This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Is The Government Misrepresenting Unemployment By 32%?
There is an old saying, "when in doubt follow the money." These days investors have lots of doubt about pretty much everything (if not so much money). And with data from the government increasingly bearing the Quality Control stamp of approval of the Beijing Communist Party, there is much doubt in store courtesy of an administration which will stop at nothing in its competition with China as to who can blow the biggest asset bubble the fastest, data integrity be damned. Undoubtedly, of all government released data, the most important is, and continues to be, anything relating to unemployment. This is precisely where the government's propaganda armada is focused. Yet in matters of (un)employment, the ultimate authority is, luckily, the Treasury, and not the Fed. "Luckily," because when it comes to making money "difficult to follow" Tim Geithner's office still has much to learn. Which is why when we looked at the Daily Treasury Statement data we were very surprised: because it indicates that the government could be underrepresenting employment data by up to 32%!
The suddenly very prominent topic of Unemployment Insurance, whether it pertains to Initial Claims or to Emergency Unemployment, has one very useful characteristic: it is based on "money", specifically money outflows from the US treasury which goes to fund the weekly "paychecks" of those that have not been in the workforce for well over a year. And as pointed out earlier, money can be followed. The US Treasury presents a daily in and outflow of all money sources in the Daily Treasury Statement prepared by the Financial Management Service. And in the plethora of data presented here, probably the most relevant and useful data series is the Withdrawals quantified in the form of Unemployment Insurance Benefits.
Compiling the monthly data of Treasury Disbursements for Unemployment Insurance Benefits and then superimposing it with the total number of people receiving Insurance Benefits as disclosed by the Department of Labor is a useful exercise, as the two series have historically correlated with an R2 of well over 0.90. Below is an indexed comparison of UIB outlays and Unemployment Insurance Receivers for Fiscal 2007.
Surely this is logical: the more unemployed collecting benefits from the government, the more the outlays.
Yet what struck us is the when this chart is presented from 2007 until today. Something unusual emerges. An absolute chart of the money spent by the government superimposed with the total insured unemployed is presented below:
Yet the best way to see what this chart indicates is on an indexed basis with a September 2007 baseline.
What becomes obvious is that a correlation which used to be almost 1.000 has diverged massively, and now the relative outlays surpass what the government highlights are the number of people actually collecting benefits by 32%! This implies two things: either the average unemployment monthly paycheck has surged, which is not the case, or there is some gray unemployment area which is not disclosed by the government, and which accounts for a shadow unemployed insurance economy. Because while the DOL indicates there are about 9.5 million total unemployed, for the correlation to return to its near 1.0 trendline the number of unemployed on benefits has to be 14 million. At least this is what the actual cash outlays by the Treasury suggest: the government spent a record $14.7 billion on Unemployment Insurance Benefits as of December 30, a 24% jump sequentially from the $11.8 billion in November. Yet the DOL has disclosed a mere 1.7% increase in those to whom insurance benefits are paid: from 9.4 million to just under 9.6 million. To put the $14.7 billion number in perspective, in December the Federal Government paid a total of $14 billion ($700 million less) in Federal Salaries! A cynic could be temped to say that effectively the number of people employed by the government is double what is disclosed. A yet bigger cynic could claim that America is now the biggest socialist state in the world. Both cynics would not necessarily be wrong.
And some more perspective: in calendar 2009 the government has paid $140 billion in Unemployment Insurance Benefits. This is yet another economic stimulus that nobody in the administration discusses, yet which undoubtedly has the biggest impact on the economy, as all those millions unemployed can moderate their pain courtesy of a passable weekly check from the government which should just about cover the rent and beer. Which is why more than anything, Obama is dead set on extending insurance benefit payments in perpetuity: because if the 10 million official and 14 million unofficial people who are on benefits (not to mention the tens of millions of unemployed unlucky enough to even get their weekly allowance from Uncle Sam) start thinking about their true predicament and their real "employability", then a landslide loss by this administration at the mid-term elections will actually be an upside surprise to what it can objectively expect.
h/t Michael
»
- 40391 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Watch for Obama to announce a Job Guarantee program after HC moves through. With a blank check proven in 2009, "deficits don't matter," and a control economy using Fed, Treasury, and Fan/Fred, it will be easy to muster Congress right and left to pass a CCC/WPA like program. Obama does not like to be hated and U6 will not come down for three years unless he does this. "The United States of America will guarantee a job with a living wage and healthcare coverage to all who want to work."
At some point, a job will be a job.
I'd hope there's some regulation that heavily leans against using length of any lack of employment as a part of any criteria(directly and/or indirectly) for anything that leads to employment. If I were a betting man, I'd say that this will be the new age discrimination in terms of use.
Now would not be a good time to bring in any snark about this and to seal this one up as well.
32%
Ken Lay and Madoff are small time candy store thieves compared to our own government.
That is a pathetic statement to have to make.
...and if you step back once more, you have businesses doing what to government?
Oh, by the way: Does anyone have that f*cking idiot on CNBS email address. I'd like to email him this link and tell him to shove this up his @ss sideways.
Here ya go - mailto:prettymucheveryone@cnbc.com
Now THAT is some funny shit.
Could the December spike in payout be from the extension approved for people who ran out anytime this year. I had a friend whose unemployment ran out prior to the extension and he was saying a few weeks ago that he would be getting a large one time check at first he thought for some of that past unemployed time due to the extension passed.
read this -
in a 24 hour period they revised the Chicago PMI numbers (maybe this is why things sold off at day end Thursday)
* DECEMBER 31, 2009, 12:41 P.M. ET UPDATE:
Revisions (from one day earlier) Show Chicago PMI At 58.7 In December CHICAGO
(Dow Jones)--The Institute for Supply Management-Chicago on Thursday released recalculations of the seasonal factors for the components of its headline business barometer. The new data, also known as the PMI, show Chicago business activity was weaker in December than had been reported Wednesday.
For December, the largest downward recalculation was in the employment index. The reading is now 47.6 compared with the 51.2 reported Wednesday.
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20091231-704973.html
Geez, this is bad.
How many times has the "Official Numbers" came out and they are constantly "revised down"? THis has happened how many times?
And the Lamestreamers don't "get it"????
The Lamestream Media (Including CNBC and MSNBC as well as the other "cheerleades", think they are oh so much more intelligent than the rest of the great unwashed, however, how damn dumb and tidiculous can they be? Clownfucks and assclowns? (I like both of those and they are most apt descriptions of these limp brains we have in the so called media. Some "watchdawg" we have there.
