Robert Brusca

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<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 src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/071129l.jpg" align="left" border="0" height="265" width="353">
The UK retail sector is stuck more or less mid range. Various
components are generally at or above the mid point of their respective
ranges. Orders, the relative strongest component, resides in the 70th
percentile of its range. Sales are in the 52nd
percentile. Sales for the time of year are in the 44th
percentile. The stock-to-sales ratio is a touch high in the 60th
percentile of its range. The various expected sales and orders are
generally in the same relative positions. See the table below. The chart on the left shows that
while variables remain mid range there has been some slippage recently
in the trend for sales, while orders trends have held a bit firmer. 



<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup></colgroup>
<thead><tr><th colspan="10" scope="col">UK Retail Volume Data CBI Survey </th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">Reported:</td>
<td>Nov-07</td>
<td>Oct-07</td>
<td>Sep-07</td>
<td>Aug-07</td>
<td>12MO Avg</td>
<td>Pcntle</td>
<td>Max</td>
<td>Min</td>
<td>Range</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Sales/Yr Ago</td>
<td>13</td>
<td>10</td>
<td>12</td>
<td>15</td>
<td>22</td>
<td>52%</td>
<td>57</td>
<td>-35</td>
<td>92</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Orders/Yr Ago</td>
<td>18</td>
<td>16</td>
<td>11</td>
<td>15</td>
<td>17</td>
<td>70%</td>
<td>42</td>
<td>-38</td>
<td>80</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Sales: Time/Yr</td>
<td>-3</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>-1</td>
<td>-7</td>
<td>5</td>
<td>44%</td>
<td>41</td>
<td>-37</td>
<td>78</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Stocks: Sales</td>
<td>18</td>
<td>13</td>
<td>12</td>
<td>14</td>
<td>12</td>
<td>60%</td>
<td>30</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>30</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Expected:</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Sales/Yr Ago</td>
<td>15</td>
<td>16</td>
<td>17</td>
<td>14</td>
<td>18</td>
<td>53%</td>
<td>49</td>
<td>-23</td>
<td>72</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Orders/Yr Ago</td>
<td>12</td>
<td>16</td>
<td>18</td>
<td>6</td>
<td>12</td>
<td>64%</td>
<td>38</td>
<td>-34</td>
<td>72</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Sales: Time/Yr</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>-9</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>-5</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>53%</td>
<td>29</td>
<td>-29</td>
<td>58</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Stocks: Sales</td>
<td>12</td>
<td>5</td>
<td>10</td>
<td>6</td>
<td>9</td>
<td>50%</td>
<td>21</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>18</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body></html>

The UK retail sector is stuck more or less mid range. Various components are generally at or above the mid point of their respective ranges. Orders, the relative strongest component, resides in the 70th percentile of its range. Sales [...]

UK: CBI Retail Sales Hold Steady and Strengthen

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<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 src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/071129k.jpg" align="left" border="0" height="265" width="353">
Japan continued to see its textile business eaten alive by
international competition in October. Still, manufacturing output rose
by 1.6% month-to-month and stands higher year/year by 3.5% after rising
6.6% the year before. 
 

Consumer goods and intermediate goods continue to show solid
gains. Investment goods output is off by 1.7% year/year and is off at a
4.3% annual rate over three months. 
 

On the whole, Japan&#8217;s industrial sector is doing well, living
off exports while domestic demand is still trying to find its way. 
 


<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup></colgroup>
<thead><tr>
<th colspan="8" scope="col"> Japan
Industrial Production Trends</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;</td>
<td colspan="3">m/m %</td>
<td colspan="3">Saar %</td>
<td>Yr/Yr</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;</td>
<td> Oct-07</td>
<td> Sep-07</td>
<td> Aug-07</td>
<td> 3-mo</td>
<td> 6-mo</td>
<td> 12-mo</td>
<td> Yr-Ago</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Mining &amp; Manufacturing</td>
<td>1.6%</td>
<td> -1.4%</td>
<td>3.5%</td>
<td>15.6%</td>
<td>8.9%</td>
<td>3.5%</td>
<td>6.6%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Total Industry</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
<td> -1.3%</td>
<td>3.8%</td>
<td>16.5%</td>
<td>7.6%</td>
<td>3.3%</td>
<td>6.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Manufacturing</td>
<td>1.6%</td>
<td> -1.4%</td>
<td>3.5%</td>
<td>15.6%</td>
<td>8.9%</td>
<td>3.5%</td>
<td>6.6%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Textiles</td>
<td> -0.3%</td>
<td> -1.0%</td>
<td> -1.0%</td>
<td> -8.8%</td>
<td> -4.2%</td>
<td> -5.5%</td>
<td> -2.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Transport</td>
<td>6.7%</td>
<td> -6.3%</td>
<td>19.1%</td>
<td>101.5%</td>
<td>32.3%</td>
<td>11.5%</td>
<td>14.2%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="8" class="firstcol"> Product Group</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Consumer Goods</td>
<td>1.6%</td>
<td> -2.2%</td>
<td>8.8%</td>
<td>36.5%</td>
<td>5.7%</td>
<td>2.9%</td>
<td>5.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Intermediate Goods</td>
<td>1.2%</td>
<td>0.0%</td>
<td>2.8%</td>
<td>17.3%</td>
<td>11.9%</td>
<td>5.9%</td>
<td>7.1%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Investment Goods</td>
<td>1.9%</td>
<td> -5.3%</td>
<td>2.5%</td>
<td> -4.3%</td>
<td>1.6%</td>
<td> -1.7%</td>
<td>6.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Mining</td>
<td> -2.9%</td>
<td>2.9%</td>
<td> -0.6%</td>
<td> -2.9%</td>
<td>6.7%</td>
<td>4.7%</td>
<td>6.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Electricity &amp; Gas</td>
<td> -3.0%</td>
<td>1.8%</td>
<td>8.7%</td>
<td>32.7%</td>
<td> -0.3%</td>
<td>2.5%</td>
<td>2.9%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body></html>

