WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. employers cut 539,000 jobs last month, the fewest since October, according to government data on Friday that signaled the economy's steep decline might be easing and gave the stock market a boost.

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idU...eedName=topNews

but we still lost 539K jobs, not including the 60K added for the cencus which will be lost shortly again

but unemployment was up to only 8.9 vs the 9.1 expected,


god im dizzy from all this spinning

Point is theyd been losing more than 600,000 per month for awhile. Has to slow down before it can stop.

but i dont think one month as a slower pace, after taking out the 60K for the cencus, is enough


i think we are having a false sense of security, like we did back in feb

every manager in my state has just gotten the axe.

Yeah, great f-ing news on jobs.

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE WEEKLY CLAIMS REPORT

SEASONALLY ADJUSTED DATA

In the week ending May 9, the advance figure for seasonally adjusted initial claims was 637,000, an increase of 32,000 from the previous week's revised figure of 605,000. The 4-week moving average was 630,500, an increase of 6,000 from the previous week's revised average of 624,500.The advance seasonally adjusted insured unemployment rate was 4.9 percent for the week ending May 2, an increase of 0.1 percentage point from the prior week's unrevised rate of 4.8 percent.

The advance number for seasonally adjusted insured unemployment during the week ending May 2 was 6,560,000, an increase of 202,000 from the preceding week's revised level of 6,358,000. The 4-week moving average was 6,337,250, an increase of 128,750 from the preceding week's revised average of 6,208,500.

The fiscal year-to-date average for seasonally adjusted insured unemployment for all programs is 5.011 million.

UNADJUSTED DATA

The advance number of actual initial claims under state programs, unadjusted, totaled 565,395 in the week ending May 9, an increase of 27,856 from the previous week. There were 325,480 initial claims in the comparable week in 2008.

The advance unadjusted insured unemployment rate was 4.6 percent during the week ending May 2, a decrease of 0.1 percentage point from the prior week. The advance unadjusted number for persons claiming UI benefits in state programs totaled 6,166,785, a decrease of 95,837 from the preceding week. A year earlier, the rate was 2.1 percent and the volume was 2,845,952.


Extended benefits were available in Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin during the week ending April 25.

Initial claims for UI benefits by former Federal civilian employees totaled 1,218 in the week ending May 2, an increase of 104 from the prior week. There were 1,684 initial claims by newly discharged veterans, an increase of 3 from the preceding week.

There were 16,542 former Federal civilian employees claiming UI benefits for the week ending April 25, a decrease of 63 from the previous week. Newly discharged veterans claiming benefits totaled 28,528, a decrease of 768 from the prior week.

States reported 2,156,515 persons claiming EUC (Emergency Unemployment Compensation) benefits for the week ending April 25, a decrease of 122,963 from the prior week. EUC weekly claims include both first and second tier activity.

The highest insured unemployment rates in the week ending April 25 were in Michigan (7.8 percent), Oregon (7.5), Pennsylvania (6.5), Wisconsin (6.4), Nevada (6.3), Idaho (6.1), Puerto Rico (5.9), Vermont (5.8), Alaska (5.7), and Rhode Island (5.7).

The largest increases in initial claims for the week ending May 2 were in Illinois (+2,052), Kansas (+2,025), Puerto Rico (+1,781), Indiana (+1,051), and Ohio (+1,013), while the largest decreases were in New York (-13,386), Michigan (-10,952), North Carolina (-8,988), Massachusetts (-3,705), and Connecticut (-2,802).


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


http://www.dol.gov/opa/media/press/eta/ui/current.htm

Must make you very happy, right? Since the voice of your party is on record as hoping for our leader to fail, which obviously means he hopes our country will fail.

Ditto for the dems when bush was in office.

My party? And which party would that be?


Since I have clearly stated that politicians on both sides of the aisle are liars, and I think that's a bad thing, tell me which party is mine? Please provide proof to back up your assertion, not simply your opinion of where my political affiliations lean. Proof would be an actual statement, made by me, that would indicate I prefer a specific party, or I voted for a specific party line, or some such other viable evidence to support your claim. Otherwise, it's just another asshole, I mean opinion of yours.

link to a DNC chairman saying he hopes Bush fails?

Funny how Pats&Sox will try to use job loss figures from one week to infer a trend in unemployment, but refuses to accept one article about global cooling.


Cherry pick that data, and twist it like a pretzel, Pats&Sox.


It shows your (lack of) intellectual integrity.

Michael Steele said he wants Obama to fail?

Link?

More ignorance from Pats&Sox

distract, avoid then lie. good plan.

Steele didnt say it, Limbaugh, the head of your party did. Since the dems dont have a party head higher than the chair of the NC, I asked for the DNC saying it.

oh please dude. are you seriously going to try this angle now? are you pissed that I wouldnt defend the entire democratic party and now youre going to act like you wont?

rush is the rnc chairman?

man you do swallow everything that is feed to you

The RNC chairman apologizes to rush for unapproved comments.

Pretty obvious who's in charge there.

Dude, you backpedal so fast it's a wonder you don't ram your wife and kids in the process. (or perhaps you do) You make statements left and right that you can't provide any proof for, and when challenged for proof you try to change the subject. Provide the proof of your claim or stfu, asshole. It really is that simple. You have made it obvious that you are a democrat with your voluminous rants about republicans and conservatives. I challenge you to find any statment I have made that provides any indication of my political preference. You simply can't. Not because you don't want to take the time, but because it isn't there.

Last time I checked, the RNC and the DNC both have a chairman that is the head of their party. You can say anything you want about who you think the party head is, it doesn't make it true. No more so than me saying you are the head of the DNC.

You are an arrogant asshole that can't stand it when someone, whom you have never met, doesn't roll over and drink in your every word as if it is the gospel truth.

Quite frankly, you are also quite ignorant in your supposed knowledge of other segments of the population, as is evidenced by your slams on anyone who doesn't agree with you lockstep, and your inability to engage in any kind of actual constructive dialogue. That is why I (and obviously so many others on this board) get immense enjoyment out of watching you make an asinine fool of yourself day after day on this board.

As I said earlier, please don't change. You are a perfect example to show to my children how they should NOT act.