S&P down to maybe 500? If "Confidence" is what the markets need, how in the world do the markets think the street is going to react on these constantly biased and overly optomistic (lies) data and numbers are constantly revised downwards?
That "confidence" is going to evaporate like flatuence in a tornado.
this is actually very very bad, not only were the numbers revised within a 24 hour period but the revisions spanned the current and prior reports. Moreover the revisions were significant with the employent index slipping into contraction mode at 47.6 compared with the 51.2 reported the day before. It certainly lends credence to what Zero is arguing.
from Reuters
http://www.reuters.com/assets/print?aid=USTRE5BT2FC20091231
what's worse about this, is if govt/politicians have reason to soften bad news and extend/pretend, then the one day of good news and then a revision makes no sense, why not wait a month...what does a day get you?...but if you wish to trade on inside information, wouldn't a mis-report and then quick correction be perfect for such a play...smells like more than just lipstick on a pig...sounds like they are porking us...
What about the mysterious Emergency Unemployment Benefits?
I am canadian citizen who work and live in u.s since 1999.
i was layoff in july, when I apply to the unemployment insurance in u.s , i was surprised cat and mouse game being played on me; first they said i have prove that i worked legally in u.s. and when i sent my immigration papers , they did not response back about two months. Finally i have to call them when but no one answers the phone, i have to hold the phone 3-4 hours and still no answer. I give up getting my money from uncle sam.
I am canadian citizen who work and live in u.s since 1999.
i was layoff in july, when I apply to the unemployment insurance in u.s , i was surprised cat and mouse game being played on me; first they said i have prove that i worked legally in u.s. and when i sent my immigration papers , they did not response back about two months. Finally i have to call them when but no one answers the phone, i have to hold the phone 3-4 hours and still no answer. I give up getting my money from uncle sam.
Did you try to collect in Ontario?
Tell UI that you are an illegal from Mexico and they are a bunch of racists ....pound the table and yell Denero!
You'll get your money quick.
It is so tough to suss out any real world meaning to BLS unemployed numbers, this cash count has to as close to what is really happening. BLS has crazy birth death models, doesn't count people when the fall off UI by exhausting benes etc...so who knows real number.
Another thing to consider is the freelance/contractors. My sense is that going into this recession, there was a much greater percentage of freelancers vs employees working for big companies. The from what I hear from friends, the local fortune 500 companies in MN, at least 30 percent of the people on their campuses are not employees. So when they talk about mass lay-offs, they mention the number of employees laid off, not the independent contractors, they just fade away and do not even qualify for UI.
So the UI costs are not even the whole story, there are so many contractors out of work, sole proprietor or small shops making half of what they used to, small business owners barely paying the bills etc..
Great point. Are contractors included?
ZH post is all about reported unemployment rate and UI costs, the unemployment rate is simply number of people getting UI minus some bogus "corrections" compared to number of people supposedly working (also based on some bogus hocus pocus numbers. So my point is beyond the issue raised in the post, which is simply the unemployment rate estimated based on those on the dole and a guess of how many do have jobs does not mesh with the money being paid....
BLS does provide the U6 that is closer to reality as it includes more than those just on UI in estimate of who is unemployed, it includes "discourage workers" etc. but still has hocus pocus in it too.
They also do a poll/survey whcih people report the unemployed people around them...that seems closest to reality.
My guess based on ZH post is unemployment rate as they report is is much higher, and then when you factor in those not in these stats...we are likely near depression levels of unemployment...certainly places like Detroit are there already...I think even tho it is almost as bad unemployment as Depression, it doesn't not look/seem quite as bad Depression due to more social safety net today than then...we have UI, Soc Sec, which older workers can take early than they planned if no work, food stamps etc...
Let's get the complete picture of collecting unemployment benefits. Anyone collecting has to apply for at least two jobs per week, keep a written record, and that written record can be audited at any time for up to 2 or more years, by the Employment Security Commission. If there's a problem, the unemployed person can be fined and penalized. I think there may even be a prison sentence for fraud.
So, yes, people receiving UI are required to be submitting paperwork evidence that s/he is looking for work. In some states, it's paper. A telephone call alone, documented by a "Note to the File" to a potential employer does not count as looking for work. Paper documentation only counts.
I have any number of degrees (master's degree, certificate, two year degree, two bachelor's degrees). On the USA JOBS site, I usually score 97.5 percent; however, I don't make the first cut because I don't have Veteran's preference. I have more degrees and more experience than most veterans.
My family pulled out a 50K retirement fund. I spent three years retraining in a health science field. During my first position, first two years, we were faxing documents to India. I had asked, during my two year degree program, whether the jobs would be sent offshore. I had asked, over and over again, during my two year degree program, whether the jobs would be sent offshore. I was told "no" by the program director. When I exhaust UI and need to sign up for welfare and food stamps, I will be the first in the line, as a registered Republican. I tell all my Republican friends, and I'll be happy to email Michele Malkin and tell her, while I'm standing in line. If I'm [over]- educated and I don't have employment, I don't choose to make that my problem or my family's problem (to paraphrase Rush Limbaugh). Try telling a teenager the value of getting a college degree when US jobs are being sent offshore.
Are you one of the Obot's blog army that is supposed to change the perception of online discourse through ancedotal (see probable bullshit) nuance?
Your story above (as well as your earlier one) are so full of glaring ancedotal and nuanced bullshit (see: "I don't have Veteran's preference..." and "I'll be happy to email Michele Malkin ...") that your *obvious troll* is showing through.
Do us all a favor and stop posting these insipid, obvious bullshit comments, 'mkay?
Tyler, we need an ignore function for perfunctory bullshit commenters such as "Heroic Couplet" ...
People argue cost but tax law is one reason jobs get sent offshore. Offshore subsidiaries don't get taxed the way continental US corporate units get taxed. If you want jobs to stay in the US, then just reverse that tax situation. Give the breaks to the employers who keep jobs in the US instead of shipping them overseas and I guarantee that a large number of jobs will flow right back into the US.
Just make sure that it doesn't apply to transplanted subsidiaries that try to get around it.
"Anyone collecting has to apply for at least two jobs per week..."
Unless you live in a state like NY and belong to a union.
Then you just check the box that says "I obtain my work from a union hiring hall" and fuggehtaboutit.
but, but, but how does this fit with the
"saved and/or created" new math equation?
Great job digging up the data Michael. Excellent argument Team Tyler.
