Tom Moeller

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html><head>
</head>
<body>
      <br>
      
      <span id="articletext">
      <p></p>
      <p><a href="/comment/111010a_big.png" name="modal"><img class="large" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/111010a.png" align="left"></a>
      Consumers may have developed some economic uncertainty. Reported late
      Friday, overall consumer credit outstanding fell $9.5B following a revised
      $11.9B July rise, initially reported as $15.5B. An $8.0B increase had been
      expected by Action Economics. It was the first monthly decline in credit
      since September of last year. Credit has risen 2.1% during the last twelve
      months following the 1.7% decline during 2010.</p>
      <p>Non-revolving credit, which accounts for nearly two-thirds of the total,
      backpedaled $7.3B and reversed half of the July gain. Nevertheless, the
      4.6% y/y change builds on the 1.5% increase last year. Loans by the
      Federal government rose by more-than one-half y/y but finance company
      lending fell 4.5% y/y. Commercial bank credit also fell 4.8% y/y but
      saving institutions lending ticked up 0.5% y/y. Nonfinancial business
      credit inched up 0.9% y/y but pools of securitized assts fell 20.3% y/y.</p>
      <p>Consumers also reduced revolving credit balances during August by $2.2B
      and it lessened the y/y decline to 2.8%. Prior to 2009, revolving credit
      usage had never been negative y/y. Pools of securitized assets dropped 15.2%
      y/y and commercial bank credit fell 4.4% y/y. Meanwhile, finance company
      credit rose 6.3% y/y while savings institution credit jumped 13.0% y/y.
      Credit union lending rose a stable and slower 2.3% y/y and nonfinancial
      business credit remained unchanged.</p>
      <p>During the last ten years, there has been a 53% correlation between the
      y/y change in credit outstanding and the change in personal consumption
      expenditures, although the correlation recently has weakened considerably.
      The credit figures are the major input to the Fed's quarterly Flow of
      Funds accounts for the household sector.</p>
      <p>The consumer credit data are available in Haver's <b>USECON</b>
      database. The Action Economics figures are in the <b>AS1REPNA</b>
      database.</p>
      
      <p><a href="/comment/111010b_big.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/111010b.png"></a>
	  <a href="/comment/111010c_big.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/111010c.png"></a></p>
      
      <table class="centered" width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0">
      	<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
        <thead>
         <tr>
            <th class="firstcol" scope="col" ><b>Consumer Credit
              Outstanding<br>
              (M/M Chg, SAAR)</b></th>
            <th scope="col"><b>Aug</b></th>
            <th scope="col"><b>Jul</b></th>
            <th scope="col"><b>Jun</b></th>
            <th scope="col"><b>Y/Y</b></th>
            <th scope="col" ><b>2010</b></th>
            <th scope="col" ><b>2009</b></th>
            <th scope="col" ><b>2008</b></th>
          </tr>
        </thead>
        <tbody>
          <tr>
            <td class="firstcol" >Total</td>
            <td>$-9.5B</td>
            <td>$11.9B</td>
            <td>$11.3B</td>
            <td>2.1%</td>
            <td>-1.7%</td>
            <td>-4.4%</td>
            <td>1.5%</td>
          </tr>
          <tr class="odd">
            <td class="firstcol" >&nbsp;&nbsp;Revolving</td>
            <td>-2.2</td>
            <td>-3.6</td>
            <td>2.6</td>
            <td>-2.8</td>
            <td>-7.5</td>
            <td>-9.6</td>
            <td>1.7</td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td class="firstcol" >&nbsp;&nbsp;Non-revolving</td>
            <td>-7.3</td>
            <td>15.5</td>
            <td>8.8</td>
            <td>4.6</td>
            <td>1.5</td>
            <td>-1.3</td>
            <td>1.5</td>
          </tr>
        </tbody>
      </table>
      </span>
</body></html>

Consumers may have developed some economic uncertainty. Reported late Friday, overall consumer credit outstanding fell $9.5B following a revised $11.9B July rise, initially reported as $15.5B. An $8.0B increase had been expected by [...]

U.S. Consumer Credit Extension Pulls Back

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html><head>
</head>
<body>
      <br>
      
      <span id="articletext">
      <p></p>
      
      <p><a href="/comment/111007a_big.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/111007a.png"></a>
	  <a href="/comment/111007b_big.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/111007b.png"></a></p>
	  
      <p>Last month's reading for jobs growth was better,
      but not great. <b>Nonfarm payrolls rose 103,000 last month</b> after
      August and July increases which were upwardly revised. Several
      factors, however, discount any notion of broad-based labor market
      improvement. 1) The latest figure was boosted by 45,000 telecom strikers
      returning to work. 2) Excluding strikers, payrolls were no better than
      advertised in earlier labor market reports for September. 3) In percentage
      terms, the 0.1% September increase was hardly changed from the monthly
      increases over the last year. 4) The gain brought with it no decline in
      the unemployment rate, still at 9.1%. 5) Upward revisions to earlier
      months' figures were small and confined mostly to government
      payrolls. The Consensus estimate for September payrolls was for
      +56,000.</p>
      <p><a href="/comment/111007c_big.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/111007c.png" align="right"></a>
      <b>Nonfarm payrolls rose 103,000 </b>last month following gains of
      57,000 during August and 127,000 during July, upwardly
      revised from no-change and 85,000, respectively. The latest figure reflected the
      return to work of strikers at Verizon. Factory sector payrolls fell
      another 13,000 reflecting broad-based industry weakness. Construction employment
      rose a moderate 26,000 leaving the y/y change at 0.7%. In the private service sector,
      payrolls rose 119,000 boosted by returning strikers. Elsewhere, gains were
      moderate. To the upside,
      professional &amp; business service employment rose an improved 48,000
      (3.4%
      y/y), jobs in health care &amp; social assistance gained 40,800 (2.2%
      y/y) and retail trade employment rose 13,600 (1.1%). Temporary help jobs rose
      19,400 (8.4% y/y). On the weak side were leisure &amp; hospitality jobs
      which fell 4,000 (+0.9% y/y) and financial activities where employment
      slipped 8,000 (-2.2% y/y). Government employment fell 34,000 (-1.3% y/y)
      with declines across sectors.</p>
      <p>Elsewhere in the establishment survey, average weekly hours worked
      recovered to 34.3 for September. Along with the job gains, this left the
      Q3 index of aggregate hours worked &amp; payrolls unchanged from Q2,
      following that quarter's 0.9% rise.</p>
      <p>The modest jobs gains were accompanied by a 0.2% (2.0% y/y) increase in
      average
      hourly earnings. The gain followed an upwardly revised reading of
      no-change in August but the
      y/y gain of 2.0% was half that in 2007. Earnings in the service sector
      rose 0.2% m/m (2.0% y/y)
      and factory sector earnings were unchanged (+1.4% y/y).</p>
      <p>From the <b>household survey, </b>the unemployment rate held at an
      expected 9.1% for the fourth month in the last five. That reflected a
      398,000 increase (0.5% y/y) in employment and a 423,000 rise (-0.1% y/y) in the labor force. The overall unemployment
      rate, including involuntarily part-time workers as well as those
      marginally attached, rose to 16.5%, its highest level this year.</p>
      <p> The labor force participation
      rate slipped m/m to 52.5%. The number out of the labor force but want a
      job fell 14.2% y/y. The number
      of workers unemployed for 52 weeks or longer slipped m/m to 4.386M (+2.3%
      y/y) but remained near its high. The average duration of unemployment
      reached a new high of 40.5 weeks. The breadth of employment increase over
      the last three months fell to 56.2%, its lowest in twelve months.</p>
      <p>The figures referenced above are available in Haver's <b>USECON</b>
      database. Additional detail can be found in the <b>LABOR </b>and in the <b>EMPL</b>
      databases. The expectation figures are from Action Economics and are in
      the <b>AS1REPNA</b> database.</p>
      <p><b>What Is The New Normal Unemployment Rate?</b> from the Federal
      Reserve Bank of San Francisco is available <a href="http://dfm.idaho.gov/Publications/EAB/Forecast/2011/April/Article_0411.pdf">here</a>.</p>
      
