Tom Moeller

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/041101c.jpg" width="353">
The total value of construction put in place dipped slightly in September as residential building fell for the first month since February 2003. The Consensus expectation for a 0.4% gain.
As hurricanes hit Florida, private residential building activity fell 0.2%. New single family building slid 0.8% (+17.3% y/y) after a 2.3% spurt in August.
Nonresidential building rose 0.2% (+5.7% y/y) as construction activity on shopping malls ballooned 30.7% (6.4% y/y).
Public construction rose 0.3% though spending on highways &amp; streets, nearly one third of the value of public construction spending, fell for the fifth consecutive month (-1.3% y/y).
These more detailed categories represent the Census Bureau&#146;s reclassification of construction activity into end-use groups. Finer detail is available for many of the categories; for instance, commercial construction is shown for Automotive sales and parking facilities, drugstores, building supply stores, and both commercial warehouses and mini-storage facilities. Note that start dates vary for some seasonally adjusted line items in 2000 and 2002 and that constant-dollar data are no longer computed.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@E9/@E907/@E90701/@E90701.HTM"> Construction Put-in-place</a></th>
<th scope="col"> Sept</th>
<th scope="col">Aug</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col"> 2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Total</td>
<td>-0.0%</td>
<td>0.9%</td>
<td>8.9%</td>
<td>5.1%</td>
<td>1.5%</td>
<td>3.5%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Private</td>
<td>-0.1%</td>
<td>1.5%</td>
<td>10.9%</td>
<td>6.0%</td>
<td>-0.2%</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Residential</td>
<td>-0.2%</td>
<td>1.8%</td>
<td>13.1%</td>
<td>13.1%</td>
<td>8.4%</td>
<td>3.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Nonresidential</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>0.7%</td>
<td>5.7%</td>
<td>-7.1%</td>
<td>-12.8%</td>
<td>-1.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Public</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
<td>-1.0%</td>
<td>3.0%</td>
<td>2.6%</td>
<td>7.0%</td>
<td>10.7%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The total value of construction put in place dipped slightly in September as residential building fell for the first month since February 2003. The Consensus expectation for a 0.4% gain. As hurricanes hit Florida, private residential [...]

U.S. Construction Spending Down in September

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/041101a.jpg" width="353">
The Institute of Supply Management reported that its Purchasing Managers&#146; Composite Index (PMI) fell in October to 56.8 versus Consensus expectations for no change at 58.5.
During the last twenty years there has been a 70% correlation between the level of the Composite Index and the three month growth in factory sector industrial production.
The Composite Index reflected declines in each of the components except new orders. The employment index (54.8) dropped to the lowest since January and production cratered to the lowest in over a year.
The separate index of export orders rose sharply to 56.6, the highest level since June.
The prices paid index recouped much of the prior month&#39;s decline and rose to 78.5.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@EF/@EF02/@EF02.HTM"> ISM Manufacturing Survey</a></th>
<th scope="col"> Oct</th>
<th scope="col">Sept</th>
<th scope="col">Oct &#39;03</th>
<th scope="col"> 2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Composite Index</td>
<td>56.8</td>
<td>58.5</td>
<td>57.1</td>
<td>53.3</td>
<td>52.4</td>
<td>43.9</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; New Orders Index</td>
<td>58.3</td>
<td>58.1</td>
<td>64.6</td>
<td>58.1</td>
<td>56.6</td>
<td>46.1</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Prices Paid Index (NSA)</td>
<td>78.5</td>
<td>76.0</td>
<td>58.5</td>
<td>59.6</td>
<td>57.6</td>
<td>42.9</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The Institute of Supply Management reported that its Purchasing Managers Composite Index (PMI) fell in October to 56.8 versus Consensus expectations for no change at 58.5. During the last twenty years there has been a 70% correlation [...]