"...unemployed can moderate their pain courtesy of a passable weekly check from the government which should just about cover the rent and beer."
I don't know what kind of beer YOU drink, but the maximum unemployment benefit in the state of FL (including the federal kicker of $25 a week) only amounts to $1100 a month. Doesn't really amount to much in terms of one's minimum monthly outlay.
Jump you Fuckers!
Let's not forget the sea of other coontracted workers employed by the FIRE industry who will never collect any unemployment benefits. These were some of the most expandable workers around (mortgage, insurance brokers, real estate agents, etc). Whether the income sourced to them during the good years was their only source of income or supplemental at that time, one thing is for sure. Now it is either significantly less than before or close to zero, as in zero hedge.
yes, really good point, I think middle class was propped up by these jobs, often very good paying jobs that did not require a degree as long as you were not illegal immirgrant and had decent personality you could get by on your wits, like real estate sales and mortgage brokers that made way way more than scientists, engineers, accountants during housing bubble...now these jobs are gone, so someone with HS education has no manufacturing jobs, no salesy type jobs, what's left..retail? service sector
Yes.
All aspects of the housing industry was rolling in the dough.
I remember reading in Businessweek about former sexy salon nail workers pulling in $1 million a year by harvesting mortgages from Mortgage brokers. Well those $1 million / year jobs are not coming back.
just from observation, imho, one of the problems is specialization, i know a few folks, highly qualified over 50, never unemployed who search search search, and the problem is thru the internet they specify 10 qualities you want, and you have 8 in spades, yet, u don't have literacy on "high faluting software xyz", although you're trained in a similar program, thus, you never make it thru human resources first pass, ie, words in your resume'
folks who've found work, over a year, and thru a referral
Three things crossed my mind.
1. Companies have not been reporting layoffs at the end of the year.
2. Could a spike in unemployment benefits paid include those that went beyond the extension and are now back on due to the exetension of 20 weeks?
3. If this is indeed a "hidden stimulus" then are we likely to see more extensions of benefits? I would think that the total amount of weeks that unemployment can be paid out should (I thought I read 99 weeks) be the biggest indicator of unemployment and more importantly job creation (not much) and long term unemployment. My question is, what % of GDP does this make up for?
You know, I watched CNBC for several minutes yesterday to see if there was any mention of revision to last weeks claims figures. Nary a mention, only that things were marginally worse this week versus last. Seems you only get journalism in the so-called fringe media. Keep up the good work.AC Compressor
I think the payout bump is definately from the extended program they just approved because a friend told me who ran out out of unemployment earlier this year he would get a large check at first when it was restored with the extension.
Recent college grads that arent in the medical field must feel like you have to hit the lottery to get a decent college entry job as there is no hiring of them - I am sure student loans will be the next huge default coming a few years from now.
Of course, I just graduated. I have a Bachelors and Masters and 30k of debt.
The government holds my debt through the Department of Education and Sallie Mae. The Feds can print money and bail themselves out when I don't pay.
My girlfriend has almost $200K in student loans and she's just about to graduate with an alternative medicine degree - she's been going to school forever! I don't know how the hell she can ever pay back these loans unless I commit to helping her. That's a big chunk of change for a guy to commit to. I'm pondering this & it weighs heavily, unfortunately.
I feel your pain dude. Stick with love, if that's truly what it is.
To add a little info to the above as well most people already know that you can't bankrupt your way out of it and they don't need to go to court to garnish. Damn slavery.
You are absolutely right. Debt is slavery -- borrower is enslaved to the lender. I suggest not entering in to that arrangement and if you do, do so with incredible moderation. Otherwise, you are just putting a millstone around your neck.
The big issue for Americans is that somehow they thought they ALL could live like kings -- which is how they live compared to the rest of the world. They were foolish to believe so.
I would like to rate this 8 out of 10, You did a good research on respective topics and this will result in this nice posting. I always salute the hard bloggers. Please come with more information..
Ruby Genders,
motor traders insurance
They will also confiscate your paycheck. Your student loans never go away. Especially if they're through the DOE.
Well Tyler, first Happy New Year and to all the same. Now, you guys are leaving out Nevada. We are so close to a depression it is not even funny. You all know about Las Vegas but here in Tahoe it is a disaster between housing and unemployment. We only have 2 main sources of income, gambling and tourism. Both suck. We did supplement that with a hugh housing bubble. Well, you know where that went. Our governor, who of course had an affair in office advises we need more spending cuts, and furloughs. When our state unemployment rate went from 13.3 to 13 we thought, ok now, that's good. But the fine print advised it was because of people leaving Nevada to return home since our horn of plenty expired. This is all so far from over as to be very scarey.
Tyler, excellant article. And now, all the "temporary hires" for the holidays will be "fired".
Beyond words.
Same here in Florida - I think the states that had the biggest housing bubble are all almost in a depression already (California,Nevada, Florida, Arizona) and then you have the rust belt states that are basically in a depression also. The media keeps saying thinga are improving but I dont see it on the ground we have so much unoccupied commercial office/retail space in Florida it is crazy.
Hungry people RIOT,KEEP THE CHECKS COMING
I Will expect mine in my account buy Wen.
on my taxes I'm shooting for the $3000 I did not pay any tax payment!
Good find Tyler. I wonder if some/all of the discrepancy might be taking over some of the GM benefits?
Here's my initial snap analysis:
The 5.5 million that ZH has identified correlates pretty closely to the record 4.5 million on emergency unemployment benefits plus the 800,000+ "correction" that BLS admits that it needs to make but which it refuses to make until next year.
Given the obtuse rules that BLS uses to decide someone is really "unemployed" means they can and do exclude lots of people who would otherwise be counted. It's possible that those on emergency unemployment, who have been out of work for so long, are excluded via some obscure asinine filtering criteria that exists solely to make the administration look better.
NOTE: This sort of selective feel-good filtering has been going on now for a few decades at the least by both parties. That Obama's main economic hit man, Summers, would continue the process is just part of what one would expect from the nest of pathological liars down in Foggy Bottom.
Mr.Durden,
Sorry to say, your findings are likely 100% spot on.
The ONLY reason there has not been an armed insurrection, and riots in the streets, is 92 weeks of Unemployment pay.
Have to keep the Peasants under control.
Can you imagine getting nearly TWO years of Unemployment?.
Where is the incentive to find work, even if there was any?.
The second that stops....................the music is over.
They know it, and look for it to continue......QE to infinity as Mr.Sinclair says.
Gee,I miss the days of Public lynchings.Dem was da good ole days.