      <p><a href="/comment/111007d_big.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/111007d.png"></a>
	  <a href="/comment/111007e_big.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/111007e.png"></a></p>
      
      <table class="centered" width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0">
      	<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
        <thead>
         <tr>
            <th class="firstcol" scope="col" ><b>Employment:
              (M/M Chg., 000s)</b></th>
            <th scope="col" ><b>Sep</b></th>
            <th scope="col" ><b>Aug</b></th>
            <th scope="col" ><b>Jul</b></th>
            <th scope="col" ><b>Y/Y</b></th>
            <th scope="col" ><b>2010</b></th>
            <th scope="col" ><b>2009</b></th>
            <th scope="col" ><b>2008</b></th>
          </tr>
        </thead>
        <tbody>
          <tr>
            <td class="firstcol" >Payroll Employment</td>
            <td>103</td>
            <td>57</td>
            <td>127</td>
            <td>1.1%</td>
            <td>-0.7%</td>
            <td>-4.4%</td>
            <td>-0.6%</td>
          </tr>
          <tr class="odd">
            <td class="firstcol" >&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Previous</td>
            <td>--</td>
            <td>0</td>
            <td>85</td>
            <td>--</td>
            <td>--</td>
            <td>--</td>
            <td>--</td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td class="firstcol" >&nbsp;Manufacturing</td>
            <td>-13</td>
            <td>-4</td>
            <td>34</td>
            <td>1.7</td>
            <td>-2.7</td>
            <td>-11.6</td>
            <td>-3.4</td>
          </tr>
          <tr class="odd">
            <td class="firstcol" >&nbsp;Construction</td>
            <td>26</td>
            <td>-7</td>
            <td>10</td>
            <td>0.7</td>
            <td>-8.1</td>
            <td>-16.0</td>
            <td>-6.1</td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td class="firstcol" >&nbsp;Private Service
              Producing</td>
            <td>119</td>
            <td>51</td>
            <td>120</td>
            <td>1.6</td>
            <td>-0.1</td>
            <td>-3.5</td>
            <td>-0.2</td>
          </tr>
          <tr class="odd">
            <td class="firstcol" >&nbsp;Government</td>
            <td>-34</td>
            <td>15</td>
            <td>-46</td>
            <td>-1.3</td>
            <td>-0.3</td>
            <td>0.3</td>
            <td>1.3</td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td class="firstcol" >Average Weekly Hours</td>
            <td>34.3</td>
            <td>34.2</td>
            <td>34.3</td>
            <td>34.2<br>(Sep.'10)</td>
            <td>34.1</td>
            <td>33.9</td>
            <td>34.5</td>
          </tr>
          <tr class="odd">
            <td class="firstcol" >Average Hourly Earnings
              (%)</td>
            <td>0.2</td>
            <td>0.0</td>
            <td>0.3</td>
            <td>2.0</td>
            <td>2.4</td>
            <td>3.0</td>
            <td>3.8</td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td class="firstcol" >Unemployment Rate(%)</td>
            <td>9.1</td>
            <td>9.1</td>
            <td>9.1</td>
            <td>9.6<br>(Sep.'10)</td>
            <td>9.6</td>
            <td>9.3</td>
            <td>5.8</td>
          </tr>
        </tbody>
      </table></span>
</body></html>

Last month's reading for jobs growth was better, but not great. Nonfarm payrolls rose 103,000 last month after August and July increases which were upwardly revised. Several factors, however, discount any notion of broad-based labor [...]

U.S. Nonfarm Payrolls' Modest Rise Aided By Strike's End

<html><head>


<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="Microsoft FrontPage 4.0">
<meta name="ProgId" content="FrontPage.Editor.Document">
<title>U</title>
</head><body>