ISM Factory Index Slipped Unexpectedly

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/041101b.jpg" width="353">
Personal income grew just 0.2% In September following a downwardly revised 0.1% rise in August. Consensus expectations had been for a 0.3% September increase.
A third consecutive monthly decline in proprietors&#39; income, down 0.4% (+4.9% y/y), generated the disappointment in total personal income growth. Wages &amp; salaries rose 0.4% (+4.6% y/y), the third firm consecutive monthly gain. Manufacturing wages rose 0.3% (2.0% y/y) and wages in private service producing industries rose 0.4% (5.4% y/y).
Personal disposable income rose a scant 0.1% (4.6% y/y) following downwardly revised gains in months prior that have been weak since June. Adjusted for inflation disposable income was unchanged (2.5% y/y). Personal taxes rose 0.6% (5.3% y/y).
&quot;Public Officials and Job Creation&quot; from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis is available <a href="http://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/net/20040901/cover.pdf"> here</a>.
Consumer spending rose 0.6% following a slight dip in August that was initially reported as unchanged. Durables purchases recovered most of the prior month&#39;s drop with a 1.6% jump as light vehicle sales jumped 5.5% to the second highest level of the year. Purchases of non-durable goods rose 0.5% (7.3% y/y) and services spending rose 0.4% (5.6% y/y). 
The PCE chain price index ticked up 0.1% as did prices less food &amp; energy (+1.5% y/y).
A recent speech by Fed Vice Chairman Roger W. Ferguson, Jr. titled &quot;Equilibrium Real Interest Rate: Theory and Application&quot; is available <a href="http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/speeches/2004/20041029/default.htm"> here</a>.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@E7/@E711/@E71102/@E71102.HTM"> Disposition of Personal Income</a></th>
<th scope="col">Sept</th>
<th scope="col">Aug</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col"> 2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Personal Income</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
<td>4.6%</td>
<td>3.2%</td>
<td>1.8%</td>
<td>3.5%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Personal Consumption</td>
<td>0.6%</td>
<td>-0.1%</td>
<td>5.9%</td>
<td>5.2%</td>
<td>4.6%</td>
<td>4.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Savings Rate</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>0.7%</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
<td>2.0%</td>
<td>1.8%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">PCE Chain Price Index</td>
<td>0.1%</td>
<td>0.0%</td>
<td>2.0%</td>
<td>1.9%</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Personal income grew just 0.2% In September following a downwardly revised 0.1% rise in August. Consensus expectations had been for a 0.3% September increase. A third consecutive monthly decline in proprietors' income, down 0.4% [...]

U.S. Personal Income Gain Light

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/041101b.jpg" width="353">
Personal income grew just 0.2% In September following a downwardly revised 0.1% rise in August. Consensus expectations had been for a 0.3% September increase.
A third consecutive monthly decline in proprietors&#39; income, down 0.4% (+4.9% y/y), generated the disappointment in total personal income growth. Wages &amp; salaries rose 0.4% (+4.6% y/y), the third firm consecutive monthly gain. Manufacturing wages rose 0.3% (2.0% y/y) and wages in private service producing industries rose 0.4% (5.4% y/y).
Personal disposable income rose a scant 0.1% (4.6% y/y) following downwardly revised gains in months prior that have been weak since June. Adjusted for inflation disposable income was unchanged (2.5% y/y). Personal taxes rose 0.6% (5.3% y/y).
&quot;Public Officials and Job Creation&quot; from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis is available <a href="http://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/net/20040901/cover.pdf"> here</a>.
Consumer spending rose 0.6% following a slight dip in August that was initially reported as unchanged. Durables purchases recovered most of the prior month&#39;s drop with a 1.6% jump as light vehicle sales jumped 5.5% to the second highest level of the year. Purchases of non-durable goods rose 0.5% (7.3% y/y) and services spending rose 0.4% (5.6% y/y). 
The PCE chain price index ticked up 0.1% as did prices less food &amp; energy (+1.5% y/y).
A recent speech by Fed Vice Chairman Roger W. Ferguson, Jr. titled &quot;Equilibrium Real Interest Rate: Theory and Application&quot; is available <a href="http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/speeches/2004/20041029/default.htm"> here</a>.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@E7/@E711/@E71102/@E71102.HTM"> Disposition of Personal Income</a></th>
<th scope="col">Sept</th>
<th scope="col">Aug</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col"> 2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Personal Income</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
<td>4.6%</td>
<td>3.2%</td>
<td>1.8%</td>
<td>3.5%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Personal Consumption</td>
<td>0.6%</td>
<td>-0.1%</td>
<td>5.9%</td>
<td>5.2%</td>
<td>4.6%</td>
<td>4.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Savings Rate</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>0.7%</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
<td>2.0%</td>
<td>1.8%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">PCE Chain Price Index</td>
<td>0.1%</td>
<td>0.0%</td>
<td>2.0%</td>
<td>1.9%</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
ISM Factory Index Slipped Unexpectedly 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> November 1, 2004


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/041101a.jpg" width="353">
The Institute of Supply Management reported that its Purchasing Managers&#146; Composite Index (PMI) fell in October to 56.8 versus Consensus expectations for no change at 58.5.
During the last twenty years there has been a 70% correlation between the level of the Composite Index and the three month growth in factory sector industrial production.
The Composite Index reflected declines in each of the components except new orders. The employment index (54.8) dropped to the lowest since January and production cratered to the lowest in over a year.
The separate index of export orders rose sharply to 56.6, the highest level since June.
The prices paid index recouped much of the prior month&#39;s decline and rose to 78.5.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@EF/@EF02/@EF02.HTM"> ISM Manufacturing Survey</a></th>
<th scope="col"> Oct</th>
<th scope="col">Sept</th>
<th scope="col">Oct &#39;03</th>
<th scope="col"> 2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Composite Index</td>
<td>56.8</td>
<td>58.5</td>
<td>57.1</td>
<td>53.3</td>
<td>52.4</td>
<td>43.9</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; New Orders Index</td>
<td>58.3</td>
<td>58.1</td>
<td>64.6</td>
<td>58.1</td>
<td>56.6</td>
<td>46.1</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Prices Paid Index (NSA)</td>
<td>78.5</td>
<td>76.0</td>
<td>58.5</td>
<td>59.6</td>
<td>57.6</td>
<td>42.9</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
U.S. Construction Spending Down in September 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> November 1, 2004


