, according to the Department of Labor. The figure is the lowest the country has seen since May 2008.
The number brings the four-week average of weekly unemployment applications to 387,750, a decline of 6,500 from the previous week and the lowest four-week figure since July 2008.
New unemployment claims falling below “400,000 is definitely a good sign but part of that is because companies have already shed a lot of jobs, made a lot of cutbacks, so we’re not in that phase anymore,” said Stephen Bronars, senior economist at Welch Consulting. ”So now the problem is getting people back to work.”
The new figure is the “best single piece of news we had in some time,” Bronars added.
“Layoffs have come way down but what we need is for hiring to pick up” to illustrate a recovery, he said. “Although hiring is up, it’s not up to anywhere close to pre-recession levels.”
”In the past three months, net job gains have averaged 143,000 a month,” according to the Associated Press. “That compares with an average of 84,000 in the previous three months.”
The country has been dogged in the past few years by persistent unemployment since hitting a high of 10.1 percent in October 2009.
One sector hit hard by the recession was manufacturing, which added just 2,000 jobs in November and has remained nearly unchanged since July, according American Manufacturing.
“If we want to rebuild the middle class in America, we need strong employment growth in manufacturing,” Scott Paul, executive director of the Alliance for American Manufacturing, said.
Bronars said, “We did lose a lot of jobs in manufacturing , probably as many as many as a couple of million,” adding that manufacturing has seen an increase in job postings.
“The problem is we’ll never get back to where we were, ” he said.
There are more than 6 million people receiving unemployment benefits.
Memorial Day Deals 
Man Charged in Deposit Error Spending Spree 
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
Keep buying American products, folks and we can turn this economy around. Read your labels and make the right choice to grow jobs here. The job you save or grow may indirectly be your own.
Posted by: Librarian53 | December 15, 2011, 12:06 pm 12:06 pm
I guess we pretty much have run out of people.
Posted by: newcountryman | December 15, 2011, 12:13 pm 12:13 pm
Watch what happens in January when all the extra help for the holidays is laid off!!!!
Posted by: Sammy | December 15, 2011, 12:22 pm 12:22 pm
This is getting ridiculous. Does the government think the people don’t see right through this? Less jobless claims because the previous unemployed that have fallen off benefits can’t reapply. The employed that are left have cut hours and make less…. I’m so tired of this
Posted by: jenny | December 15, 2011, 12:39 pm 12:39 pm
Sammy…shush! We’re not talking about that now. Be of good cheer.
Posted by: newcountryman | December 15, 2011, 12:40 pm 12:40 pm
@Librarian53 – That always doesn’t work for those of us who are living on the IRA money that was supposed to be our retirement. Those of use who no longer show in the unemployment figures, however, we’re part of the REAL percentage. The 17-18% rate.
Besides, my 4 year old Honda Accord was built in the mid west, by US workers, from US made parts. The engines are about the only part still shipped in from Japan, and I’m not too sure about that.
Posted by: Unemployed_WAY_Too_Long | December 15, 2011, 12:49 pm 12:49 pm
Lowest number of “new claims” not lowest number of “unemployed”.
The fact is, when so many people are already unemployed, the pace of new claims should slow down at some point.
..”Only 366,000 people (entire population of Colorado Springs!)filed claims for the week ending Dec 10″!!!
The markets react so irrationally (they go up sharply on this news), nobody really reads, just see what they want to see.
Posted by: Really? | December 15, 2011, 1:08 pm 1:08 pm
REALLY? | DECEMBER 15, 2011, 1:08 PM…..And when we measure unemployment as was done before Clinton changed the metrics, we get closer to 16%. But Bush’s admin used the same calculation method that Obama’s is.
Posted by: deanbob | December 15, 2011, 1:14 pm 1:14 pm
Well good ! Then we dont need to extend unemployment and can stop with the 99 weeks of unemployment.!!!!!!!!!!! I guarantee you by February it will be hovering at 10%. This is merely false information and due to the Christmas season.
Posted by: Soni | December 15, 2011, 1:23 pm 1:23 pm
REALLY? | DECEMBER 15, 2011, 1:08 PM…..And when we measure unemployment as was done before Clinton changed the metrics, we get closer to 16%. But Bush’s admin used the same calculation method that Obama’s is.
Posted by: deanbob | December 15, 2011, 1:14 pm 1:14 pm
********************************************************************************************************************
Obama changed it last year to keep long term on the rolls for three additional years. Unlike Bush. When the republicans try to claim Obama is bad because they changed how this is calculated they evidently don’t grasp he changed it in a way that is more honest than Bush had it.
Posted by: lexingtonlady | December 15, 2011, 2:10 pm 2:10 pm
Once again, we get a bit of good news and the Right WHINERS come here and cry about it. I swear, these people would whine if Obama cured cancer, because he DIDN’T cure the common cold too…………..
Posted by: Searambler | December 15, 2011, 3:30 pm 3:30 pm
Sea don’t worry, if a cure comes up Obam will have no problem of taking the credit. He always does.But when his policies fail, it is Bush’t fault or his new whipping post, the House.
Posted by: specialty57 | December 15, 2011, 4:34 pm 4:34 pm
I don’t quite understand how that no new claims for unemployment means that people are getting employed. What about the long term unemployed? There are probably thousands of people that have been unemployed for 2 years or more that are no longer getting benefits yet still unemployed. How does the government keep track of those people? There should be a measuring stick to keep track of those people. It is a sad situation still for the unemployed, but I am keeping my hopes up that things will turn around. I just wish the TRUE numbers were published and put on the news, not the “adjusted” numbers.
Posted by: Joyce Hammock | December 15, 2011, 6:53 pm 6:53 pm
Posted by: jenny | December 15, 2011, 12:39 pm 12:39 pm: “This is getting ridiculous. Does the government think the people don’t see right through this? Less jobless claims because the previous unemployed that have fallen off benefits can’t reapply.” +++++ Jenny, it’s ridiculous that you can’t read “new jobless claims” and realize -if you bothered reading the article- that these are NEWLY unemployed people and the number has NOTHING to do with the long-term unemployed.
Posted by: The_Mick | December 15, 2011, 9:59 pm 9:59 pm
LEXINGTONLADY | DECEMBER 15, 2011, 2:10 PM ….You copied my post. Did you read the entire post? Do you know the difference between THE MEASUREMENT of unemployment and the payment of it? Does my post sat anything about PAYMENT? We need to disband the Dept of Education because we’ve tripled the spending, but the average test scores have – at best – stayed the same. Throwing good money after bad, is such a waste.
Posted by: deanbob | December 16, 2011, 12:04 pm 12:04 pm