Japan continued to see its textile business eaten alive by international competition in October. Still, manufacturing output rose by 1.6% month-to-month and stands higher year/year by 3.5% after rising 6.6% the year before. Consumer [...]

Japan IP Sharply High in the Month of October

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<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 src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/071129j.jpg" align="left" border="0" height="265" width="353">
The abrupt drop in French consumer confidence in the INSEE
survey is sharp and as strong a reversal as appeared in early 2001.
Confidence itself at -28 in the 11 percentile of that variable&#8217;s range
&#8211; very weak showing. Living standards over the past 12 months as well
as those expected in the next twelve months rank in the bottom eight
percent of the range for such responses historically. Expected
unemployment in the next 12 months is barely below the mid point of its
historic range at a level of 13. 

Price developments over the past 12 months have given the
second highest reading ever (since January 1990). Expected price
developments in the 12 months ahead are still elevated in the 57th
percentile of their range. 

Oddly the &#8216;favorable to save&#8217; response ranks above its
midpoint at the sixty-first percentile. But &#8216;the ability to save&#8217; ranks
in the bottom third of its range. 

The financial situation is assessed as being in its 57th
percentile at a reading of +15, a slippage from October&#8217;s 16. But the
past 12 months are assessed as having been in the 40th percentile of
their range; what&#8217;s worse is that the next 12 months are assessed as
being in the bottom third of theirs. 

The French consumer has shed all the post election visions of
nirvana and Sarkozy&#8217;s honeymoon is over. The strong euro, ongoing
budget fights, and racial unrest in Paris&#8217; suburbs are taking their
toll despite the spirit of optimism that swept him into office and
lingered&#8230;for a while. 


<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup></colgroup>
<thead><tr><th colspan="11" scope="col"> INSEE Household Monthly Survey</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td colspan="2">Since Jan 1990</td>
<td colspan="4">Since Jan 1990</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;</td>
<td>Oct 07</td>
<td>Sep 07</td>
<td>Aug 07</td>
<td>Jul 07</td>
<td>%tile</td>
<td>Rank</td>
<td>Max</td>
<td>Min</td>
<td>Range</td>
<td>Mean</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Household Confidence</td>
<td>-22</td>
<td>-21</td>
<td>-17</td>
<td>-15</td>
<td>25.6</td>
<td>118</td>
<td>10</td>
<td>-33</td>
<td>43</td>
<td>-17</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol" colspan="11">Living Standards</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Past 12-Mos</td>
<td>-53</td>
<td>-50</td>
<td>-47</td>
<td>-46</td>
<td>15.5</td>
<td>153</td>
<td>18</td>
<td>-66</td>
<td>84</td>
<td>-37</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Next 12-Mos</td>
<td>-24</td>
<td>-26</td>
<td>-17</td>
<td>-11</td>
<td>31.6</td>
<td>103</td>
<td>15</td>
<td>-42</td>
<td>57</td>
<td>-18</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Unemployment: Next 12</td>
<td>11</td>
<td>11</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>-7</td>
<td>43.6</td>
<td>155</td>
<td>73</td>
<td>-37</td>
<td>110</td>
<td>30</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol" colspan="11">Price Developments</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Past 12-Mos</td>
<td>14</td>
<td>10</td>
<td>5</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>81.6</td>
<td>22</td>
<td>30</td>
<td>-57</td>
<td>87</td>
<td>-20</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Next 12-Mos</td>
<td>-18</td>
<td>-15</td>
<td>-20</td>
<td>-26</td>
<td>46.2</td>
<td>19</td>
<td>31</td>
<td>-60</td>
<td>91</td>
<td>-34</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol" colspan="11">Savings</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Favorable to save</td>
<td>32</td>
<td>36</td>
<td>35</td>
<td>32</td>
<td>77.8</td>
<td>23</td>
<td>40</td>
<td>4</td>
<td>36</td>
<td>23</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Ability to save Next 12</td>
<td>-6</td>
<td>-5</td>
<td>-5</td>
<td>-4</td>
<td>58.6</td>
<td>67</td>
<td>6</td>
<td>-23</td>
<td>29</td>
<td>-8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol" colspan="11">Spending</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Favorable for major purchase</td>
<td>-10</td>
<td>-8</td>
<td>-6</td>
<td>-3</td>
<td>55.2</td>
<td>62</td>
<td>16</td>
<td>-42</td>
<td>58</td>
<td>-12</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol" colspan="11">Financial Situation</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Current</td>
<td>16</td>
<td>16</td>
<td>15</td>
<td>15</td>
<td>61.9</td>
<td>39</td>
<td>24</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>21</td>
<td>12</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Past 12-Mos</td>
<td>-16</td>
<td>-15</td>
<td>-14</td>
<td>-14</td>
<td>50.0</td>
<td>85</td>
<td>-5</td>
<td>-27</td>
<td>22</td>
<td>-16</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Next 12-Mos</td>
<td>-5</td>
<td>-4</td>
<td>-3</td>
<td>-1</td>
<td>40.7</td>
<td>172</td>
<td>11</td>
<td>-16</td>
<td>27</td>
<td>0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol"></td>
<td colspan="6">Number of observations in the period</td>
<td>208</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body></html>