<div id="content">
  <div id="rightside">
    <div id="entire" class="col">
      <br>
      <span id="articletext">
      <p>They've done this before. <b>Initial claims for jobless insurance rose
      a slight 6,000 to 391,000,000 last week </b>from 395,000 (revised from
      391,000). Together, the two numbers were near the lowest of 2011. However,
      this reaching for a low was done earlier. Twice before this year, claims
      declined then backed up to leave in place a trend level near 415,000 since
      February. The latest figure was below Consensus expectations for 410,000
      claims, according to the Action Economics survey. The 4-week moving
      average of claims slipped to 414,000. During the last ten years there has
      been a 76% correlation between the level of claims and the m/m change in
      payroll employment.</p>
      <p><b>Continuing claims for unemployment insurance fell to 3.700M in the
      September 24th week. </b>It also has been trending sideways since early
      this year.<b>  The insured unemployment rate slipped to 2.9%</b>. By
      state, the rate varied with Virginia (1.4%), Oklahoma (1.7%), Texas
      (1.8%), Ohio (1.8%), Colorado (2.0%) and Tennessee (2.1%) at the low end
      of the range. The rates in Illinois (3.0%), Connecticut (3.2%), Nevada
      (3.3%), New Jersey (3.4%, California (3.5%) and Pennsylvania (3.9%) were
      at the high end.</p>
      <p>The grand total of those receiving unemployment insurance, including
      extended programs run by the states and the federal government, was 6.862M
      as of September 17, down by one-quarter y/y. Regular extended benefits,
      with eligibility dependent on conditions in individual states, recovered
      the prior week's decline with a rise to 524,685 (-48.1% y/y) and those on
      the special "EUC 2008" programs slipped to 3.027M (-26.6% y/y).</p>
      <p>Data on weekly unemployment insurance programs are contained in Haver's
      <b>WEEKLY</b> database, including the seasonal factor series, and they are
      summarized monthly in <b>USECON</b>. Data for individual states, including
      the unemployment rates that determine individual state eligibility for the
      extended benefits programs and specific "tiers" of the emergency
      program, are in <b>REGIONW</b>, a database of weekly data for states and
      various regional divisions. Action Economics estimates are in <b>AS1REPNA</b>.</p>
      <p><b>Unemployment Insurance and the Great Recession</b> from the
      University of California, Berkeley and NBER can be found here <a href="http://www.brookings.edu/%7E/media/Files/Programs/ES/BPEA/2011_fall_bpea_papers/2011_fall_bpea_conference_rothstein.pdf">http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/Programs/ES/BPEA/2011_fall_bpea_papers/2011_fall_bpea_conference_rothstein.pdf</a></p>
      <table class="centered" width="1232" border="0" cellspacing="0" height="153">
        <thead>
          <tr>
            <th class="firstcol" scope="col" width="451" height="25">Unemployment
              Insurance (000s)</th>
            <th scope="col" width="111" height="25">9/31/11</th>
            <th scope="col" width="111" height="25">9/24/11</th>
            <th scope="col" width="111" height="25">9/17/11</th>
            <th scope="col" width="111" height="25">Y/Y%</th>
            <th scope="col" width="111" height="25">2010</th>
            <th scope="col" width="111" height="25">2009</th>
            <th scope="col" width="111" height="25">2008</th>
          </tr>
        </thead>
        <tbody>
          <tr>
            <td class="firstcol" width="451" height="31">Initial Claims</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="31">401</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="31">395</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="31">428</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="31">-10.7</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="31">461</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="31">577</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="31">413</td>
          </tr>
          <tr class="odd">
            <td class="firstcol" width="451" height="31">Continuing Claims</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="31">--</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="31">3,700</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="31">3,752</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="31">-16.9</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="31">4,544</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="31">5,807</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="31">3,338</td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td class="firstcol" width="451" height="32">&nbsp;Insured Unemployment
              Rate(%)</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="32">--</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="32">2.9</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="32">3.0</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="32">3.5<br>
              (9/10)</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="32">3.6</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="32">4.4</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="32">2.5</td>
          </tr>
          <tr class="odd">
            <td class="firstcol" width="451" height="32">Total "All
              Programs" (NSA)</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="32">--</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="32">--</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="32">6.862M</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="32">-24.3</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="32">9.850M</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="32">9.163M</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="32">3.903M</td>
          </tr>
        </tbody>
      </table>
      </span>
    </div>
  </div>
</div>

<div id="footer" class="sprites">
  <ul>
  <li>&nbsp;</li>
  </ul>
  <div id="rightside0">
    <div id="entire0" class="col">
      <span id="articletitle0"><b>Mixed Employment Indicators For September</b></span>
      <p><span id="byline0">Tomorrow's jobs report will indicate whether the
      recent weakness in payrolls continued. The indicators now in hand from
      several advance data-series give mixed signals for September. However,
      overall, they lean toward a weak reading in payrolls. The current Consensus forecast, according to Action Economics, is
      for a rise in payrolls of 56,000. That would be one of the weakest this
      year and continue the deterioration versus 2010. </span></p>
      <p><span id="byline0">Pointing toward moderate deterioration versus August
      is the rise in initial claims for jobless insurance, a decline in the
      employment component of the ISM&nbsp; non-manufacturing series and the
      rise in Challenger job cut announcements. Countering these is the rise in
      the ISM manufacturing employment component and a weak, but stable, ADP
      number.</span></p>
      <span id="articletext0">
      <table class="centered" width="1232" border="0" cellspacing="0" height="153">
        <thead>
          <tr>
            <th class="firstcol" scope="col" width="451" height="25">Employment
              Indicators</th>
            <th scope="col" width="111" height="25">September</th>
            <th scope="col" width="111" height="25">August</th>
            <th scope="col" width="111" height="25">July</th>
          </tr>
        </thead>
        <tbody>
          <tr>
            <td class="firstcol" width="451" height="31">Nonfarm Payrolls (M/M
              Change, 000s)</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="31">--</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="31">0</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="31">85,000</td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td class="firstcol" width="451" height="31">&nbsp;&nbsp; Initial
              Unemployment Insurance Claims (Survey Week)</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="31">428,000</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="31">412,000</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="31">422,000</td>
          </tr>
          <tr class="odd">
            <td class="firstcol" width="451" height="31">&nbsp;&nbsp; Purchasing
              Managers Mfg. Employment Index</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="31">53.8</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="31">51.8</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="31">53.5</td>
          </tr>
          <tr class="odd">
            <td class="firstcol" width="451" height="31">&nbsp;&nbsp; Purchasing
              Managers Non-Mfg. Employment Index</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="31">48.7</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="31">51.6</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="31">52.5</td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td class="firstcol" width="451" height="32">&nbsp;&nbsp; ADP
              Private Employment Change</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="32">91,000</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="32">89,000</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="32">107,000</td>
          </tr>
          <tr class="odd">
            <td class="firstcol" width="451" height="32">&nbsp;&nbsp; Challenger
              Job Cut Announcements</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="32">115,730</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="32">51,114</td>
            <td width="111" align="center" height="32">66,414</td>
          </tr>
        </tbody>
      </table>
      </span>
    </div>
  </div>
</div>


<div id="footer0" class="sprites">
  <ul>
  </ul>
</div>

</body></html>

They've done this before. Initial claims for jobless insurance rose a slight 6,000 to 391,000,000 last week from 395,000 (revised from 391,000). Together, the two numbers were near the lowest of 2011. However, this reaching for a low [...]

U.S. Weekly Initial Claims for Jobless Insurance Tick Higher But Trend Sideways

Robert Brusca

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html><head>
</head>
<body>
<br>

<span id="articletext">
<p></p>
<p><a href="/comment/111006e_big.png" name="modal"><img class="large" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/111006e.png" align="left"></a>
German industrial orders have fallen for the second month running. In July plunging foreign 
orders took the headline for orders growth into negative territory but in August it was weak 
domestic orders that dragged the series into contraction. It’s always something.</p>
<p>Despite the fact that foreign orders show an odd 12-mo to 6-mo to 3-mo accelerating 
trend that seems more the product of some odd serendipity that a slice of reality order 
growth is slowing down. Domestic orders have on the same growth sequence taken a large 
step lower. </p>
<p>The broader Yr/Yr trends depicted in the chart take the broader perspective where the 
overarching trend is most clear. It shows both the series’ volatility as well as the clear 
downward trend for each on annual percentage changes. </p>
<p>Germany is the traditional strong country in EMU and it is under a great deal of stress. 
Germany’s growth metrics are still at or near the best of the Zone but its gauges of growth 
are weakening. Weak conditions in adjoining states as well as ongoing concerns about debt 
conditions and the prospects for knock-on effects are taking a substantial toll on growth 
and investor and consumer attitudes. In Europe investors are looking for investment 
safe-havens to protect capital instead of looking at ways to make capital grow. Risk is 
off the investment table because so much of risk encroaches on everyday life.</p>
<p></p>

