Initial claims at 857,148 (NSA), largely unchanged. Continuing claims also fairly steady at 13,197,059. There's a risk we are becoming numb to numbers this high and steady, but we can't lose sight of how bad this is. While the economy is recovering, this is still bad news
Last year at this time there were 160,342 initial claims. So we are up by around 700,000. That's such a massive amount of job loss, and it doesn't even include PUA.
There are real contradictions in the data all around. CPS says the unemployment level is 13.6 million, claims says 29.6 million. Truth is likely somewhere in between. CPS is undercounting for sure, claims likely double counting
So how do we gauge where we really are? Here is a fairly simple way to look that will be more immune to measurement problems than unemployment. Despite the bounce back, we are *still* down more jobs than the worst of the Great Recession
We hope that a lot of this is not permanent job loss, but it is crazy to think that we are on a self-sustaining path not needing fiscal stimulus when the job loss six months into this is worse than the worst of the Great Recession
@chrislhayes lets talk about it on air!

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Adam Ozimek

Adam Ozimek Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ModeledBehavior

4 Sep
Quick thread on the remote work data from the BLS today. First, we can see that the % working remotely due to the pandemic remains high but is declining. Down to 24.3% from 35.4% in May. Note this doesn't include those working remotely *before* the pandemic.
We continue to see an inverse U shape for remote work by age. The youngest and oldest are least likely to work from home, with little difference between prime years of 25 and 54.
There is an education gradient as well. Among advanced degree holders more than half are still working remote. This was as high as 68% in May. Less than HS, very few are remote.
Read 6 tweets
11 Aug
I want to add a few more points here around this question: why the heck am I talking about this? There are two pieces of modern economic history that have been largely misread, which contributed significantly to the slow recovery from the Great Recession. Let me explain...
The first misread is that the late 1990s economy was unsustainable. This was not the case. In fact, prior to the fed raising rates, energy prices & housing prices were shooting up massively, creating a misleading inflation environment.
We weren't beyond full-employment, we were simply at full-employment. That is mistake number one. Mistake number two is misreading the 2001 recession and it's aftermath.
Read 14 tweets
25 Jul
Aside from the headline findings, one issue I address in my paper is the question of whether remote work will kill agglomeration. I say no, and I cite the existence of fried egg Twitter content-static.upwork.com/blog/uploads/s…
I can unpack this a little bit. Here are 3 components of agglomeration of big cities: 1) better matching, 2) within firm effects, 3) between firm effects
Better matching results from large labor markets, creating more opportunities. But it would be very easy for fully remote workers to reach the scale of the countries largest cities. Only a few percent of the workforce to be as big as San Francisco
Read 12 tweets
25 Jun
Jobless claims yet again historically elevated, at 2.2 million. Don't be fooled by the monthly job growth, the damage to the economy continues to accumulate.
These numbers aren't a surprise, nor is the fact that people are still being laid off in significant numbers. You have to look through the data to see it, but the economy is not in the clear yet.
What we are seeing is that some businesses are coming back to work and rehiring temporary furloughs. This is generating lots of apparent job growth. But beneath this, there are businesses who are closing and others continue to shrink, turning temporary layoffs to permanent.
Read 8 tweets
21 Jun
A very broad big economic theory I loosely hold... for the past X decades, the global economy has had a speed limit set by inelastic energy supply. When things start to grow fast enough, we hit a speed limit that turns into inflationary forces....
This causes central banks to raise rates despite the fact that overall capacity utilization is not high. Especially labor markets utilization. Basically, we raise rates with an output gap, and indeed the output gap is hard to measure as energy price shocks confuse policymakers
What does this all mean? Inelastic energy supply is a first order driver of the decline in labor share in developed countries. We can’t get up to high levels of capacity utilization because the energy constraints kicks in.
Read 8 tweets
14 Jun
People are wrongly thinking about the slow recovery from the virus as a reallocation shock, with demand pivoting away from leisure/hospitality, tourism, arts/recreation/entertainment. This is a very incomplete underestimate of the challenge...
It is really three reallocation shocks. First, is the pandemic crisis mode where businesses have to figure out how to survive on a mix of shutdowns, partial openings, PPP, and other stimulus...
This economy has its own allocation of labor and capital, with more in groceries and delivery. Next we have phase 2 where the economy is recovering, where the Highly Affected Sectors (leisure/hospitality, tourism, arts/recreation/entertainment) recover some amount but incomplete
Read 10 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!