The abrupt drop in French consumer confidence in the INSEE survey is sharp and as strong a reversal as appeared in early 2001. Confidence itself at -28 in the 11 percentile of that variable’s range – very weak showing. Living [...]

French Consumer Confidence in Abrupt About Face

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/071129h.jpg" width="353">
According to the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO), home prices in the U.S. fell last quarter and that was the first q/q decline since 1994. The decline pulled the y/y change in prices to a still positive 1.7% but that overall rate of appreciation is down from the double digit rates of gain during 2004 and 2005.
The House Price Indices in this report are weighted indexes based on repeat sales or refinancings using data provided by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. The overall figures are available in Haver&#39;s USECON data base and the state figures are in USREGIONAL<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/071129i.jpg" width="353">
Price declines were scattered throughout the country. Job cutbacks in the auto industry helped lower prices in Michigan for the sixth consecutive quarter and in New York prices fell 0.5%. Prices in Florida fell for only the second quarter but the y/y rate of gain of 1.3% compares to staggering rates of growth in earlier years. Prices also fell in Massachusetts for the fourth quarter in the last five (-1.0% y/y) and prices in Nevada fell 1.6% (-1.5% y/y).
The latest report from the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) can be found <a href="http://www.ofheo.gov/media/pdf/3q07hpi.pdf">here</a>.
Defining and Detecting Predatory Lending from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York is available <a href="http://www.newyorkfed.org/research/staff_reports/sr273.html"> 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/REGIONAL/@R11/@R1101/@R1101.HTM">House Price Index (OFHEO)</a></th>
<th scope="col">3Q &#39;07</th>
<th scope="col">2Q &#39;07</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2006</th>
<th scope="col">2005</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">United States</td>
<td>-0.4%</td>
<td>0.1%</td>
<td>1.8%</td>
<td>8.8%</td>
<td>12.9%</td>
<td>10.6%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; California</td>
<td>-1.2%</td>
<td>-0.7%</td>
<td>-1.4%</td>
<td>11.7%</td>
<td>23.3%</td>
<td>22.2%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; New Jersey</td>
<td>-0.3%</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>1.9%</td>
<td>10.2%</td>
<td>16.0%</td>
<td>14.9%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; New York</td>
<td>-0.5%</td>
<td>0.6%</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
<td>8.5%</td>
<td>13.6%</td>
<td>13.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Michigan</td>
<td>-1.4%</td>
<td>-0.3%</td>
<td>-1.4%</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>4.0%</td>
<td>4.2%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Florida</td>
<td>-0.8%</td>
<td>-0.2%</td>
<td>1.3%</td>
<td>17.6%</td>
<td>25.7%</td>
<td>17.0%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

According to the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO), home prices in the U.S. fell last quarter and that was the first q/q decline since 1994. The decline pulled the y/y change in prices to a still positive 1.7% but [...]

Home Price Appreciation Slowest in Three Years

<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/071129f.jpg" width="353">
Initial claims for unemployment insurance surged much more than expectations to the highest level since early this year. The 23,000 rise last week to 352,000 followed a little revised 12,000 decline during the week prior. The early timing of this year&#39;s Thanksgiving holiday may have affected the latest figure.
A claims level below 400,000 typically has been associated with growth in nonfarm payrolls. During the last six years there has been a (negative) 78% correlation between the level of initial claims and the m/m change in nonfarm payroll employment.
The four week moving average of initial claims rose to 335,250 (3.3% y/y) and that was up 3.5% from the prior four weeks.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/071129g.jpg" width="353">
The largest increases in initial claims for the week ending Nov. 17 were in Texas (+1,097), Kentucky (+797), Idaho (+341), Arkansas (+219), and Wisconsin (+209), while the largest decreases were in Michigan (-6,493), California (-5,905), Puerto Rico (-3,882), New Jersey (-3,011), and Virginia (-1,542).
Continuing claims for unemployment insurance surged 112,000 from the prior week, the largest one week increase since early this year, and it followed modest decline in the prior three weeks.
The continuing claims numbers lag the initial claims figures by one week.
The insured rate of unemployment rose slightly to 2.0% from 1.9% during the prior week.