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/041101c.jpg" width="353">
The total value of construction put in place dipped slightly in September as residential building fell for the first month since February 2003. The Consensus expectation for a 0.4% gain.
As hurricanes hit Florida, private residential building activity fell 0.2%. New single family building slid 0.8% (+17.3% y/y) after a 2.3% spurt in August.
Nonresidential building rose 0.2% (+5.7% y/y) as construction activity on shopping malls ballooned 30.7% (6.4% y/y).
Public construction rose 0.3% though spending on highways &amp; streets, nearly one third of the value of public construction spending, fell for the fifth consecutive month (-1.3% y/y).
These more detailed categories represent the Census Bureau&#146;s reclassification of construction activity into end-use groups. Finer detail is available for many of the categories; for instance, commercial construction is shown for Automotive sales and parking facilities, drugstores, building supply stores, and both commercial warehouses and mini-storage facilities. Note that start dates vary for some seasonally adjusted line items in 2000 and 2002 and that constant-dollar data are no longer computed.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@E9/@E907/@E90701/@E90701.HTM"> Construction Put-in-place</a></th>
<th scope="col"> Sept</th>
<th scope="col">Aug</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col"> 2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Total</td>
<td>-0.0%</td>
<td>0.9%</td>
<td>8.9%</td>
<td>5.1%</td>
<td>1.5%</td>
<td>3.5%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Private</td>
<td>-0.1%</td>
<td>1.5%</td>
<td>10.9%</td>
<td>6.0%</td>
<td>-0.2%</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Residential</td>
<td>-0.2%</td>
<td>1.8%</td>
<td>13.1%</td>
<td>13.1%</td>
<td>8.4%</td>
<td>3.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Nonresidential</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>0.7%</td>
<td>5.7%</td>
<td>-7.1%</td>
<td>-12.8%</td>
<td>-1.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Public</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
<td>-1.0%</td>
<td>3.0%</td>
<td>2.6%</td>
<td>7.0%</td>
<td>10.7%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Carol Stone, CBE

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/041029f.jpg" width="353">
The People&#39;s Bank of China surprised world markets yesterday with a hike in its prime lending rate to 5.58% from 5.31%. The former level had been in place since February 2002. The move concludes an 8-1/2 year span of rate cuts. While a surprise in terms of exact timing, the Bank&#39;s action was not totally unexpected. In the spring it had used moral suasion to talk commercial banks into restraining their own loan growth; several Asian economists were forecasting a rate hike to make the attitude of restraint more concrete. (The Bank also raised its companion &quot;deposit rate&quot; to 2.25% from 1.98%.)
Further, in an additional step, the central bank removed a cap on rates commercial banks may charge their own customers. Previously, they were limited to rates no higher than 1.7 times the central bank lending rate. For the last couple of years this was equivalent to 9.03%. But in the face of the recent policy of qualitative restraint on lending, companies are said to have been resorting to &quot;underground&quot; channels for financing, and according to press sources, have been paying 15% to 20% for loans. Now, a more active and open bank credit market should develop.
Undesirably high inflation is prompting these actions, as well as a desire, bank officials indicated, to encourage behavior in the Chinese banking system that more closely resembles practices in international banking markets. Perhaps this evolutionary and philosophical move toward freer markets is the real surprise in this monetary policy action.
Meantime, inflation has indeed risen. The 12-month change in the consumer price index has been above 5% since June and was 5.2% in September. These last four months have seen the strongest pace since early 1997. Producer prices and corporate goods prices suggest continuing cost pressures, with the PPI up 7.9% for the 12 months ending September, the highest rate in the nearly eight-year history of the data. Corporate goods prices, another wholesale price measure, show strong gains in most types of products, with the total up 9.6%. 

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol">12-Month % Changes, NSA</th>
<th scope="col">Sept 2004</th>
<th scope="col">Aug 2004</th>
<th scope="col">Jul 2004</th>
December/December
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">2003</td>
<td>2002</td>
<td>2001</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Consumer Price Index</td>
<td>5.2</td>
<td>5.3</td>
<td>5.3</td>
<td>3.2</td>
<td>-0.4</td>
<td>-0.3</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Producer Price Index</td>
<td>7.9</td>
<td>6.8</td>
<td>6.4</td>
<td>3.0</td>
<td>0.4</td>
<td>-4.0</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Corporate Goods Price Index</td>
<td>9.6</td>
<td>9.5</td>
<td>9.4</td>
<td>6.3</td>
<td>-0.5</td>
<td>-2.5</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The People's Bank of China surprised world markets yesterday with a hike in its prime lending rate to 5.58% from 5.31%. The former level had been in place since February 2002. The move concludes an 8-1/2 year span of rate cuts. While [...]