<table class="centered" border="0" cellSpacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
   <th colspan="9" scope="col">German Orders and Sales By Sector and Origin</th>
    </tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
    <tr class="even">
      <td class="firstcol"><b>Real and SA</b></td>
      <td colspan="3"><b>% M/M</b></td>
      <td colspan="5"><b>% SAAR</b></td>
    </tr>
    <tr class="grey3">
      <td class="firstcol">&nbsp;</td>
      <td><b>Aug-11</b></td>
      <td><b>Jul-11</b></td>
      <td><b>Jun-11</b></td>
      <td><b>3Mo</b></td>
      <td><b>6Mo</b></td>
      <td><b>12Mo</b></td>
      <td><b>YrAgo</b></td>
      <td><b>Q-2-Date</b></td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td class="firstcol">Total Orders</td>
      <td>-1.4%</td>
      <td>-2.6%</td>
      <td>1.8%</td>
      <td style="color: red;"><b>-8.6%</b></td>
      <td>4.1%</td>
      <td style="color: red;"><b>3.6%</b></td>
      <td>20.5%</td>
      <td>-7.7%</td>
    </tr>
    <tr class="odd">
      <td class="firstcol">Foreign</td>
      <td>0.1%</td>
      <td>-7.2%</td>
      <td>13.1%</td>
      <td>21.4%</td>
      <td>4.2%</td>
      <td style="color: red;"><b>1.5%</b></td>
      <td>29.0%</td>
      <td>-6.8%</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td class="firstcol">Domestic</td>
      <td>-3.2%</td>
      <td>3.7%</td>
      <td>-10.1%</td>
      <td style="color: red;"><b>-33.6%</b></td>
      <td style="color: red;"><b>4.3%</b></td>
      <td style="color: red;"><b>6.6%</b></td>
      <td>10.8%</td>
      <td>-8.3%</td>
    </tr>
    <tr class="grey3">
      <td colspan="9" class="firstcol"><b>Real Sector Sales</b></td>
    </tr>
    <tr class="odd">
      <td class="firstcol">MFG/Mining</td>
      <td>-0.4%</td>
      <td>4.0%</td>
      <td>-0.1%</td>
      <td>14.4%</td>
      <td style="color: red;"><b>7.2%</b></td>
      <td style="color: red;"><b>8.5%</b></td>
      <td style="color: red;"><b>11.1%</b></td>
      <td>17.2%</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td class="firstcol">Consumer</td>
      <td>-1.5%</td>
      <td>-1.3%</td>
      <td>2.9%</td>
      <td>0.0%</td>
      <td style="color: red;"><b>-0.6%</b></td>
      <td>2.3%</td>
      <td>1.0%</td>
      <td>-7.7%</td>
    </tr>
    <tr class="odd">
      <td class="firstcol">Cons Durables</td>
      <td>-8.8%</td>
      <td>11.5%</td>
      <td>-3.8%</td>
      <td>-8.6%</td>
      <td style="color: red;"><b>-3.8%</b></td>
      <td style="color: red;"><b>4.3%</b></td>
      <td style="color: red;"><b>8.0%</b></td>
      <td>18.4%</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td class="firstcol">Cons Non-Durable</td>
      <td>-0.2%</td>
      <td>-3.3%</td>
      <td>4.0%</td>
      <td>1.7%</td>
      <td style="color: red;"><b>0.0%</b></td>
      <td>2.0%</td>
      <td>-0.1%</td>
      <td>-11.3%</td>
    </tr>
    <tr class="odd">
      <td class="firstcol">Captial Gds</td>
      <td>1.5%</td>
      <td>7.0%</td>
      <td>-0.4%</td>
      <td>36.7%</td>
      <td>14.8%</td>
      <td style="color: red;"><b>12.9%</b></td>
      <td style="color: red;"><b>14.5%</b></td>
      <td>39.7%</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td class="firstcol">Intermediate Gds</td>
      <td>-2.1%</td>
      <td>2.5%</td>
      <td>-0.5%</td>
      <td>-1.0%</td>
      <td style="color: red;"><b>1.9%</b></td>
      <td style="color: red;"><b>7.1%</b></td>
      <td>13.3%</td>
      <td>5.2%</td>
    </tr>
    <tr class="odd">
      <td class="firstcol">All MFG-Sales</td>
      <td>-0.4%</td>
      <td>4.0%</td>
      <td>-0.1%</td>
      <td>14.4%</td>
      <td style="color: red;"><b>7.3%</b></td>
      <td style="color: red;"><b>8.5%</b></td>
      <td style="color: red;"><b>11.2%</b></td>
      <td>17.2%</td>
    </tr>
  </tbody>
</table>
</span>
</body>
</html>


German industrial orders have fallen for the second month running. In July plunging foreign orders took the headline for orders growth into negative territory but in August it was weak domestic orders that dragged the series into [...]

German Order Growth Spirals Lower

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html><head>
</head>
<body>
      <br>
      
      <span id="articletext">
      <p></p>
      
      <p><a href="/comment/111006a_big.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/111006a.png"></a>
	  <a href="/comment/111006b_big.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/111006b.png"></a></p>
	  
      <p>They've done this before. <b>Initial claims for jobless insurance rose
      a slight 6,000 to 391,000 last week </b>from 395,000 (revised from
      391,000). Together, the two numbers were near the lowest of 2011. However,
      this reaching for a low was done earlier. Twice before this year, claims
      declined then backed up to leave in place a trend level near 415,000 since
      February. The latest figure was below Consensus expectations for 410,000
      claims, according to the Action Economics survey. The 4-week moving
      average of claims slipped to 414,000. During the last ten years there has
      been a 76% correlation between the level of claims and the m/m change in
      payroll employment.</p>
      <p><b>Continuing claims for unemployment insurance fell to 3.700M in the
      September 24th week. </b>It also has been trending sideways since early
      this year. The insured unemployment rate slipped to 2.9%. By
      state, the rate varied with Virginia (1.4%), Oklahoma (1.7%), Texas
      (1.8%), Ohio (1.8%), Colorado (2.0%) and Tennessee (2.1%) at the low end
      of the range. The rates in Illinois (3.0%), Connecticut (3.2%), Nevada
      (3.3%), New Jersey (3.4%, California (3.5%) and Pennsylvania (3.9%) were
      at the high end.</p>