<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/WEEKLY/@W5/@W507/@W507.HTM">Unemployment Insurance (000s)</a></th>
<th scope="col">11/24/07 </th>
<th scope="col">11/17/07 </th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2006</th>
<th scope="col">2005</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Initial Claims</td>
<td>&nbsp;352</td>
<td>329</td>
<td>0.9%</td>
<td>313</td>
<td>331</td>
<td>343</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Continuing Claims</td>
<td>--</td>
<td>2,665</td>
<td>8.2%</td>
<td>2,459</td>
<td>2,662</td>
<td>2,924</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Initial claims for unemployment insurance surged much more than expectations to the highest level since early this year. The 23,000 rise last week to 352,000 followed a little revised 12,000 decline during the week prior. The early [...]

U.S. Initial Unemployment Insurance Claims Surged

<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/071129d.jpg" width="353">
New single family home sales rose a modest 1.7% last month to 728,00 but the prior month&#39;s figures were revised down to the point where so far this year, new home sales are down by nearly one third. Sales during the latest three months were 45.3% below the peak hit in the middle of 2005.
In the West, sales fell 15.7% last month to a new low and reversed all of a downwardly revised gain in September. Sales out West are down by more than one third this year and they are down by two thirds from the 2005 peak. Sales in the Northeast ticked up 1.8% and they have moved erratically sideways this year. Sales in the Midwest posted a 14.2 m/m gain but are off by one third since year end 2006. Sales in the South also rose 6.8% m/m but are down one quarter this year.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/071129e.jpg" width="353">
All this weakness in sales has done nothing for prices and they fell another 8.6% last month. The decline left prices down 17.1% from the peak earlier this year.
The number of homes for sale continued down another 2.3% last month and the supply of homes is off a moderate 3.6% this year. However, at the current low sales rate, the months&#39; supply of homes on the market is 8.5, down slightly from September but still double the rate for all of 2005. 

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol">US New Homes</th>
<th scope="col">October</th>
<th scope="col">September</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2006</th>
<th scope="col">2005</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Total Sales (SAAR, 000s)</td>
<td>728</td>
<td>716</td>
<td>-23.5%</td>
<td>1,049</td>
<td>1,279</td>
<td>1,201</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Median Price (NSA, $)</td>
<td>217,800</td>
<td>238,400</td>
<td>-13.0%</td>
<td>243,067</td>
<td>234,208</td>
<td>217,817</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

New single family home sales rose a modest 1.7% last month to 728,00 but the prior month's figures were revised down to the point where so far this year, new home sales are down by nearly one third. Sales during the latest three [...]

US Home Sales Ticked Up in October, Revisions Way Down

<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>
 



<div align="left"><img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/071129b.jpg" width="353">
U.S. real GDP growth during the third quarter was revised upward to 4.9% (AR) from 3.9% in the advance report. The latest figures from the Commerce Department were about as expected. The revision came from two components only: net exports and inventories.
Improvement in the net export deficit added 1.4 percentage points to GDP growth during 3Q versus an initial indication of a 0.9 point add. During 2Q, improved net exports made a 1.3 percentage point growth contribution. A modest upward revision to export growth to 18.9% (AR, 10.2% y/y) added 2.1 points to GDP growth and a modest downward revision to import growth to 4.2% (1.7% y/y) left imports subtracting 0.7 points from growth.
Inventories added a revised 1.0 percentage points to 3Q growth in GDP versus an initial indication of just a 0.4 add. Inventories contributed 0.2 points to 2Q growth and that contribution has been negative this year.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/071129c.jpg" width="353">
Overall corporate profits fell at a 4.6% annual rate (+1.9% y/y) last quarter. The housing market&#39;s travails weighed down the financial sector&#39; earnings by 20.5% (AR, +3.4% y/y). Domestic nonfinancial sector profitability also fell 5.9% (AR, -8.3% y/y) as costs rose but the lower dollar boosted rest of world earnings by 30.9% (AR, 34.7% y/y).
Growth in final sales to domestic purchasers actually was taken down a notch to 2.4% but still remained slightly improved from the 2.1% growth during the second quarter.
The drop in residential investment last quarter was left roughly unchanged and it fell 19.7% (AR, -6.3% y/y). It subtracted 1.0 percentage points from growth during 3Q after subtractions of between 0.6 and 1.3 percentage points in each of the prior five quarters.
Firm growth in business fixed investment continued as the underpinning of US demand. The 9.4% (5.2% y/y) rate of growth was upwardly revised and it added 1.0 percentage points to 3Q growth, about the same as during 2Q. Spending on structures was upwardly revised with a 14.3% rate of growth (13.3% y/y) and spending on equipment &amp; software also was revised up to 7.2% (AR, 1.7% y/y) after weak growth or q/q declines from 2Q &#39;06 to 1Q &#39;07.<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/071129a.jpg" width="353">
Growth in real personal consumption expenditures was taken down a notch to 2.7% (2.9% y/y) but it still was double growth during 2Q. Growth in spending on durable goods rose 4.0% (4.6% y/y) despite a 4.9% drop in spending on motor vehicles. Nondurable goods spending rose 1.9% (2.2% y/y), which was lower than originally indicated, and services spending growth held steady at 2.8% (3.0% y/y).
The GDP chain price index was left little changed at a 0.9% growth rate. Nonresidential (+0.8% y/y) and residential (+0.7 y/y) investment price indexes both fell during 3Q while consumer prices rose 1.7% (2.% y/y), held back by the decline in gasoline prices. Less food &amp; energy consumer prices rose 2.2% (2.2% y/y), a number that was revised up slightly.
The latest Beige Book from the Federal Reserve Board is available <a href="http://www.federalreserve.gov/fomc/beigebook/2007/20071128/default.htm"> here</a>.</div>