+1
They know it, and look for it to continue......QE to infinity as Mr.Sinclair says.
Or a variation on the old slogan, SPQE.
Nice. 'Semper Perpetuus' ... forever!
Could the extra 32% be fraudulent checks sent to illegal aliens? Could there be that big a hole in our system? Wouldn't that just be a kick in the rear...
if there is corruption, why wouldn't the unemployment rate and UI payments both go up? to get UI when you don't qualify you have to fake being a legit unemployed person qualified to receive benes...so even if you are not unemployed or should not qualify, still does not explain divergence between costs and number of unemployed people
Very cool data. The monthly expenditure on unimployment "insurance" is equal to the monthly expenditure on Federal salaries. With all the fudging of statistics like the unemployment rate and CPI, just following the money works. Didn't you guys analyze withholding taxes paid into the Treasury as another independent piece of data indicating a dramatically higher unemployment rate than that reported?
I guess the unemployment check has replaced the soup lines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What becomes obvious is that a correlation which used to be almost 1.000 has diverged massively, and now the relative outlays surpass what the government highlights are the number of people actually collecting benefits by 32%! This implies two things: either the average unemployment monthly paycheck has surged, which is not the case, or there is some gray unemployment area which is not disclosed by the government, and which accounts for a shadow unemployed insurance economy. Because while the DOL indicates there are about 9.5 million total unemployed, for the correlation to return to its near 1.0 trendline the number of unemployed on benefits has to be 14 million. At least this is what the actual cash outlays by the Treasury suggest: the government spent a record $14.7 billion on Unemployment Insurance Benefits as of December 30, a 24% jump sequentially from the $11.8 billion in November. Yet the DOL has disclosed a mere 1.7% increase in those to whom insurance benefits are paid: from 9.4 million to just under 9.6 million. To put the $14.7 billion number in perspective, in December the Federal Government paid a total of $14 billion ($700 million less) in Federal Salaries! A cynic could be temped to say that effectively the number of people employed by the government is double what is disclosed. A yet bigger cynic could claim that America is now the biggest socialist state in the world. Both cynics would not necessarily be wrong.
good observation: "The monthly expenditure on unimployment "insurance" is equal to the monthly expenditure on Federal salaries" - that is stunning
the average Fed salary has to be way higher than average UI check..so if monthly fed salary outlay is less than UI outlay, that's a lot of unemployed people....so how many Fed employees are there? what is there median salary....there must be 1.5 to 3 as many unemployed people as Fed employees...
Wednesday - December 30
Christmas and New Years Hope for a Global Present: Principles
http://www.deanlebaron.com/index.html
William K. Black's Theory of Corporate Fraud
William K. Black is a former senior deputy chief counsel at the federal Office of Thrift Supervision. During the savings and loan crisis of the late 1980s Black investigated accounting fraud. He spoke with Huffington Post Senior Reporter, David Heath, about how fraud can infiltrate entire corporations.
http://tinyurl.com/y89tewt
Lies, damn lies and statistics (c).
Or maybe money went somewhere else and were reported as part of Unemployment Insurance.
This possibility also crossed my mind. Although it seems unlikely given the proximity to the debt ceiling for the past couple of months.
New ad campaign cropping up around the net:
Encouraging people to find local banks and to move their money. Just plug in your zip and they will tell you bank names in your area.
http://moveyourmoney.info/
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/dpike/detail??blogid=161&entry_id=54426
MsC....moveyourmoney is Arianna Huffington's baby along with a few of her friends...she is pumping it heavily on HuffPo as well as the MSM.
I'm sure he eventual meeting with Sheila Bair will be blacked out on the FOIA request just like Meredith Whitney lol!!
I've already moved one account to a local bank and plan to move 2 more soon.
BTW: Did you hear Arianna Huffington give Larry K. the business? "I don't understand why anyone even listens to you any more...." Music to the ears.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-tv/arianna-calls-out-kudlow_b_408480....
wow in pt2 i thought Kudlow was going to cry. Since when is citing someone's own comments an ad hominem attack?
Since Larry wasn't the accuser.
He said she was just out to pimp her website too. So friken what. Does he ever accuse any of the bulls they herd through there each and everyday telling us to buy, buy, buy of talking their book? Hell no. Hypocrite bastard - fuck him and the entire network.
ever notice how bad actors, when called out publicly often get all whiny and victimy...such hypocrisy
just read something on Science news about they proved in a scientific experiment what we know intuitively, how rich and powerful tend to be more judgmental and on moral high horse about other peoples moral slippage but they are more likely to cheat themselves...so rich and powerful are naturally prone to hypocrisy and sense of entitlement and opposite happens with poor and powerless, they are more critical of themselves, more tolerant of others failings
Tyler, a not really tongue-in-cheek question: isn't there someone at the BLS or in Treasury generally that can be bought off to provide some answers to questions like this, or at least to point where (and how) to look to find those answers? Senators and Congressmen probably cost too much, but I'm sure the ZH commentariat and readership could raise a sufficient amount of money to bribe someone knowledgeable enough to shed some real light on matters like this. Seriously - are you telling me that there's not some statistician nerd at the BLS who's struggling to put his kids through school, or care for his aging parents, or who gets lonely for some companionship now and again, who couldn't be induced to spill the beans? Say the word and I'll bet you could raise enough cash to really pull back the curtains and start raising some genuine havoc in the pursuit of the truth about what's going on.
I hope ZH readers are at least slightly brighter than that, if anything, then government is just waiting for such moment to happen to crack down on blogs, you'll give them such a nice excuse to do that.
Boris, I'm not suggesting that it be called the "Bribe a Government Official Fund", highlighted in a neon banner at the top of the main page. Bloody hell, I'm just suggesting that we start playing the game the way it needs to be played. I'm tired of being the guy with the penknife at the gun fight.
Fighting corruption with corruption produces more corruption, not less. I really hope you trolling man, because if you aren't, I'll start suspecting you being one of those agent provocateurs who are usually injected into the legitimate opposition groups and provoke them for unlawful actions. Old technique, really old.
Bring a guillotine next time, idiot.
Sorry, that was aimed at Costanza, not you Boris. Damn Budweiser...
That 32% discrepancy is probably the Govt's way of adding "Street Crime" as employment!
Good work! Can we get an on-going tracking of this outflow number? That would be the best data to observe. My old b-school profs always said, "the statement of cash flow never lies."
Happy New Years
YES!!! A real comment. NiiiiiCCCSE!!!!
are you THE mr mortgage of youtube and crunching Cali mortgage bank numbers? where you been?