People's Bank of China Raises Lending Rate; Removes Cap on Bank Rates in Major Monetary Policy Shift

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/041029c.jpg" width="353">
The October Chicago Purchasing Managers Business Barometer jumped 6.6 points from September to 68.5, just nosed out the prior high and was at the highest level since July 1988. Consensus expectations had been for a slight decline to 59.0.
During the last ten years there has been a 73% correlation between the level of the Chicago Business Barometer and the three month change in factory sector industrial output. That correlation has risen to 86% during the last five years.
The new orders index jumped to 79.4, the highest since 1983. The employment index rose slightly to 54.1, a five month high. During the last twenty years there has been an 80% correlation between the level of this employment index and the three month change in factory sector employment.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/041029d.jpg" width="353">
The index of prices paid remained firm at 84.1. During the last ten years there has been an 88% correlation between the Chicago price index and the three month change in the &quot;core&quot; intermediate goods PPI.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@EF/@EF05/@EF05.HTM"> Chicago Purchasing Managers Index, SA</a></th>
<th scope="col"> Oct</th>
<th scope="col">Sept</th>
<th scope="col">Oct&nbsp;&#39;03</th>
<th scope="col"> 2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Business Barometer</td>
<td>68.5</td>
<td>61.9</td>
<td>55.8</td>
<td>54.7</td>
<td>52.7</td>
<td>41.4</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; New Orders</td>
<td>79.4</td>
<td>69.7</td>
<td>61.6</td>
<td>58.0</td>
<td>56.2</td>
<td>42.3</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Prices Paid</td>
<td>84.1</td>
<td>85.9</td>
<td>59.8</td>
<td>55.8</td>
<td>56.9</td>
<td>50.4</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The October Chicago Purchasing Managers Business Barometer jumped 6.6 points from September to 68.5, just nosed out the prior high and was at the highest level since July 1988. Consensus expectations had been for a slight decline to [...]

Chicago Purchasing Agents' Index Highest Since 1988

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/041029b.jpg" width="353">
The reading of consumer sentiment for the full month of October from the University of Michigan did fall 2.7% m/m to 91.7, but that reflected a sharp improvement from the mid-month read of a 7.1% plunge to 87.5. Consensus expectations for a reading of 88.0.
The continuing decline in claims for unemployment insurance may have bolstered confidence following earlier concerns over the War in Iraq, the rising price of gasoline and several hurricanes which hit Florida.
During the last ten years there has been a 75% correlation between the level of consumer sentiment and the y/y change in real PCE.
The reading of current economic conditions improved 0.3% m/m versus the mid-month read of a 4.0% slump. Consumer expectations shaved the mid-month decline in half and fell 4.8% m/m.
The University of Michigan survey is not seasonally adjusted.The mid-month survey is based on telephone interviews with 250 households nationwide on personal finances and business and buying conditions. The survey is expanded to a total of 500 interviews at month end.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@EF/@EF14/@EF1402/@EF1402.HTM"> University of Michigan</a></th>
<th scope="col"> Oct</th>
<th scope="col"> Sept</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col"> 2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Consumer Sentiment</td>
<td>91.7</td>
<td>94.2</td>
<td>2.3%</td>
<td>87.6</td>
<td>89.6</td>
<td>89.2</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;&nbsp; Current Conditions</td>
<td>104.0</td>
<td>103.7</td>
<td>4.1%</td>
<td>97.2</td>
<td>97.5</td>
<td>100.1</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;&nbsp; Consumer Expectations</td>
<td>83.8</td>
<td>88.0</td>
<td>1.0%</td>
<td>81.4</td>
<td>84.6</td>
<td>82.3</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The reading of consumer sentiment for the full month of October from the University of Michigan did fall 2.7% m/m to 91.7, but that reflected a sharp improvement from the mid-month read of a 7.1% plunge to 87.5. Consensus expectations [...]

U.S. Consumer Sentiment Recovered After Early October Slump

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/041029e.jpg" width="353">
The employment cost index for private industry workers rose 0.9% last quarter, in line with Consensus expectations for a 1.0% gain.
Wages and salaries, which account for roughly 70% of the compensation index, accelerated from 2Q and rose 0.9%.
Benefit cost inflation in 3Q decelerated to 1.0% as the y/y cost of health benefits eased to 7.3%, the slowest since late 1999.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@EB/@EB08/@EB08.HTM"> ECI- Private Industry Workers</a></th>
<th scope="col"> 3Q&#39;04</th>
<th scope="col">2Q&#39;04</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col"> 2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Compensation</td>
<td>0.9%</td>
<td>1.0%</td>
<td>3.7%</td>
<td>4.0%</td>
<td>3.2%</td>
<td>4.2%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Wages &amp; Salaries</td>
<td>0.9%</td>
<td>0.6%</td>
<td>2.6%</td>
<td>3.0%</td>
<td>2.7%</td>
<td>3.8%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Benefit Costs</td>
<td>1.0%</td>
<td>1.7%</td>
<td>6.8%</td>
<td>6.4%</td>
<td>4.7%</td>
<td>5.1%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The employment cost index for private industry workers rose 0.9% last quarter, in line with Consensus expectations for a 1.0% gain. Wages and salaries, which account for roughly 70% of the compensation index, accelerated from 2Q and [...]