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@E7/@E701/@E701.HTM">Chained 2000$, % AR</a></th>
<th scope="col">3Q &#39;07 Preliminary</th>
<th scope="col">3Q &#39; 07 Advance</th>
<th scope="col">2Q &#39;07</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2006</th>
<th scope="col">2005</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">GDP</td>
<td>4.9</td>
<td>3.9</td>
<td>3.8</td>
<td>2.8</td>
<td>2.9</td>
<td>3.1</td>
<td>3.6</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Inventory Effect</td>
<td>1.0</td>
<td>0.4</td>
<td>0.2</td>
<td>-0.4</td>
<td>0.1</td>
<td>-0.2</td>
<td>0.4</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Final Sales</td>
<td>3.9</td>
<td>3.5</td>
<td>3.6</td>
<td>3.1</td>
<td>2.8</td>
<td>3.3</td>
<td>3.3</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Foreign Trade Effect</td>
<td>1.4</td>
<td>0.9</td>
<td>1.3</td>
<td>0.9</td>
<td>-0.1</td>
<td>-0.2</td>
<td>-0.7</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Domestic Final Demand</td>
<td>2.4</td>
<td>2.5</td>
<td>2.1</td>
<td>2.1</td>
<td>2.7</td>
<td>3.3</td>
<td>3.8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Chained GDP Price Index</td>
<td>0.9</td>
<td>0.8</td>
<td>2.6</td>
<td>2.4</td>
<td>2.6</td>
<td>1.7</td>
<td>2.1</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

U.S. real GDP growth during the third quarter was revised upward to 4.9% (AR) from 3.9% in the advance report. The latest figures from the Commerce Department were about as expected. The revision came from two components only: net [...]

US 3Q GDP Up 4.9%: Trade & Inventories Boosted Revision, Profits Fell

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

US economy expected to outperform other major economies in 2025

Only modest evidence of AI-related surge in US productivity growth

Previous Trump tariffs fading. A boost from new tariffs ahead?

Heavy US manufacturing states underperforming while Sun Belt states outperforming

Rising long-term yields a global phenomenon

US financial market concerns shifting from growth to inflation

Economic activity is picking up in the US but remains lackluster abroad

Policy uncertainty has surged since the US national elections.

Recent turnaround in US economic surprises leading to increases in rate-cut expectations

The outlook has brightened in the US, while it has dimmed for other major economies

Headline US PCE inflation elevated by sticky services prices

US and global equity prices have recently diverged

US leading global upturn in economic surprises

Blue Chip forecasters look for further significant monetary easing apart from Japan

Recent rise in global supply chain pressures could augur a pickup in global inflation pressures

Underperforming German economy generating increased policy uncertainty relative to Europe and the US

Resilient US economy is pushing up longer-term inflation expectations and interest rates

Positive US economic data surprises leading to upward adjustment of interest rate expectations

Recent aggressive policy easing in China has given a massive boost to equity prices

FOMC expects much more easing now than in June

US is clear world leader in business capital spending on artificial intelligence

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. 

New York

London

Singapore

Tokyo

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

250314F0.jpg

250314G0.jpg

The National Association of Realtors' Fixed Rate Mortgage Housing Affordability Index (HAI) eased 0.2% (-3.6% y/y) in January to 100.7 after rising 1.5% to 100.9 in December and falling 2.9% in November to 99.4. The level of home affordability has risen 12.0% from its low of 89.9 in October 2023. It remains 43.8% below the high of 179.2 in April 2020.