      <p>The grand total of those receiving unemployment insurance, including
      extended programs run by the states and the federal government, was 6.862M
      as of September 17, down by one-quarter y/y. Regular extended benefits,
      with eligibility dependent on conditions in individual states, recovered
      the prior week's decline with a rise to 524,685 (-48.1% y/y) and those on
      the special &quot;EUC 2008&quot; programs slipped to 3.027M (-26.6% y/y).</p>
      <p>Data on weekly unemployment insurance programs are contained in Haver's
      <b>WEEKLY</b> database, including the seasonal factor series, and they are
      summarized monthly in <b>USECON</b>. Data for individual states, including
      the unemployment rates that determine individual state eligibility for the
      extended benefits programs and specific &quot;tiers&quot; of the emergency
      program, are in <b>REGIONW</b>, a database of weekly data for states and
      various regional divisions. Action Economics estimates are in <b>AS1REPNA</b>.</p>

      <p><b>Unemployment Insurance and the Great Recession</b> from the
      University of California, Berkeley and NBER can be found 
      <a href="http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/Programs/ES/BPEA/2011_fall_bpea_papers/2011_fall_bpea_conference_rothstein.pdf">here</a>.</p>
    
     <p><a href="/comment/111006c_big.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/111006c.png"></a>
	 <a href="/comment/111006d_big.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/111006d.png"></a></p>
	 
      <table class="centered" width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0">
      	<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
        <thead>
         <tr>
            <th class="firstcol" scope="col" >Unemployment
              Insurance (000s)</th>
            <th scope="col" >9/31/11</th>
            <th scope="col" >9/24/11</th>
            <th scope="col" >9/17/11</th>
            <th scope="col" >Y/Y%</th>
            <th scope="col" >2010</th>
            <th scope="col" >2009</th>
            <th scope="col" >2008</th>
          </tr>
        </thead>
        <tbody>
          <tr>
            <td class="firstcol" >Initial Claims</td>
            <td>401</td>
            <td>395</td>
            <td>428</td>
            <td>-10.7</td>
            <td>461</td>
            <td>577</td>
            <td>413</td>
          </tr>
          <tr class="odd">
            <td class="firstcol" >Continuing Claims</td>
            <td>--</td>
            <td>3,700</td>
            <td>3,752</td>
            <td>-16.9</td>
            <td>4,544</td>
            <td>5,807</td>
            <td>3,338</td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td class="firstcol" >&nbsp;Insured Unemployment
              Rate(%)</td>
            <td>--</td>
            <td>2.9</td>
            <td>3.0</td>
            <td>3.5<br>
              (9/10)</td>
            <td>3.6</td>
            <td>4.4</td>
            <td>2.5</td>
          </tr>
          <tr class="odd">
            <td class="firstcol" >Total "All
              Programs" (NSA)</td>
            <td>--</td>
            <td>--</td>
            <td>6.862M</td>
            <td>-24.3</td>
            <td>9.850M</td>
            <td>9.163M</td>
            <td>3.903M</td>
          </tr>
        </tbody>
      </table><br>

      <p><b>Mixed Employment Indicators For September</b> Tomorrow's jobs report will indicate whether the
      recent weakness in payrolls continued. The indicators now in hand from
      several advance data-series give mixed signals for September. However,
      overall, they lean toward a weak reading in payrolls. The current Consensus forecast, according to Action Economics, is
      for a rise in payrolls of 56,000. That would be one of the weakest this
      year and continues the deterioration versus 2010. </p>
      <p>Pointing toward moderate deterioration versus August
      is the rise in initial claims for jobless insurance, a decline in the
      employment component of the ISM non-manufacturing series and the
      rise in Challenger job cut announcements. Countering these is the rise in
      the ISM manufacturing employment component and a weak, but stable, ADP
      number.</p>
      <table class="centered" width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0">
      	<colgroup><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
        <thead>
         <tr>
            <th class="firstcol" scope="col" >Employment
              Indicators</th>
            <th scope="col" >September</th>
            <th scope="col" >August</th>
            <th scope="col" >July</th>
          </tr>
        </thead>
        <tbody>
          <tr>
            <td class="firstcol" >Nonfarm Payrolls (M/M
              Change, 000s)</td>
            <td>--</td>
            <td>0</td>
            <td>85,000</td>
          </tr>
          <tr class="odd">
            <td class="firstcol" >Initial
              Unemployment Insurance Claims (Survey Week)</td>
            <td>428,000</td>
            <td>412,000</td>
            <td>422,000</td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td class="firstcol" >Purchasing
              Managers Mfg. Employment Index</td>
            <td>53.8</td>
            <td>51.8</td>
            <td>53.5</td>
          </tr>
          <tr class="odd">
            <td class="firstcol" >Purchasing
              Managers Non-Mfg. Employment Index</td>
            <td>48.7</td>
            <td>51.6</td>
            <td>52.5</td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td class="firstcol" >ADP
              Private Employment Change</td>
            <td>91,000</td>
            <td>89,000</td>
            <td>107,000</td>
          </tr>
          <tr class="odd">
            <td class="firstcol" >Challenger
              Job Cut Announcements</td>
            <td>115,730</td>
            <td>51,114</td>
            <td>66,414</td>
          </tr>
        </tbody>
      </table>
      </span>
</body></html>

They've done this before. Initial claims for jobless insurance rose a slight 6,000 to 391,000 last week from 395,000 (revised from 391,000). Together, the two numbers were near the lowest of 2011. However, this reaching for a low was [...]

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html><head>
</head>
<body>
      		  <br>
		      
		      <span id="articletext">
		      <p></p>
		      		      
		      <p><a href="/comment/111005k_big.png" name="modal"><img class="large" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/111005k.png" align="left"></a>
		      The index of total mortgage applications fell 4.3% last week to 734.0
		      (March 16, 1990 = 100). Despite the decline, applications rose slightly
		      for the full month. Overall, applications have risen more-than 80% since
		      their early-year low. The jump has come as lower interest rates spurred
		      refinancing.</p>
		      <p>Applications to <i>refinance</i> have more-than doubled since April but
		      they fell 5.2% last week. That's on the heels of double-digit increases
		      during the prior two weeks. Weekly applications to <i>purchase</i> a home
		      slipped 0.8% w/w. They're roughly 10% above the August low but still off
		      almost two-thirds versus before the recession.</p>
		      <p>The effective rate on fixed-interest, conventional 15-year mortgages
		      held near the record low at 3.60%. The effective rate on 30-year fixed
		      rate loans fell to a new low of 4.31%. On a 30-year Jumbo the effective
		      rate was 4.62%. Though it's narrowed slightly of late, the spread between
		      15- and 30-year loan rates continued wide by historical standards. The
		      effective interest rate on an adjustable 5-year mortgage ticked up to 3.17%
		      versus 3.65% at the beginning of the year.</p>
		      <p>The Mortgage Bankers Association surveys between 20 to 35 of the top
		      lenders in the U.S. housing industry to derive its refinance, purchase and
		      market indexes. The weekly survey covers roughly 50% of all U.S.
		      residential mortgage applications processed each week by mortgage banks,
		      commercial banks and thrifts. The figures for weekly mortgage applications
		      are available in Haver's <b>SURVEYW</b> database.</p>
		      