3Q'04 Employment Cost Index Up 0.9%

Falling oil prices aren't pulling down inflation expectations, pointing to a boost from increased tariffs

Equity market exuberance outpacing macroeconomic data

Apart from Japan, Blue Chip forecasters expect further sizable monetary easing

US production rebounded in Q2, but demand continued to slow

US leader, Germany trailer for real GDP growth over past 3 years

Negative US inflation surprises leading G10 down

Deflation continues in China

Incoming data surprising on downside in US; positive surprises elsewhere

FOMC expects more inflation and less growth than in March

With escalation of Israel/Iran conflict, geopolitical risk has recently surged while US trade policy uncertainty has ebbed

Renewed supply chain pressures point to a rebound in global inflation ahead

Apart from Japan, Blue Chip forecasters look for further significant monetary policy easing

Apart from the US, productivity is moribund

Financial market concerns ebb even though policy uncertainty continues to soar

US tariff revenues nearly doubled in April

Even with expected tariff-induced increases in inflation, BCFF forecasters look for a more aggressive round of monetary easing

USD/EUR exchange rate uncoupling from interest rate differential

Widespread downgrading of 2025 GDP outlook

Trade and fiscal policy uncertainty has exploded with the new administration

Much lower US electricity costs gives it a competitive advantage

Wage growth slowing in the US and Euro area; elevated and sticky in the UK

Stagflation-lite: Blue Chip forecasts below-trend growth and elevated inflation

US policy gyrations boosting policy uncertainty worldwide

Expected tariff hikes have boosted inflation expectations

US and Japan ended 2024 on solid ground in contrast to Europe

Our global data offering is unparalleled in terms of coverage, quality, and organization. We offer 290+ databases from 2500 government and private sources, a wealth of key survey and forecast data covering the world’s economies, and a robust offering of archive databases that drive machine learning for big data applications.

Optimized for precision analytics, our data is seamlessly integrated with Microsoft Office and all leading statistical packages through our DLX® software and platform independent HaverView™ website. We further offer direct database feeds, client server or cloud-based delivery, and RESTful API.


Privacy Policy

Disclaimer

Contact us

A premier time series data platform for the global strategy, research, and quant communities. 

London

Singapore

Tokyo

New York

Economy in Brief

Viewpoints

Contact Us

Our Data

Our Products

What We Do

Our Authors

About Us

Data News

Resources

Release Calendars

Training Center

Webinars

Newsletters

Download Software

For Clients

Live Updates

250822A2.jpg

250822B2.jpg

The **Industrial Materials Price Index** from the Foundation for International Business and Economic Research (FIBER) declined 1.7% during the last four weeks, after easing 0.4% in the prior four weeks. Together, these declines left prices unchanged during the last twelve months. During July, factory sector production rose an improved 1.4% y/y.

**Crude Oil & Benzene** group costs led the overall price weakening as they moved 3.3% lower (-12.6% y/y) in the latest four week period. The price of West Texas Intermediate crude oil declined 5.0% to $62.94 per barrel and remained 14.7% lower y/y. It had fallen to a low of $58.50 per barrel in the second week of May. The cost of the petrol-chemical benzene, used for making plastics & synthetic fibers, weakened 7.0% (-32.3% y/y). Excluding crude oil, the industrial commodity price index weakened 1.5% (+1.0% y/y) during the last four weeks.

Lower **Miscellaneous** group prices followed with a 2.9% weakening in the latest four week period, but prices remained up 4.0% y/y. Lumber prices fell 9.9% (+15.2% y/y) during the last four weeks. Natural rubber prices also were fairly weak as they fell 6.9% (-11.5% y/y) in four weeks. Working higher, tallow costs (used in the soap industry) improved 0.6% (32.9% y/y) over the last four weeks.

**Metals** group prices fell 1.2% (+1.1% y/y) over four weeks. Lead prices declined 2.6% (-4.3% y/y) while copper scrap prices weakened 1.6% (+5.9% y/y). Aluminum prices were off 1.5% in four weeks (+7.5% y/y), and the cost of zinc declined 1.4% (+0.5% y/y). Tin prices eased 0.4% (+4.4% y/y), but steel scrap costs edged 0.2% higher (-6.7% y/y) over four weeks.

Prices in the **Textile** group moved 0.3% higher (2.0% y/y) during the last four weeks. Burlap costs improved 3.9% (15.9% y/y), but cotton prices fell 0.9% (+2.3% y/y) in four weeks.

The Foundation for International Business and Economic Research (FIBER) develops economic measurement techniques as applied to business cycles and inflation in the U.S. and other market economies. The commodity price data can be found in Haver's **DAILY**, **WEEKLY**, **USECON** and **CMDTY** databases.

**Monetary Policy and the Fed’s Framework Review** is the title of today’s speech by Fed Chair Jerome H. Powell, and it can be found [here](https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/powell20250822a.htm).

250822C2.jpg

250822D2.jpg

- Decline reverses earlier strength.
- Crude oil costs lead the weakening.
- Lumber & metals prices follow, but textile costs rise.