In the past (e.g. 2007), Extended Benefits (EB) was covered half by the states and half by the federal government. The February Stimulus Bill provides 100% federal funding for EB (http://lwd.dol.state.nj.us/labor/ui/content/ui_benefit_extensions.html#6). Furthermore, EUC wasn't in play in 2007. Lastly, we haven't had the current level of structural unemployment (e.g. >26 weeks) in this country in a long, long time. I wouldn't expect r2 to really tell you anything given this scenario.
don't knwo about your other points, but the Fed paying more of the UI insurance could make a big difference, from one half to all is a big increase in costs per unemployed person...that could explain it, but would love to knwo if that really pencils out
What does this phrase mean in the post:
"not to mention the tens of millions of unemployed unlucky enough to even get their weekly allowance from Uncle Sam"?
I don't understand how that fits into the context of the sentence.
Great find, but nothing sinister here... looks like extended benefits are excluded from the head count but cost is included in the withdrawals (heads will likely roll for not coming up with a new "innocuous" line item for the added cost though... sloppy). Que righteous indignation of learned bean counters... covert manipulation of employment data does not align with core principles. Data analysis methodology revision (to exclude extended benefits) apparently does though (avoiding those messy ethics issues).
It's all good, people... unless yesterdays close was the real deal... if so, look out below.
how stupid is it that extended benes people are not "unemployed"
I think that this is actually an artifact of states underfunding their unemployment trust funds, and so now they have to go to the Treasury to get money to cover the difference.
Al Korelin of the Korelin Economics Report interviewed your secretary/treasurer for a few minutes yesterday about GATA's federal lawsuit against the Federal Reserve seeking disclosure of the Fed's international gold swap agreements. You can listen to the interview at the Korelin Internet site here:
http://www.kereport.com/dailyshow/dailyupdate-dec3109-seg1.html
http://tinyurl.com/yjxkpj6
Don't bash the unemployed. I'm unemployed, most of my friends are also. I've been looking everywhere with no luck. To make things even more spectacular, the dealership my wife worked at went tits up now she's laid off also.
Don't bash the unemployed that are trying, bash the greedy Wall Street scum and politicians that preached NAFTA CAFTA SHAFTA and everything else they've done to screw us over.
The US governments little conquest over foreign oil fields have ruined this country for everyone except the elite. For example.........Afghanistan is nothing more than getting their stupid oil lines secured. Free the people. Yeah right. If we had kept all the $ and our soldiers here protecting the borders we would never have a problem.
Now we are broke, millions of people are screwed and to make things even rosier.........I have 20 years of pension credit and some of the brightest minds I know claim another huge stock market crash is on the way that would effectively wipe it out.
I give up. I built a chicken coop, thru my property tax statement in the trash, and any jackass that shows up in 3 years to claim my property??? I am going to kill them. Literally blow their heads off.
Have a nice day.
chicken coop revolutionary...sounds better than Tea Partiers
Lots of good comments here but many are missing the simple math: this is not a multivariate equation. It would be if the weekly allowance varied. It does not- it is relatively fixed. So if the UST is spending much more, nearly $3 billion month over month to be precise, one would expect a comparable increase in unemployed receiving this money. Yet that part of the equation is missing: only a 2% increase MoM in jobless benefits recipients. So unless the gov't is secretly pumping existing insurance recipients checks higher (the average check now works out to about $1.5k a month from $1.1k average), there is a big question mark which is not readily answerable.
The federal government is now paying for 100% of EB, instead of the 50% it was paying prior to Feb 09. This could explain the greater percentage increase in federal unemployment distributions than persons collecting unemployment.
I thought I had read that UI benefits were paid in part both by the individual states and the federal government. I discrepency could be as that as the state funds dry up, that they are leaning on the Fed to pick up the shortfalls. Uniformed speculation on my part.
If so, it begs the question who specifically authorized the expenditures, if not Congress.
It used to be that way, but the Feb 09 Stimulus Bill provided that all EB is paid by the federal government. Per the NJ unemployment website: "Effective February 2009, as part of the stimulus bill, the federal government is funding 100% of EB benefits. This is set to expire January 1, 2010." http://lwd.dol.state.nj.us/labor/ui/content/ui_benefit_extensions.html#6
Your second point is not really speculation. You'll enjoy this link: http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2009/12/nj_businesses_unemployment_tax....
Looking at Tyler's last chart, it looks like monthly unemployment payments have doubled YoY (Dec 08 - Dec 09). Which means roughly twice as many people collected unemployment payments YoY (assuming average payments remained constant).
Total unemployment in Dec 08 was 7.2% according to this link
http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2009/jan/wk2/art02.htm
Which means unemployment today should be at 14.4% - twice as many unemployed collecting checks from Uncle Sam compared to a year ago ?
Speaking from a definitely different POV, if you smell trash - it means that a trash dump is close by. Same way with smoke - gotta be fire too.
All those government committees with sub-committees composed of commissions that have back room "fact" groups, who's responsibility (amongst many) is dis-information/misdirection/veiled language/creative accounting/discordance/etc. Although out right lying is a definite NO,NO in case you are caught - otherwise it's okay!
Speaking from a definitely different POV, if you smell trash - it means that a trash dump is close by. Same way with smoke - gotta be fire too.
All those government committees with sub-committees composed of commissions that have back room "fact" groups, who's responsibility (amongst many) is dis-information/misdirection/veiled language/creative accounting/discordance/etc. Although out right lying is a definite NO,NO in case you are caught - otherwise it's okay!
Did anything special happen in March?
Apparently, that's when the payment line crossed over (and above) the unemployment line...and the significant divergence began.
Well those casualties of first post-Lehman lay offs in September reached the limit of the 6 months of unemployment insurance in March and got rolled off into the extended benefits program
Governement Data that is a little off? , very Doubtful / Highly unlikely haha
http://www.dailyjobcuts.com
Happy New Years Everyone!!
The usual paranoia is as usual misplaced.. You would do well to do your homework before posting yet another conspiracy thread. Those on extended u/e benefits, i.e those received after regular u/e benefits run out after 6 months are not counted as part of continuous jobless claims statistics which is what is used to calculate insured unemployment. There are other more inclusive statistics that are a lot less widely followed. All of this is widely known by professionals. And this thread only does damage to the credibility of this site
And as usual these "professionals" completely ignore the DOL data referred to, which includes not only continuing claims but extended and EUCs (EUCs are now nearly half of all insurance recipients, a topic to which ZH has dedicated about 10 posts in the past and which professional such as Steve Liesman were apparently unaware of): our total includes all classes receiving unemployment insurance. There are explanatory hyperlinks provided in the post for your clicking pleasure. In fact reread the post as many times as necessary to realize that there is no, gasp, conspiracy imputed here.