The slip in affordability in January reflected a 1.6% drop (+5.0% y/y) in the median price of an existing single-family home to $402,000 which was offset by a rise in mortgage rates to 7.04% from 6.80% in December. The price decline was the sixth in the last seven months from the record $432,900 in June. The rise in mortgage rates compared to a September low of 6.26% and a 7.14% high during May. It remained increased from a December 2020 low of 2.73%. These changes raised the principal & interest payment by 0.8% (8.4% y/y) to $2,148 per month. That was well above the most recent low of $984 in February 2020. Monthly mortgage payments averaged a steady 24.8% of income during January. They remained up from a low of 14.0% in April 2020.

The rise in housing costs in January was accompanied by improvement in median family income. It increased 0.7% (4.5% y/y) to a record $103,850 after rising 0.3% in December and 0.4% in November.

Housing affordability was mixed m/m across the country in January. The index rose 0.4% (-5.9% y/y) to 134.2 in the Midwest. It remains the most affordable region of the country. In the South, the index eased 0.6% (-2.5% y/y) to 103.3 and the affordability index in the Northeast fell 1.9% (-8.7% y/y) to 89.9. In the West, where homes are the least affordable, the index weakened 1.8% (-5.5% y/y) to 69.8 in January.

The Housing Affordability Index (HAI) equals 100 when a median-income borrower qualifies for an 80% mortgage on a median-priced existing single-family home. The HAI had exceeded 100 in each month since July 1990 and reached its all-time high of 213.3 in January 2013; since then, it fell below 100 for the first time in June 2022 (98.8).

Data on Housing Affordability can be found in Haver’s **REALTOR** database. Median home sales prices are also available in **USECON**. Higher frequency interest rate data are found in **SURVEYS**, **WEEKLY**, and **DAILY**.

250314H0.jpg

250314I0.jpg

- Home prices ease but mortgage rates rise.
- Median income strengthens.
- Affordability weakens in most of country.

U.S. Housing Affordability Is Little Changed in January

Carol Stone, CBE

250314F2.jpg

250314G2.jpg

Yesterday, March 13, the Federal Reserve published the Financial Accounts for Q4 2024. They show, among numerous other things, that domestic nonfinancial participants in the U.S. economy had borrowings that represented 11.4% of GDP during Q4. This is down moderately from 12.3% in Q3 and produced an amount for the whole year of 2024 of 11.9% of GDP. The quarterly amounts cited here are at seasonally adjusted annual rates.

In Q4, the largest borrowing sector was the federal government, which used $2,602.9 billion, or 8.8% of GDP, up from $2,261 billion in Q3, or 7.7% of GDP.  Households borrowed $624.3 billion or 2.1% of GDP; this amount included $294.3 billion of home mortgages and $133.1 billion of consumer credit.

Nonfinancial business corporations actually paid down debt of $64.1 billion in Q4, or 0.2% of GDP. In Q1 of 2024, businesses had borrowed $698.2 billion and for the whole year, they borrowed $436.6 billion or 1.5% of GDP. State and local governments paid down $46.0 billion in Q4; for the whole year they did use $97.8 billion or 0.3% of GDP.

In addition to domestic borrowers, the foreign sector borrowed $341.3 billion in Q4, or 1.1% of GDP and up from $196.7 billion in Q3.  For all of 2024, foreign participants used $345.5 billion, or 1.2% of GDP.

The Financial Accounts data are in Haver's **FFUNDS** database. The Federal Reserve is the main source, while associated information is compiled in the Integrated Macroeconomic Accounts produced jointly with the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA); those nonfinancial data are carried in Haver's **USNA** database as well as in **FFUNDS**. Note that revisions are common throughout the accounts with every quarterly release.

250314H2.jpg

250314I2.jpg

- Nonfinancial sectors together borrowed 11.4% of GDP in Q4.
- Not surprisingly, the largest borrowing sector was the federal government.
- Households had sizable amounts of home mortgage borrowing, though this was less than in Q3.
- Businesses paid down debt in Q4.

U.S. Economic Sectors Borrowed Moderately in Q4 and for All of 2024

Andrew Cates

**Falling US growth momentum**
The latest Blue Chip Economic Indicators survey reflects a shifting global economic landscape, with the US experiencing a notable loss of momentum. After climbing above 2.0% on the back of a strong economic performance in late 2024, consensus forecasts for US growth in 2025 have now been revised downward for the first time in nearly a year. This reversal reflects weaker-than-expected economic data and emerging challenges tied to the policy shifts of the new administration. The downgrade in US growth projections also coincides with a further downward revision to an already subdued outlook for the UK and the euro area, reinforcing concerns about a sluggish global growth outlook (chart 1).

250313Z1.jpg

**Global inflation expectations**
In the meantime the same survey reveals growing concerns about the inflation outlook in the US and Europe this year, and possibly reflecting the impact of US tariff policies on global price pressures. Japan’s inflation forecast for 2025 has also surged, as rising import costs and shifting trade dynamics have additionally contributed to stronger price pressures. This all stands in contrast to China with inflation expectations for this year falling below 1%, reinforcing concerns about deflation and weak demand (chart 2).