FIBER: Industrial Commodity Prices Decline Sharply in Latest Four Weeks

Andrew Cates

**The US housing market**
This first chart below highlights the growing downside risks to the US economic outlook stemming from the housing market. The S&P Case-Shiller home price index has slowed sharply from the pandemic-era surge, while the NAHB (National Association of Homebuilders) housing market index has weakened to levels historically associated with falling home prices. Housing matters because it is not just a cyclical sector but also a key transmission channel for the broader economy: consumer confidence, household balance sheets and credit conditions are all heavily influenced by shifts in the housing market.

250821Z1.jpg

**China’s economy**
The latest run of data from China has also reinforced downside risks for the broader world economy. As the Citigroup Economic Surprise Indices show below, China-specific data have more consistently undershot expectations in recent days. China’s July releases in particular disappointed: retail sales growth slowed to just 3.7% y/y, with weakness in autos and furniture hinting that earlier policy-driven boosts are fading. Industrial output and fixed-asset investment also came in below consensus, while property prices continued to fall and retail sector investment contracted by double digits. Even the labour market showed strain, with unemployment edging higher. The worry is not just China’s slowdown in isolation, but the spillovers. Softer Chinese demand feeds directly into global supply chains, commodity markets, and regional trade partners. Combined with tariff and non-tariff headwinds from the US, the risk is that China’s structural challenges spill into weaker global growth momentum.

250821Z2.jpg

**UK inflation** 
Persistently high services inflation remains one of the biggest headaches for UK monetary policy - and the UK is far from unique in that regard. Services are wage- and demand-sensitive, and their stickiness complicates the calibration of monetary policy even as broader disinflation takes hold. This week’s July upside surprise to UK services inflation was driven in no small part by airfares, which spiked 30% month-on-month – the largest July rise on record. While such volatility may prove temporary, it nonetheless lifted year-on-year services inflation to 5.0%, well above comfort levels. Still, the offsets are important: stripping out airfares and other volatile components, underlying services momentum appears to have eased, while broader data on wages, employment, and activity point to cooling demand. Nevertheless, this tension – headline stickiness versus softer underlying trends – underscores why the Bank of England is treading carefully.

250821Z3.jpg

**Inflation expectations and energy**
US medium-term inflation expectations have been unusually decoupling from oil prices in recent weeks. Normally, falling oil prices would help anchor breakevens, yet the 5-year forward inflation rate has edged higher of late even as WTI has slipped. This probably reflects US tariff policies that are shifting inflation dynamics away from energy and toward trade-related costs. At the same time, a weaker dollar has lifted imported prices, and the upward creep in expectations suggests markets may be more actively questioning whether the Fed’s “higher for longer” stance is sufficient to contain medium-term inflation risks.

250821Z4.jpg

**Clean energy**
Pivoting to more structural issues, the stark divergence between the global clean energy equity market index and the broader S&P 500 underlines the mounting challenges facing the renewables sector at present. While US equities have pushed to record highs, clean energy stocks have languished, weighed down by policy uncertainty, higher financing costs, and a more sceptical public mood. In the US, shifting political winds and uneven implementation of green subsidies have clouded the outlook for investment, while globally, resistance to renewables has grown as consumers and businesses grapple with high energy bills. Rising interest rates have further undermined the economics of capital-intensive clean energy projects, eroding returns and delaying investment pipelines. At the same time, bottlenecks in transmission infrastructure, permitting delays, and questions over the pace of the net-zero transition have all dented confidence. The result is a sector underperforming dramatically even as the urgency of the climate challenge grows.

250821Z5.jpg

**Renewables versus non-renewables**
Global energy consumption data show how limited—and in some respects, stalled—the transition away from fossil fuels has become. Oil, gas, and coal still dominate the energy mix, with shares that have proven remarkably resilient over the past several years. In fact, coal use has ticked higher of late as countries turned back to cheaper, more secure supplies amid energy price spikes and supply disruptions. While renewables have grown rapidly in percentage terms, their absolute contribution remains small compared with the scale of fossil fuel demand. Nuclear and hydro have also struggled to gain ground, leaving the overall mix looking more like a story of continuity than transformation. The result is a global transition that has not just slowed but, in key areas, has partially reversed—highlighting the gulf between climate ambitions and energy realities.

250821Z6.jpg

Recent financial market gains have been underpinned by resilient global data, AI-fuelled optimism, and hopes that most central banks will continue to loosen monetary policy. Yet beneath the surface, a more complicated picture may be emerging. In the US, housing indicators are flashing warnings about household balance sheets and credit channels (chart 1), while China’s latest data—covering retail sales, industrial output, and property—underscore persistent weakness (chart 2). In the UK, this week’s data showing sticky services inflation is complicating the Bank of England’s easing path (chat 3), while back in the US, medium-term inflation expectations have been rising despite softer oil prices (chart 4), hinting at a more disruptive role for trade policy. Against this cyclical backdrop sit deeper structural challenges: global energy consumption remains overwhelmingly dependent on fossil fuels, the clean energy sector has lost momentum amid high costs and policy uncertainty, and equity markets have punished renewables even as climate imperatives intensify (charts 5 and 6). Together, these dynamics suggest that while markets continue to trade on optimism, the mix of weak housing signals, patchy Chinese demand, sticky inflation, and an uneven energy transition potentially leaves the global outlook more fragile than headline performance implies.