Documented conspiracies of the factual kind?
YMMV, but I know when I was on unemployment, the stated MAXIMUM was actually lower than what I received monthly, this was in 2008. Didn't question it at the time, but, hmmmmm....
TD, thanks for weighing in... some of these comments remind me worse from Charles Barkley...when a scientific study came out showing that NBA refs called fouls on black players at a greater RATE than white players, Charles, in his infinite wisdom, figured he found a logic hole the scientists surely missed...he said "of course the refs called more fouls on black players, there were more black players in the NBA." Charles, of course, had not read the report, looked at the stats carefully, he had not consulted other stat people to see if the scientists missed something, he just assumed the scientists were stupid, because he did not even understand the meaning of "rate". Kinda reminds me of CNBC analysis...
CNBC Headline right now:
Latest Jobless Numbers Point To Happy New YearLatest Jobless Numbers Point To Happy Ending...
The chart you provide is for insured unemployment which is based on continuous claimes but not on extended claims
Very good report. This government has no choice but to keep up the lies and keep all those unemployed on the dole. Either stop and it will all be over.
Hey you finance guys out there, have you ever gone to a Wallmart gun dept? Or any other gun store? Check out the empty shelves of ammo. The unwashed are buying guns and ammo by the ton. They will be ready, will you???? Be afraid, very afraid.
Obama's fault
"This implies two things: either the average unemployment monthly paycheck has surged, which is not the case"
Tyler, you are wrong. There was a massive increase in the average unemployment paycheck in the spring of 2009.
In fact, the 8.2% of people who received the minimum amount of unemployment insurance saw a 55% increase in their paychecks beginning May 3. In fact, the minimum increase last spring was 9% (for those making the maximum). All in all, the increase ranged from 9% to 55%. Take a look at when your chart showing the 6 month moving averages really diverge. It's right around May.
What you should be focusing on is why it is that someone who made less than $10,400 a year ($200/week) can now make more money on unemployment benefits than he/she did working. Talk about no incentive to go back to work!
Tyler,
There was a massive expansion of unemployment benefits last spring. The hike ranged from 9% to 55% depending on your level of benefits.
Well if you are going to perform a stress test of the Banks and your scenario is a 10% unemployment rate it makes sense that you would hide unemployment above that.
good point, not just the stress tests, but I have heard the models and bank projections blow up once unemployement is over 10...that's when they know credit card defaults will kill them etc..
Since when has there been a mine safety czar?
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/US-mine-deaths-hit-record-low-apf-30824023...
We aren't China, where disregarding safety and disappearing people for the sake of cheapness is the name of the game.
I'd be a lot safer in any currently active Appalachian mine than any hole/cut you put in Chinese ground that has minerals/etc. in it.
Anonymous, what expansion was that ? The 25.00 extra a week from the stimilus bill. I know here in Florida my friend just said his check went from $ 275 to $ 300 a week - we are one of the lower paying atates and had a $ 275 weekly max payment.
See above: I, sadly, reside in the sunshine state as well and I cashed Gov't checks for $1200/month in '08 despite the fact that the stated max was $1100. Again, no complaints at the time since my fucking rent alone was over a grand, but still not sure how that worked out...
Good work here TD. Do me a favor. When the folks at Treasury call you up with an explanation for this could you ask them what the hell is the $15 b they layed out this month for HFA??
I don't think they count the emergency unemployed, you know the ones that no longer get unemployment benifits because they ran out, but now get emergency unemployment. I think they just "forgot" to add them in. That number is growing by leaps and bounds.
frequent reader, 1st time commenting...anyone think the birth/death model might be at the heart of this discrepancy?
TD,
Take a look at this announcement:
http://www.edd.ca.gov/About_EDD/pdf/nwsrel09-70.pdf
Note that the extension covers 110K Californians whose benefits had expired and that it is retroactive to November. The total payout (at CA maximum) would be somewhat less than $400 million so this does not fully address your basic premise and supposition. The maximum which could be extrapolated from the extended extension is certainly less than $4 billion nationally.
I'm wondering if the 110K were actually rolled back into the EUC number - perhaps we'll be seeing a EEUC figure in the near future?
anyone think the birth/death model is responsible for the discrepancy...cash outlays to the unemployed don't lie, most financial, econometric models are littered with assumptions- thanks Samuelson... im a physicist, the older I get I realize I don't know much, but what I do know is economics isn't a science, and the fact that we have beuracrats (summers and bernanke, etc) who are data worshipers, seemingly uncapable of true critical thought, doesn't bode well
agreed...I get that you can't just look at total outlay to figure unemployment rate, but come one, these numbers have to at least track each other, which, as ZH has pointed out, traditionally they do...
I see most top level treasury bureaucrats as extensions of academia...not a great thing when you think how much mistaken orthodoxy can run amok unproven until actually proven wrong when the f-up everything. I don't know if string theory is true or not, but don't think it will plummet us into dark ages if we let some people study it out...but these economists...
I know so little about economy/monetary issues but from what I have read, common wisdom as put out by these experts is so not well-thought out and just a little scratching below surface shows major cracks. Like why Mises school not prominent when it proves correct...
would like to Mish's take on this, he knows BLS tricks pretty well
Lawton, here's a link that will explain the expansion.
http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/index.php/2009/02/how-will-the-proposed...
I can't figure a way to refute this argument.
I hope someone tries...I want to see a challenge.
But it's consistent with the Obama adminstration takeover and the $500billion treasury contribution to "market stabilization" for the PWG.
looks like there's possible seasonality with Nov. low and then a takeoff, so look out for the first quarter!
No one believed that the recent UE rate really came down.
very unfortunate.