250313Z2.jpg

**Global bond markets**
Recent shifts in 10-year government bond yields reflect changing market expectations. While yields have risen sharply in Germany, China, and Japan, they have fallen in the US. Germany’s increase is tied to expanded defense spending and industrial subsidies, while China’s reflects a shift toward more aggressive fiscal easing, with its deficit target rising to 4% of GDP to counter deflation and weak demand. In contrast, falling US yields signal a reassessment of growth expectations under the new administration. This divergence suggests capital may be flowing toward economies with stronger fiscal stimulus, potentially weakening the dollar, increasing borrowing costs for US businesses, and complicating efforts to revive domestic manufacturing.

250313Z3.jpg

**Overseas holdings of US Securities**
Latest data show that foreign-holdings of US long-term securities have risen steadily over the past decade, with a notable acceleration in the past two years. The most recent data additionally highlights a significant increase in foreign ownership of US corporate equities, reflecting, until recently, investor confidence in US companies.

250313Z4.jpg

**Industrialisation versus de-industrialisation**
Recent US policy shifts—particularly higher tariffs on Chinese imports—aim to address the long-term decline in domestic manufacturing jobs. However, their effectiveness is uncertain, given the growing role of automation and AI in reshaping industrial production. While tariffs may offer short-term relief, they are unlikely to reverse decades of global manufacturing shifts. China’s rise from a low-value agrarian economy to an industrial powerhouse has reshaped trade patterns, while US industrial employment has steadily declined, mirroring trends in other advanced economies. Meanwhile, Vietnam and other emerging markets have absorbed manufacturing capacity, benefiting from shifting supply chains. The real challenge for US policymakers is not just bringing back jobs but ensuring domestic industries stay competitive amid changing cost structures and technological advancements.

250313Z5.jpg

**Global competitiveness**
Historically, China's low unit labour costs provided it with a significant advantage, fuelling its manufacturing boom and accelerating the offshoring of US industrial jobs. However, as China's wages have risen due to economic development and increased productivity, and as US unit labour costs have remained relatively stable, the gap has narrowed considerably. Yet, still high labour costs in the US – coupled with rising trade barriers and rising input costs - still pose a challenge to the effectiveness of US policies, as firms may still find it difficult to maintain competitiveness without significant productivity gains. Indeed, as suggested above, there is a real risk that firms may instead accelerate their shift toward automation or relocate production to other low-cost regions (e.g. Vietnam), undermining the broader economic rationale for these interventions. The erosion of economic goodwill, combined with rising costs and financial market instability, additionally suggest that while the strategic objectives of US policy may be clear, the long-term implications remain highly uncertain.

250313Z6.jpg

The recent financial market volatility, marked by sharp swings in bond yields and equity market repricing, reflects growing uncertainty about the trajectory of the US economy amid a rapidly shifting policy environment. The US administration’s latest tariff measures, and their conflicting objectives, have amplified uncertainty, stifled risk appetite and further ignited inflation concerns (charts 1 and 2). Markets are grappling with the inflationary impact of rising import costs, the potential supply chain disruptions caused by abrupt shifts in trade policy, and the broader implications of protectionism on corporate investment. Meanwhile, recent policy announcements from Germany and China, coupled with firming inflationary pressures in Japan, have pushed global (ex-US) bond yields sharply higher, potentially amplifying global financial instability (charts 3 and 4). These shifts could profoundly reshape global trade and investment, not just through economic fundamentals but also through a growing erosion of goodwill toward the United States. As policy unpredictability forces companies and governments to hedge against potential disruptions, trust in the stability of US economic leadership is weakening. At the same time, concerns are mounting over the effectiveness of US policy choices, particularly in relation to one of its core ambitions—reshoring manufacturing jobs (charts 5 and 6). The question remains whether these interventions will achieve their intended goals or simply accelerate automation and supply chain realignment elsewhere.

<iframe style="border-radius:12px" src="https://open.spotify.com/embed/episode/3jhzSO4G2WNbw3KYrYFowF?utm_source=generator" width="100%" height="152" frameBorder="0" allowfullscreen="" allow="autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; fullscreen; picture-in-picture" loading="lazy"></iframe>

<iframe allow="autoplay *; encrypted-media *; fullscreen *; clipboard-write" frameborder="0" height="175" style="width:100%;max-width:660px;overflow:hidden;border-radius:10px;" sandbox="allow-forms allow-popups allow-same-origin allow-scripts allow-storage-access-by-user-activation allow-top-navigation-by-user-activation" src="https://embed.podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/from-blue-to-red/id1706849345?i=1000699027560"></iframe>

Charts of the Week: From Blue to Red

250313J4.jpg

250313K4.jpg

The Producer Price Index for final demand held steady (+3.2% y/y) during February after increasing 0.6% in January, revised from 0.4% and rising an unrevised 0.5% in December according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). The February reading compared to a 0.2% rise expected in the Action Economics Forecast Survey. Producer prices excluding food, energy & trade services rose 0.2% (3.3% y/y) last month after an unrevised 0.3% January increase, and an unrevised 0.4% gain in December. The PPI excluding food & energy eased 0.1% (+3.4% y/y) after rising 0.5% in January, revised from 0.3%. A 0.3% increase had been expected.