<iframe data-testid="embed-iframe" style="border-radius:12px" src="https://open.spotify.com/embed/episode/1GqSlFq3gfZuMYDWhif8Ht?utm_source=generator" width="100%" height="152" frameBorder="0" allowfullscreen="" allow="autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; fullscreen; picture-in-picture" loading="lazy"></iframe>

Charts of the Week: Cracks Beneath The Shine

250821J8.jpg

250821K8.jpg

Existing home sales rose 2.0% (0.8% y/y) to 4.01 million (SAAR) in July after falling 2.7% in June to an unrevised to 3.93 million and rising 1.0% to 4.04 million in May, according to the National Association of Realtors (NAR). The Action Economics Forecast Survey expected 3.91 million unit sales in July. Last month’s sales decline accompanied a decline in the effective 30-year mortgage interest rate to 6.72% from 6.82% in June. The sales figures are based on closings of sales signed over the past couple of months.

Existing single-family home sales rose 2.0% (1.1% y/y) during July to 3.64 million units after a 3.0% decline to 3.57 million in June and a 1.4% May rise to 3.68 million. Sales of condos and co-ops rose 2.8% (-2.6% y/y) to 370,000 after holding steady in June.

Sales were mixed across the country last month. Sales in the Northeast increased 8.7% (2.0% y/y) to 500,000 following an 8.0% June decline. Sales in the South improved 2.2% both m/m and y/y to 1.85 million, after falling 2.2% in June. Sales in the West rose 1.4% (-4.0% y/y) to 720,000 after a 1.4% June gain. Falling by 1.1% (+1.1% y/y) to 940,000 were sales in the Midwest after falling 4.0% in June.

The median price of all existing homes (NSA) in July weakened 2.4% (+0.2% y/y) from the June record to $422,400. The median price of an existing single-family home fell 2.3% (+0.3% y/y) to $428,500 in July, and the median price of condos & co-ops declined 3.1% (-1.2% y/y) to $362,600 last month. Prices for homes in the West declined 1.1% (-1.4% y/y) to $620,700 while prices in the Northeast fell 6.3% (+0.8% y/y) to $509,300. In the South, prices were off 1.8% (-0.6% y/y) to $367,400 while in the Midwest, home prices fell 1.1% (+3.9% y/y) to $333,800.

The number of existing homes for sale (NSA) rose 0.6% (15.7% y/y) to 1.55 million units in July. The supply of homes on the market at the current selling rate (NSA) slipped to 4.6 months, still nearly the highest level in nine years, up from a low of 1.6 months in January 2022.

The data on existing home sales, prices and affordability are compiled by the National Association of Realtors. The data on single-family home sales extend back to February 1968. Total sales and price data and regional sales can be found in Haver's **USECON** database. Regional price and affordability data and national inventory data are available in the **REALTOR** database. Mortgage interest rates can be found in the **WEEKLY** database. The expectations figure is from the Action Economics Forecast Survey, reported in the **AS1REPNA** database.

The minutes to the latest **FOMC** meeting can be found [here](https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/files/fomcminutes20250730.pdf).

250821L8.jpg

250821M8.jpg

- Home sales remain below recent high in December.
- Sales are slightly higher m/m in most of country.
- Median sales price slips from record high.

U.S. Existing Home Sales Rise Slightly in July; Home Prices Decline

Sandy Batten

250821N4.jpg

250821O4.jpg

The Current Activity Diffusion Index from the latest Manufacturing Business Outlook Survey (MBOS) conducted by the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, fell more than 16 points to -0.3 in August from 15.9 in July. The index has posted negative readings, which indicate that activity is declining, in four of the previous five months. A reading of +5.0 for August had been expected by the Action Economics Forecast Survey. Nearly 30% of respondents reported an increase in activity in August, down from 31.7% in July, while 30% reported a decline, up markedly from 16% in July. Responses to this month's survey were collected from August 11 to August 18.

The headline index reflects the answer to a single question on activity. Haver Analytics calculates an ISM-adjusted current activity diffusion index from five key components using the methodology employed in constructing the national ISM index. That calculated index fell to 49.1 in August, the first reading below the critical 50 level that separates expansion from contraction since April, from 51.2 in July.

Looking at the component indexes, both new orders and shipments posted significant declines in August with orders plummeting into negative territory at -1.9 versus 18.4 in July. This was the first negative reading for new orders since the tariff-induced plunge in April. Thirty-four percent of respondents reported an increase in orders in August, little changed from 35% in July. In contrast, 36% reported a decline in orders in August, up markedly from 17% in July. Shipments also declined significantly in August although they remained in positive territory at 4.5 versus 23.7 in July. Twenty-nine percent of respondents reported an increase in shipments, down slightly from 32% in July. In contrast, 24% reported a decline, up markedly from 9% in July.