America is becoming, not more like China nor Japan, but more like Europe of the 1980s - ridiculous unemployment rate, years of tepid growth (if at all), and inflation not seen since the late 1970s. And not forgetting a weak currency. Of course with a propaganda department that includes all the country's major news sources (CNBC, Bloomberg, FT ( yes the UK is our 52nd state right? and Martin Wolf is the 52nd state's equivalent of Krugman), comparing data with thopse countries is useless unless ZH can come up with more accurate data. But in the long run, watch the interest rates, not even the Fed can manipulate the bond market in the long run.
if what Europe did was so bad, why is it everytime I visit there, their middle class seems so much better off than us, way less insecure, have a higher standard of living, less poor, not much in the way of ghettos, rural poor compare to here, little bankruptcy, etc...yes they pay more in taxes but no student loan debt, no saving for kids education, health coverage,pensions so no 401k needed to survive, and still seem to have a decent business climate, lots of retail, decent price on consumer goods at least as many jobs as we have...maybe they are on worse track than us, but from the ground they seem way better off, I can just tell by what they complain about, their complaints are petty compared to ours...
Because they took the guns away and have better beer?
Could it be due to the fact that Europe enjoyed US military umbrella for a long time and didn't spend much on their own, leaving them with more cash to spend on anything else?
I was unemployed from Jan 09 to Nov 09. I was on the second extension when I finally got a job working at Tinker AFB as a Sheet Metal Mechanic. SO while the gov was paying me $400 a week on unemployment, I am now getting paid to do work for the government, working on aircraft, something I love to do.
I know that being a government employee is not the best thing, but it is the only thing available at this time. I was tired of being unemployed, and hated having to take the money. But I was unable to find a job anywhere else, as are a whole bunch of people that got layed off when I did.
We all know the government is fudging the unemployment numbers, and they have done so since Carter was President as far as I know.
I ran out my initial 26 weeks in June 09, and was no longer counted since I was receiving extended benefits. A lot of people I worked with who are still on UIB are also not being counted as they are on extended benefits.
Unemployment is a lot worse than the State Run media would have us believe. The Depression as already here.
It's a pathetic development when the only American Industry hiring now is the military industrial complex. All that money (that we dont have), sunk into a blackhole---and we cant even achieve victory.
Watch us follow the Soviet Union into the ranks of defeated superpowers. Mission Accomplished!
For the record, there will be no government cheese this time around. The dairy subsidies were dropped in '86 and half the dairy cattle in the country went to the butcher within six months. Beef prices were low for awhile. Observation: You don't want to lose your subsidy.
That silo in my avatar is currently a cellphone tower. No kidding.
This post and commentary is the most important (and disturbing) discussion I have read since TSHTF.
The contemporary US economic model hit the wall. Massive wreckage, and no sustainable way out since the producing component of our economy was sacrificed for other things.
Is it a coincidence that the divergence of UI payments compared to unemployed has presented beginning with the new Team?
Is the discrepancy due to understatement of the unemployed, or UI disbursements just another slush conduit for who knows what?
The human tragedy of this state of affairs is incomprehensible for those fortunate enough to be getting by, or thriving.
Such a sad state of affairs when the economy has been ruined, people are going bust, and government behavior cannot be trusted.
Lots of luck.
I remember a conversation with my Dad (a blue collar guy) back in the 1960s when he lamented that he could no longer believe government reports ...
Solution: everyone quits their job; country collapses and we found a new one and wipe the slate clean.
The government does NOT misrepresent data. They never have, and they never will.
The government is the most efficiently run entity with intentions as pure as a wind driven snow.
I would like to see more journalistic integrity on this site and do more positive articles on Obama and the government. Like the one where Obama gets advice from Tiger Woods http://blogs.suntimes.com/sportsprose/2009/12/tiger_woods_barack_obama_g...
So how come the vaunted Republican party is not screaming about this? Or are they that stupid to have missed this issue? Oop's never mind.
Seriously though, Shouldn't the party that is out of power be more aggressive on spotlighting the financial shenanigans or did the rightwing social Republicans manage to chase out all the old time fiscal conservative Republicans out of office who might have understood what was going on and the ramifications for the future. Or, are the Republicans cynically waiting for all to blow up?
The whole thing just pisses me off.
Sadly, if the political spectrum is 3 feet wide, Republicans and Democrats are one-quarter inch apart on that spectrum. The difference between the typical Democrat and typical Republican is imperceptible. They all lean left, more so in the past 5-10 years.
govt misrepresents many things...i'd just like to know where the phuck all the money went if program is failure......
U.S. Loan Effort Is Seen as Adding to Housing Woes
The Treasury Department publicly maintains that its program is on
track. “The program is meeting its intended goal of providing
immediate relief to homeowners across the country,” a department
spokeswoman, Meg Reilly, wrote in an e-mail message.
But behind the scenes, Treasury officials appear to have concluded
that growing numbers of delinquent borrowers simply lack enough income
to afford their homes and must be eased out.
In April, Chase, which had taken over Washington Mutual, lowered her
payment to $1,033.62 in a trial that was supposed to last three
months.
Ms. Smith made all three payments on time and submitted required
documents, Chase confirms. She called the bank almost weekly to
inquire about a permanent loan modification. Each time, she says,
Chase told her to continue making trial payments and await word on a
permanent modification.
Then, in October, a startling legal notice arrived in the mail: Chase
had foreclosed on her house and sold it at auction for $100. (The
purchaser? Chase.)
“I cried,” she said. “I was hysterical. I bawled my eyes out.”
http://tinyurl.com/yg73hpl
Here's some fact checking for the article:
Durden states,
In fact, the BLS claimed there were 15.4 million unemployed people in November 2009 (see http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm).
What Durden probably meant to claim is "9.5 million total unemployed receiving unemployment benefits." The government's December 26, 2009 "unemployment insurance weekly claims report" (available at http://www.dol.gov/opa/media/press/eta/ui/eta20091574.htm) gives total non-seasonally adjusted unemployment for Dec. 12, 2009 as:
Ins. Unemployment (NSA) [state level] = 5,345,467
Federal Employees = 26,422
Newly Discharged Veterans = 37,526
Railroad Retirement Board = 11,000
Extended Benefits = 367,498
EUC 2008 = 4,448,914
[the last 5 figures are at federal level]
total = 10,236,827
This 10.2 million doesn't come anywhere near the 14 million Durden asserts must be receiving payments, so he may be onto something.
The answer, really is not an understatement of the employment, but is rather found by looking at cash flows. Unemployment payments come from three sources - 1) insurance premiums that come out of the paychecks of those employed. 2) State outlays for unemployment, and 3) Federal outlays for unemployment.
It is fairly clear that 1) has declined precipitously, and 2) has declined because of reduced tax incomes to states. This implies that the Federal government has come to the rescue to make up the difference.
This in my opinion should account for the anamoly you see
As I understand it the govt is also paying for 80% of the extended unemployed‘s health insurance, maybe that is the difference…?