		      <p><a href="/comment/111005l_big.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/111005l.png"></a>
	  		 <a href="/comment/111005m_big.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/111005m.png"></a></p>
		      
		    <table class="centered" border="0" cellSpacing="0" width="100%">
			<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
			<thead>
					<tr>
		            <th class="firstcol" scope="col">MBA Mortgage Applications (SA,
		              3/16/90=100)</th>
		            <th scope="col">9/30/11</th>
		            <th scope="col">9/23/11</th>
		            <th scope="col">9/16/11</th>
		            <th scope="col">Y/Y %</th>
		            <th scope="col">2010</th>
		            <th scope="col">2009</th>
		            <th scope="col">2008</th>
		          </tr>
		        </thead>
		        <tbody>
		          <tr>
		            <td class="firstcol">Total Market Index</td>
		            <td>734.9</td>
		            <td>767.9</td>
		            <td>702.7</td>
		            <td>-6.1</td>
		            <td>659.3</td>
		            <td>736.4</td>
		            <td>642.9</td>
		          </tr>
		          <tr class="odd">
		            <td class="firstcol">&nbsp;Purchase</td>
		            <td>175.2</td>
		            <td>176.6</td>
		            <td>172.2</td>
		            <td>-11.8</td>
		            <td>199.8</td>
		            <td>263.5</td>
		            <td>345.4</td>
		          </tr>
		          <tr>
		            <td class="firstcol">&nbsp;Refinancing</td>
		            <td>4,019.0</td>
		            <td>4,239.6</td>
		            <td>3,813.2</td>
		            <td>-3.9</td>
		            <td>3,348.1</td>
		            <td>3,509.2</td>
		            <td>2,394.1</td>
		          </tr>
		          <tr class="odd">
		            <td class="firstcol">15-Year Mortgage Effective Interest Rate (%)</td>
		            <td>3.60</td>
		            <td>3.58</td>
		            <td>3.57</td>
		            <td>4.15<br>
		              (9/10)</td>
		            <td>4.39</td>
		            <td>4.85</td>
		            <td>5.88</td>
		          </tr>
		        </tbody>
		      </table>
		      </span>
</body></html>

The index of total mortgage applications fell 4.3% last week to 734.0 (March 16, 1990 = 100). Despite the decline, applications rose slightly for the full month. Overall, applications have risen more-than 80% since their early-year [...]

U.S. Mortgage Applications Slip W/W But Rise M/M

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html><head>
</head>
<body>
      		  <br>
		      
		      <span id="articletext">
		      <p></p>
		      <p><a href="/comment/111005j_big.png" name="modal"><img class="large" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/111005j.png" align="left"></a>
		      The outplacement firm of Challenger, Grey &amp; Christmas reported that
		      job cut announcements during September surged following their August dip.
		      The jump to 115,730 left them more-than double last year. The jump
		      in announcements was led by the government (military), transportation,
		      financial, energy, health care and industrial goods industries. During the
		      last ten years there has been a 67% correlation between the three-month
		      moving average of announced job cuts and the three-month change in payroll
		      employment. Job cut announcements differ from layoffs. Many are achieved
		      through attrition, early retirement or just never occur.</p>
		      <p>Challenger also samples firms' hiring plans which improved moderately
		      and rose to 76,551. That was the highest level since last October. The
		      retail and insurance industries showed the bulk of the gain.</p>
		      <p>The Challenger figures are available in Haver's <b>SURVEYS</b>
		      database.</p>
		      
      		<table class="centered" border="0" cellSpacing="0" width="100%">
			<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
			<thead>
					<tr>
		            <th class="firstcol" scope="col" ><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/SURVEYS/@S3/@S301/@S301.HTM"><b>Challenger,
		              Gray &amp; Christmas</b></a></th>
		            <th scope="col" ><b>Sep</b></th>
		            <th scope="col" ><b>Aug</b></th>
		            <th scope="col" ><b>Jul</b></th>
		            <th scope="col" ><b>Y/Y%</b></th>
		            <th scope="col" ><b>2010</b></th>
		            <th scope="col" ><b>2009</b></th>
		            <th scope="col" ><b>2008</b></th>
		          </tr>
		        </thead>
		        <tbody>
		          <tr>
		            <td class="firstcol" >Announced Job Cuts</td>
		            <td>115,730</td>
		            <td>51,114</td>
		            <td>66,414</td>
		            <td>211.5</td>
		            <td>529,973</td>
		            <td>1,288,030</td>
		            <td>1,223,993</td>
		          </tr>
		          <tr class="odd">
		            <td class="firstcol" >Announced Hiring Plans</td>
		            <td>76,551</td>
		            <td>15,201</td>
		            <td>10,706</td>
		            <td>-37.8</td>
		            <td>402,638</td>
		            <td>272,573</td>
		            <td>118,600</td>
		          </tr>
		        </tbody>
		      </table></span>
</body></html>

The outplacement firm of Challenger, Grey & Christmas reported that job cut announcements during September surged following their August dip. The jump to 115,730 left them more-than double last year. The jump in announcements was led [...]

U.S. Challenger Reports Widespread Increase In Job Cut Announcements

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html><head>
</head>
<body>
      		<br>
            
            <span id="articletext">
            <p></p>
            
            <p><a href="/comment/111005e_big.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/111005e.png"></a>
	  		<a href="/comment/111005f_big.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/111005f.png"></a></p>
	  		
            <p>The Composite Index for the service and construction sectors from
            the Institute for Supply Management (ISM) was 53.0 versus an
            unrevised 53.3 during August. The figure matched Consensus
            expectations. Since the series' inception in 1997 there has been a
            71% correlation between the level of the nonmanufacturing composite
            index and the q/q change in real GDP for the service and the
            construction sectors.</p>
            <p>The nonmanufacturing index follows last week's report that the
            ISM factory sector index for September rose slightly. <b>Haver
            Analytics calculates a composite index</b> using the two readings of
            the factory and nonmanufacturing sectors. It fell marginally to 52.8
            from 53.0 and was nearly the lowest reading since January of last
            year. The composite index has a 71% correlation with Q/Q growth in
            real GDP during the last ten years.</p>
            <p>The business activity component of the Nonmanufacturing Index
            rose to its highest level (57.1) since March. The new orders series
            also improved to its highest (56.5) since March. The supplier
            delivery series fell sharply to its lowest (48.7) since March of
            last year. The employment series also dropped to its lowest (48.7)
            since March of 2010. Since the series' inception in 1997 there has
            been an 84% correlation between the level of the ISM
            nonmanufacturing employment index and the m/m change in payroll
            employment in the service-producing plus the construction
            industries.</p>
            <p>The prices index slipped m/m to 61.9. A lesser twenty four
            percent of respondents reported higher prices and a slightly reduced
            seven percent reported them lower. Since inception ten years ago,
            there has been a 65% correlation between the price index and the Q/Q
            change in the GDP services chain price index.</p>
            <p>Beginning with the January 2008 Nonmanufacturing <cite>Report On
            Business &#174;,</cite>the composite index is calculated as an
            indication of overall economic conditions for the non-manufacturing
            sector. It is a composite index based on the diffusion indices of
            four of the indicators (business activity, new orders, employment
            and supplier deliveries) with equal weights.</p>
            <p>The ISM data are available in Haver's <b>USECON</b> database. The
            expectations figure from ACTION ECONOMICS is in the <b>AS1REPNA </b>database.</p>
            