Firms continued to report overall increases in employment, but at a slower pace. The employment index fell 4 points to 5.9 in August from 10.3 in July. Most firms continued to report no change in employment levels (74%), while the share of firms reporting increases (16%) exceeded the share reporting decreases (10%, up from 7% in July). The average workweek index rose from 0.4 in July to 4.7 in August, its highest reading since March.

There was still no indication that increased tariffs have damaged supply chains. The delivery times index slipped further below zero to -5.4 in August, the fourth negative reading in five months indicating that delivery times are shortening, from -4.7 in July. Thirteen percent of respondents reported an increase in delivery times in August, up from 8% in July, while 18% reported a decrease versus 13% in July.

Inflation indicators continued to rise in August. The prices paid index jumped to 66.8 in August, its highest reading since May 2022, from an already elevated 58.8 in July. Nearly 67% of respondents reported an increase in input prices while no respondent reported a decline. The prices received index edged up to 36.1 in August, its highest reading in three months, from 34.8 in July. In the answer to a special question, firms expected a 4.1% increase in the prices of their own products over the coming year, up from 3.8% when this question was last asked in the May survey.

The outlook for the next six months brightened marginally in August with the Future Activity Index rising to 25.0 following an increase to 21.5 in July. Forty-one percent of respondents expect activity to increase over the coming six months, the same as in July, while 16% expect it to decline, down from 20% in July. The pace of increase in both new orders and shipments is expected to pick up. Delivery times are expected to increase only slightly. Employment growth is expected to slow. The outlook for capital expenditures rose markedly to 38.4 in August, the highest reading since January.

The Manufacturing Business Outlook Survey (MBOS), conducted by the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, is a monthly survey of manufacturers in the Third Federal Reserve District. Participants indicate the direction of change in overall business activity and in the various measures of activity at their plants. The diffusion indexes in the MBOS represent the percentage of respondents indicating an increase minus the percentage indicating a decrease. The series from the survey dating back to May 1968 can be found in Haver's **SURVEYS** database. The expectations forecast figures are from the Action Economics Forecast Survey in **AS1REPNA**.

250821P4.jpg

250821Q4.jpg

- The headline index fell more than 16 points to -0.3, led by outsized declines in both new orders and shipments.
- The ISM-adjusted composite fell below the critical 50 level for the first time in four months, also pointing to a decline in activity.
- Delivery times shortened further while both prices paid and prices received indexes posted gains.

U.S. Philly Fed Manufacturing Index Dipped Below Zero in August

250821A2.jpg

250821B2.jpg

Initial claims for unemployment insurance rose to 235,000 during the week ended August 16 after falling to an unrevised 224,000 in the prior week. The Action Economics Forecast Survey expected 226,000 initial claims for last week. The four-week moving average of initial claims increased to 226,250 from 221,750. It was the highest level since the second week of July.

In the week ended August 9, the total number of unemployment insurance beneficiaries – also known as “continuing claims” – rose to 1.972 million from 1.942 million in the prior week, revised from 1.953 million. The four-week moving average rose to 1.955 million, the highest level in five weeks.

In the week ending August 9, the insured rate of unemployment (the number of beneficiaries as a percent of covered employment) was 1.3% for the eleventh straight week.

The insured unemployment rate varied greatly across individual states and territories. In the week ended August 2, the highest unemployment rates were in New Jersey (2.74%), Puerto Rico (2.62%), Rhode Island (2.52%), California (2.14%), Minnesota (2.20%) and Massachusetts (2.15%). The lowest were in South Dakota (0.27%), Florida (0.39%), North Carolina (0.47%), Kansas (0.58%), Georgia (0.59%) and Louisiana (0.61%). Rates in other notable states include Pennsylvania (1.90%), Illinois (1.72%), New York (1.73%), Texas (1.25%) and Michigan (1.17%). These state data are not seasonally adjusted.

Data on weekly unemployment claims are from the Department of Labor itself, not the Bureau of Labor Statistics. They begin in 1967 and are contained in Haver’s **WEEKLY** database and summarized monthly in **USECON**. Data for individual states are in **REGIONW** back to December 1986. The expectations figure is from the Action Economics Forecast Survey in the **AS1REPNA** database.

250821C2.jpg

250821D2.jpg

- Initial claims surge to highest level in eight weeks.
- Continuing claims extend upward trend.
- Insured unemployment rate holds steady.

Economy in Brief: 2004

Jump to:

U.S. Construction Spending Down in September

ISM Factory Index Slipped Unexpectedly

U.S. Personal Income Gain Light

U.S. Personal Income Gain Light

People's Bank of China Raises Lending Rate; Removes Cap on Bank Rates in Major Monetary Policy Shift

Chicago Purchasing Agents' Index Highest Since 1988

U.S. Consumer Sentiment Recovered After Early October Slump

3Q'04 Employment Cost Index Up 0.9%