Energy prices declined 1.2% (-3.7% y/y) during February, after rising 1.8% in January. Gasoline costs fell 4.7% (-8.2% y/y) after rising 0.3% while home heating oil prices declined 9.8% (-12.2% y/y) after a 6.5% strengthening. Electric power prices rose 0.5% (0.9% y/y) in February following a 0.4% January decline and natural gas costs strengthened 1.3% (6.7% y/y) following a 3.8% surge. Diesel fuel prices declined 3.9% (-18.5% y/y) after a 10.5% jump.

Final demand food prices rose 1.7% (5.9% y/y) in February, following a 1.0% January gain. Egg prices jumped 28.1% (136.6% y/y) following a 44.0% increase. Prices for fresh and dry vegetables rose 6.0% (-16.3% y/y) after falling 22.3% in January. Beef & veal prices declined 1.8% (+9.5% y/y) after a 5.7% rise while dairy product prices rose 0.1% (5.7% y/y) after a 0.4% increase.

Final demand goods prices excluding food & energy rose 0.4% (2.1% y/y) in February following a 0.2% rise. Core finished consumer goods prices rose 0.4% (2.1% y/y) after a decline of 0.2% in January. Core nondurable goods prices strengthened 0.6% (2.3% y/y) last month after falling 0.4% in January. Durable consumer goods prices improved 0.2% (1.6% y/y), after edging 0.1% higher in January. Capital equipment prices rose 0.2% (2.5% y/y) last month following a 0.3% gain. Core government-purchased goods prices rose 0.2% (2.4% y/y) in January, after a 0.6% January increase.

Final demand services prices declined 0.2% (+3.9% y/y) last month after rising 0.6% in January. Trade services prices fell 1.0% (+4.0% y/y) last month following a 1.2% gain. Trade of finished goods prices declined 1.1% (3.6% y/y) and reversed the January rise. Prices for final demand transportation and warehousing services held steady (+2.6% y/y) in February, after strengthening 0.9% in January. Services prices less these costs rose 0.2% (4.0% y/y) last month, after a rise of 0.3% in January.

Construction costs eased 0.1% (+1.7% y/y) in February, after increasing 0.4% during January.

Prices for intermediate demand of processed goods rose 0.5% (0.3% y/y) following a 1.0% jump. Processed energy goods prices rose 0.5% last month after increasing 3.6% in January, while food prices rose 2.0% following a 0.7% January gain.

The PPI data are published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and can be found in Haver’s **USECON** database. Further detail is contained in **PPI** and **PPIR**. The expectations figures are available in the **AS1REPNA** database.

250313L4.jpg

250313M4.jpg

- Energy prices weaken and food prices firm.
- Price gains in core goods pick up.
- Services prices decline.

U.S. PPI Is Unchanged in February; Rise in Core Index Moderates

250313A5.jpg

250313B5.jpg

Initial claims for unemployment insurance were 220,000 seasonally adjusted in the week ended March 8, just slightly less than the 222,000 the week before; that earlier amount was revised marginally from 221,000 reported before. In the latest week, the Action Economics Forecast Survey had expected 230,000. In this March 8 week, the four-week moving average was 226,000.

The total number of unemployment insurance beneficiaries was 1.87 million in the week ended March 1, down from 1.897 million in the week ended February 22. The four-week moving average was 1.872 million through the March 1st week, up from 1.866 million the week before.

The insured unemployment rate, that is, the total number of beneficiaries as a percent of covered employment, remained at 1.2%, which has held since March 2023.

Economic conditions vary widely across states and territories. In the week ended February 22, the highest rates were in Rhode Island (3.37%), New Jersey (2.90%), Massachusetts (2.58%), Minnesota (2.57%) and California (2.42%). The lowest rates were in Florida (0.36%), Alabama (0.44%), Virginia (0.46%), Tennessee and North Carolina (both 0.56%) and Mississippi (0.58%). Rates in other notable states include New York (2.08%), Pennsylvania (2.03%) and Texas (1.12%). These state rates 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.

250313C5.jpg

250313D5.jpg

- Initial claims were less than forecast.
- Total recipients of unemployment insurance also fell.
- Insured unemployment rate still 1.2%.

Economy in Brief: November 2007

Jump to:

UK: CBI Retail Sales Hold Steady and Strengthen

Japan IP Sharply High in the Month of October

French Consumer Confidence in Abrupt About Face

Home Price Appreciation Slowest in Three Years

U.S. Initial Unemployment Insurance Claims Surged

US Home Sales Ticked Up in October, Revisions Way Down

US 3Q GDP Up 4.9%: Trade & Inventories Boosted Revision, Profits Fell

US 3Q GDP Up 4.9%: Trade & Inventories Boosted Revision, Profits Fell