            <p><a href="/comment/111005g_big.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/111005g.png"></a>
	  		<a href="/comment/111005h_big.png" name="modal"><img class="small" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/111005h.png"></a></p>
            
            <table class="centered" border="0" cellSpacing="0" width="100%">
			<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
			<thead>
			<tr>
                  <th class="firstcol" scope="col" ><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@EF/@EF03/@EF03.HTM">ISM Nonmanufacturing Survey</a></th>
                  <th scope="col" >Sep</th>
                  <th scope="col" >Aug</th>
                  <th scope="col" >Jul</th>
                  <th scope="col" >Sep'10</th>
                  <th scope="col" >2010</th>
                  <th scope="col" >2009</th>
                  <th scope="col" >2008</th>
                </tr>
              </thead>
              <tbody>
                <tr>
                  <td class="firstcol" >Composite Index</td>
                  <td>53.0</td>
                  <td>53.3</td>
                  <td>52.7</td>
                  <td>53.9</td>
                  <td>54.0</td>
                  <td>46.3</td>
                  <td>47.3</td>
                </tr>
                <tr class="odd">
                  <td class="firstcol" >&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Business
                    Activity</td>
                  <td>57.1</td>
                  <td>55.6</td>
                  <td>56.1</td>
                  <td>54.4</td>
                  <td>57.4</td>
                  <td>48.1</td>
                  <td>47.5</td>
                </tr>
                <tr>
                  <td class="firstcol" >&nbsp;&nbsp; New Orders</td>
                  <td>56.5</td>
                  <td>52.8</td>
                  <td>51.7</td>
                  <td>55.6</td>
                  <td>56.8</td>
                  <td>48.0</td>
                  <td>47.0</td>
                </tr>
                <tr class="odd">
                  <td class="firstcol" >&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Employment</td>
                  <td>48.7</td>
                  <td>51.6</td>
                  <td>52.5</td>
                  <td>50.7</td>
                  <td>49.8</td>
                  <td>40.0</td>
                  <td>43.7</td>
                </tr>
                <tr>
                  <td class="firstcol" >&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Supplier
                    Deliveries (NSA)</td>
                  <td>49.5</td>
                  <td>53.0</td>
                  <td>50.5</td>
                  <td>55.0</td>
                  <td>52.2</td>
                  <td>49.0</td>
                  <td>51.1</td>
                </tr>
                <tr class="odd">
                  <td class="firstcol" >Prices Index</td>
                  <td>61.9</td>
                  <td>64.2</td>
                  <td>56.6</td>
                  <td>61.0</td>
                  <td>61.4</td>
                  <td>49.4</td>
                  <td>66.1</td>
                </tr>
              </tbody>
            </table>
            </span>
</body></html>

The Composite Index for the service and construction sectors from the Institute for Supply Management (ISM) was 53.0 versus an unrevised 53.3 during August. The figure matched Consensus expectations. Since the series' inception in [...]

U.S. ISM Nonmanufacturing Index Remains Flat

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

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

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

250502A5.jpg

250502B5.jpg

Nonfarm payrolls increased 177,000 (1.2% y/y) during April after rising 185,000 in March, revised from 228,000, and 102,000 in February, revised from 117,000. Expectations had been for a 130,000 rise in the Action Economics Forecast Survey. The latest figure left the three-month average change at 155,000 in April, down from 232,000 in January.

Average hourly earnings rose 0.2% during April after unrevised increases of 0.3% in March and 0.2% in February. Earnings growth of 3.8% y/y was below the 5.9% high in March 2022.

The unemployment rate, measured in the household survey, held m/m at an expected 4.2% in April, and compared to 4.1% in February and 4.0% in January. It reached a low of 3.4% in April 2023. The unemployment rate, including employees working part-time for economic reasons plus all marginally-attached workers, eased to 7.8% in April from 7.9% in March.

In the **establishment survey**, private-sector employment rose 167,000 (1.2% y/y) after a 170,000 March increase. Factory sector jobs edged 1,000 lower (-0.7% y/y) following a 3,000 gain. Construction sector employment increased 11,000 (1.7% y/y), after rising 7,000 in March.

Private service-producing sector employment increased 156,000 (1.4% y/y) in April after improving 161,000 in March. Increases varied greatly amongst service sector categories. Private education & health sector employment rose 70,000 (3.4% y/y) last month following a 74,000 March increase. Leisure & hospitality employment rose 24,000 (1.3% y/y) after a 38,000 gain. Trade, transportation & utilities rose 32,000 (0.9% y/y) in April following a 25,000 March increase. Professional & business services employment rose 17,000 (-0.1% y/y) following a 3,000 rise while temporary help employment rose 3,600 (-3.9% y/y) following a 2,700 decline. Financial activities employment improved 14,000 (1.2% y/y) after a 6,000 gain. The number of information sector jobs held steady (-0.4% y/y) last month after falling 2,000 in March.

Government sector payrolls rose 10,000 (1.3% y/y) last month after increasing 15,000 in March. The number of local government jobs increased 13,000 (1.4% y/y) following a 17,000 gain. State government employment rose 6,000 (1.8% y/y) following a 2,000 March increase but federal government payrolls fell 9,000 (-0.3% y/y), the third consecutive monthly decline.

Private-sector average hourly earnings rose 0.2% (3.8% y/y) in April after increasing 0.3% in March. Earnings in the goods-producing sector eased 0.1% (+4.0% y/y) following a 0.6% gain. Earnings in construction rose 0.3% (3.6% y/y), after a 0.2% rise but factory sector earnings declined 0.3% (+4.3% y/y) after surging 0.8% in March. In the private services-sector, earnings rose 0.2% (3.7% y/y) in April for the third straight month. Information sector pay increased 1.0% (5.2% y/y) last month after easing 0.1%, and financial activities earnings rose 0.5% (4.3% y/y) for the second straight month. Trade, transportation & utilities sector pay increased 0.4% (3.4% y/y) after 0.6%. Professional & business sector earnings increased 0.1% (4.4% y/y) after 0.2% in March. Leisure & hospitality earnings held steady (+3.8% y/y) following a 0.6% March increase.