New York City Unemployment Rates by geographic area and race
http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/documents/st_nyjobs_20091215.html
What are the future ramifications of the fact that Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac have, not only already received $111 - $124 Billion in bailout money, but subsequently saw the financial "cap" for future Federal bailout money lifted from a ceiling of $200 Billion under the Bush Administration to $400 Billion under Obama's Administration - and NOW even the aforementiond $400 Billion bailout ceiling has been lifted by Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner?
Does this mean that our Federal government can pour as much bailout money over the next decade as necessary to keep Fannie Mae/Freedie Mac afloat even if if the total reached as high as $600 Billion or even $800 Billion?
And, if so, who pays for this crippling financial burden, our great-grandchildren?
"...either the average unemployment monthly paycheck has surged, which is not the case..."
The federal government increased unemployment benefits by $25 per paycheck as a part of the stimulus plan. That increases the average paycheck. Check the facts please.
I've also read that, over the next half-century or so, our U.S. faces $100 Trillion in unfunded liabilities such as Social Security, Medicare, Disability, Medicaid, Food Stamps, Welfare, Subsidized Housing, et al.
Additionally, I am told by numerous sources to continue to watch for "red flags" pertaining to many of the various states' government employee union's lifetime guaranteed health and pension obligations as being unsustainable in no more than a decade or two.
Are these concerns warranted? And, if so, who will shoulder these smothering financial obligations - our great, great grandchildren?
Can anyone tell me if it might be worth a look to relocate to another country within the next 4 or 5 years, thereby avoiding the onslaught of the looming increases in taxes & fees (both Federal taxes/fees & the State of California taxes/fees, where I live), not to mention the rising interest rates and inflation which, inevitably, must occur based upon the laws of economics when the debt obligation to foreign sources becomes exponential and excess amounts of money is printed with little to back it up?
Also, I've been hearing that the commercial real estate market may just be the "next shoe to drop". Is there any truth to these rumors?
And, on the "healthcare reform" front, if our U.S. government ends up passing the current version and eventually takes over 1/6 of our American economy, does it mean that a shortage of qualified physicians is destined for America down the road a decade or so?
Back to my aforementioned request at the top of this post. What are some of the countries that would provide a fairly low cost of living with fairly good employment opportunities? Does anyone know anything about living conditions in places such as Costa Rica (I've surfed since 1979 as a little "gremmie"), Honduras, Trinidad & Tobago, Cozumel, Brazil, Argentina, Russia's Black Sea region?
Any other enticing or potentially alluring destinations to possibly relocate to if I don't want to get "caught up" in a bunch of drama if the defecation hits the oscillation here in the states in the not too distant future?
Don't know much about their politics, but New Zealand seems like a decent bet. And it should benefit from its proximity to future economic growth - China and India, but it still close enough to English culture not to be overly shocking to us.
I'm an expat in New Zealand and will help you with your tax revolt. There is socialism here (meddlesome local councils, and the dole can be a way of life) but NZ was just ranked as having the least corrupt government in the world. No bailouts, subsidies, random wars, secret gulags, etc. So, even though the taxes are comparable to America, you get a lot more- i.e. cheap education and socialized medicine that actually works. Interested?
I've also heard good things about Argentina. They're now pulling out of their own collapse, so they will have freedom for a while. Costa Rica and Belize are also good.
hello, my name is joe. i am from the united states of america. i believe in the american dream. i dont like to pay taxes. in fact i want my government to be as small as possible. people are supposed to be selfsufficiant. if you dont have a job that is your own fault, right? everyone can create their own future.
on the other hand i do like to bitch. because eventhough my government is crap small compared to other western countries, i like to blame them for everything. if it ain't the government's fault, it must be mine, or the system's .. and that can't be.
rules and regulation are something only stupid countries require, with people who don't have an american super brain. our economy will fix itself, through competition. it's awesome and it works like a charm. and if it doesn't work, i just close my eyes and bitch a little more on my idiotic small government for not doing anything.
now my whole economy is going to shit and i haven't learned anything.
the end.
p.s. i like to borrow money.
Unemployment, both in the U.S. and the world as a whole, marches ever higher because the field of economics doesn't account for the relationship between population density and per capita consumption.
Following the beating the field of economics took over the seeming failure of Malthus' theory, economists adamantly refuse to ever again consider the effects of population growth. If they did, they might come to understand that once an optimum population density is breached, further over-crowding begins to erode per capita consumption and, consequently, per capita employment.
And these effects of an excessive population density are actually imported when a nation like the U.S. attempts to trade freely with other nations much more densely populated - nations like China, Japan, Germany, Korea and a host of others. The result is an automatic trade deficit and loss of jobs - tantamount to economic suicide.
Using 2006 data, an in-depth analysis reveals that, of our top twenty per capita trade deficits in manufactured goods (the trade deficit divided by the population of the country in question), eighteen are with nations much more densely populated than our own. Even more revealing, if the nations of the world are divided equally around the median population density, the U.S. had a trade surplus in manufactured goods of $17 billion with the half of nations below the median population density. With the half above the median, we had a $480 billion deficit!
If you‘re interested in learning more about this important new economic theory, then I invite you to visit my web site at http://PeteMurphy.wordpress.com.
Pete Murphy
Author, "Five Short Blasts"
Politicians in our government lie to us on a near continual basis and have been for years. Why should this issue be any different? I'm not surprised at all.
Does anyone know what the withdrawals for "Unemployment Insurance Benefits" actually are? Does it all go towards UI checks to individuals? Is there any program admin in there?Does it include Federal Additional Compensation? I'm trying to compare the Monthly Treasury Statement with the daily statement for the last working day of the month.
For shits and grins, here are some numbers from previous years' DTS for Unemployment Benefits Insurance withdrawals:
Dec. 29, 2006: MTD - 2,541,000,000 FYTD - 6,978,000,000
Dec. 31, 2007: MTD - 3,059,000,000 FYTD - 8,047,000,000
Dec. 31, 2008: MTD - 7,243,000,000 FYTD - 16,386,000,000
Dec. 30, 2009: MTD - 14,651,000,000 FYTD - 38,112,000,000
Monthly UI Benefits withdrawals more than doubled from Dec. 2007 to Dec. 2008, and then more than doubled again from Dec. 2008 to Dec. 2009, when looking at either the monthly total withdrawn or the amount withdrawn fiscal year-to-date.
Could any of this be attributed to fraud? Just like Medicare and Defense spending, it's usually ignored until a major "controlled" distraction shunts the subject.