Economic policy reports, blog postings, and media stories of interest:
For the benefit week ending on October 23rd, 12,972 North Carolinians filed initial claims for state unemployment insurance benefits, and 115,871 individuals applied for state-funded continuing benefits. Compared to the prior week, there were more initial and continuing claims. These figures come from data released by the U.S. Department of Labor.
Averaging new and continuing claims over a four-week period — a process that helps adjust for seasonal fluctuations and better illustrates trends — shows that an average of 14,514 initial claims were filed over the previous four weeks, along with an average of 116,752 continuing claims. Compared to the previous four-week period, there were more initial and continuing claims.
One year ago, the four-week average for initial claims stood at 17,339 and the four-week average of continuing claims equaled 179,989.
While the number of claims has dropped over the past year, so has covered employment. Last week, covered employment totaled 3.7 million, down from 4 million a year ago.
The graph (right) shows the changes in unemployment insurance claims (as a share of covered employment) in North Carolina since the recession’s start in December 2007.
Both new and continuing claims appear to have peaked for this business cycle, and the four-week averages of new and continuing claims have fallen considerably. Yet continuing claims remain at an elevated level, which suggests that unemployed individuals are finding it difficult to find new positions.
Also, little change has occurred within recent months. Since April 2010, the four-week average of initial claims consistently has ranged between 14,075 and 11,200.
Even with the recent increase, the inflation-adjusted value of the minimum wage is still well below the 1968 level (via EPI).
Economic policy reports, blog postings, and media stories of interest:
Henry Aaron of The Brookings Institution looks at the proposal put forth by Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson, the co-chairs of the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, and is not impressed. From the article …
Even more troubling than timing, is the program itself. Over the first nine years, 70 percent of the deficit reduction under the Bowles-Simpson “mark” would come from spending cuts, 30 percent from added taxes. The steady-state spending level, as a share of GDP, would be 20.5 percent of GDP. That is lower than spending averaged from 1980 to 2008 when none of the baby boomers had yet retired and claimed Social Security and Medicare and when spending on health care per person was a minor fraction of what it will be in 2020.
Email Sign-Up | 
RSS Feed