250502C5.jpg

250502D5.jpg

The length of the average workweek held steady at 34.3 hours in April. The workweek in the goods-producing sector eased to 39.8 hours from 40.0 hours. The construction sector average workweek eased to 39.0 hours from 39.3 hours while the factory sector workweek moved lower to 40.0 hours from 40.2. The average workweek in the private service sector held at 33.2 hours. Professional & business service hours fell to 36.3 hours from 36.4 while trade, transportation & utilities hours improved to 34.3 from 34.0 hours. Private education hours rose slightly to 32.8, but leisure & hospitality held steady at 25.5 hours.

In the **household survey**, the unemployment rate held at 4.2% in April as employment rose 436,000 and the size of the labor force increased 518,000. The labor force participation rate edged up to 62.6% last month from 62.5% in March. It remained below the high of 63.3% early in 2020. The rate for teenagers declined to 36.9%. For workers aged 20-24, the rate held steady at 72.1%, up from 71.8% six months earlier. For workers aged 25-54 the rate rose to 83.6%, a five-month high. For individuals 55 and over, the rate improved to 38.4% in April.

The employment/population ratio for all workers in April rose to 60.0%. It remained below the peak reading of 61.1% in February, 2020 just prior to the pandemic.

The employment and earnings data are collected from surveys taken each month during the week containing the 12th day of the month. The labor market data are contained in Haver's **USECON** database. Detailed figures are in the **EMPL** and **LABOR** databases. The expectations figures are in the **AS1REPNA** database.

250502X5.jpg

250502F5.jpg

- Job growth spreads across most sectors.
- Earnings growth trend decelerates.
- Jobless rate holds steady.

U.S. Job Growth Is Firm in April but March Gain Is Lessened

Winnie Tapasanun

250502F32.jpg

250502G32.jpg

Total factory orders rose a slightly less-than-expected 4.3% m/m in March after rises of 0.5% in February and 1.8% in January, data from the U.S. Census Bureau showed. A 4.5% m/m March increase had been expected in the Action Economics Forecast Survey. The March reading was the third successive monthly rise and the largest since July 2024. The year-on-year rate accelerated to 6.0% in March, the highest since November 2022, from 2.3% in February. Notably, orders for nondefense aircraft & parts soared 139.0% in March following a 7.4% drop in February and a 92.9% surge in January. Factory orders excluding defense rose 4.8% (5.9% y/y), the largest of three straight m/m/ rises, after a 0.4% February increase. Factory orders excluding the transportation sector fell 0.2% (+1.1% y/y), the first m/m fall since August, after rising 0.3% in February, January and December.

Durable goods orders jumped 9.2% (11.9% y/y) in March, the third consecutive m/m gain and the biggest since July 2024, on top of a 0.8% increase in February (matching +9.2% m/m in the advance report on April 24). The March jump reflected m/m orders increases of 27.1% (the largest m/m surge since July 2024; 31.2% y/y) in transportation equipment, 1.1% (4.9% y/y) in primary metals, 0.5% (-0.4% y/y) in furniture & related products, 0.1% (2.5% y/y) in fabricated metal products, and 0.1% (0.9% y/y) in machinery. To the downside, durable goods orders for computers & electronic products (-1.3%; +2.7% y/y) and electrical equipment, appliances & components (-1.0%; +4.2% y/y) declined m/m in March.

Nondurable goods orders, which equal nondurable goods shipments, fell 0.3% (+0.4% y/y) in March, the first m/m fall since September, after a 0.1% uptick in February. The March fall reflected m/m drops of 2.4% (-9.3% y/y) in petroleum & coal products and 0.9% (-1.2% y/y) in apparel. To the upside, the following nondurable goods shipments rose m/m in March: leather & allied products (1.5%; 8.6% y/y), beverage & tobacco products (0.7%; 5.8% y/y), paper products (0.6%; 2.3% y/y), printing (0.3%; 3.8% y/y), textile mills (0.3%; 0.8% y/y), chemical products (0.2%; 5.4% y/y), plastics & rubber products (0.2%; 0.4% y/y), food products (0.1%; 1.8% y/y), and textile products (0.1%; 2.1% y/y).

Total shipments slipped 0.1% (+2.0% y/y) in March, the first m/m easing since October, after a 0.7% increase in February. Excluding transportation, shipments were virtually unchanged m/m (+1.1% y/y) in March following six straight m/m gains. Shipments of durable goods industries inched up 0.1% (3.8% y/y) in March, the smallest of four consecutive m/m increases, after a 1.3% advance in February. This reflected m/m durable goods shipments rises of 1.2% (5.6% y/y) in primary metals, 0.9% (0.1% y/y) in furniture & related products, 0.8% (-0.2% y/y) in nonmetallic mineral products, 0.4% (0.0% y/y) in machinery, 0.3% (1.8% y/y) in fabricated metal products, 0.2% (4.5% y/y) in computers & electronic products, 0.2% (-2.1% y/y) in wood products, and 0.1% (3.0% y/y) in electrical equipment, appliances & components. In contrast, durable goods shipments for transportation equipment (-0.5%; +7.3% y/y) and miscellaneous durable goods (-0.1%; +2.9% y/y) fell m/m in March following three successive m/m increases.

Unfilled orders rose 2.0% (2.3% y/y) in March, up for the eighth month in nine, after a 0.1% uptick in February. Excluding transportation, unfilled orders dipped 0.1% (+0.7% y/y) in March, the first m/m easing since May 2024, after holding steady in February. Backlogs of durable goods rose 2.0% (2.3% y/y) in March, reflecting m/m rises of 3.1% (3.1% y/y) in transportation equipment and 0.2% (2.4% y/y) in electrical equipment, appliances & components.

Inventories edged up 0.1% (0.9% y/y) in March, the fifth straight m/m increase, after rising at the same pace in the prior two months. Excluding transportation, inventories were up 0.1% (0.5% y/y) in March, the fifth consecutive m/m rise. Durable goods inventories ticked up 0.1% (1.0% y/y) in March after holding steady in February and January; nondurable goods inventories edged up 0.1% (0.8% y/y), the fifth successive m/m increase.

The factory sector data are available in Haver’s **USECON** database. The Action Economics Forecast Survey is in the **AS1REPNA** database.

250502H32.jpg

250502I32.jpg

- March manufacturers’ new orders +4.3% m/m; +6.0% y/y, highest since Nov. ’22.
- Durable goods orders (+9.2%) jump m/m, while nondurable goods orders (-0.3%) and shipments (-0.1%) decline m/m.
- Transportation equipt. orders +27.1% m/m, w/ a 139.0% m/m surge in nondefense aircraft & parts orders.
- Unfilled orders +2.0%, the eighth m/m rise in nine months.
- Inventories +0.1%, the fifth consecutive m/m increase.

U.S. Factory Orders Increase for the Third Straight Month in March

250502E.jpg

The global manufacturing data showed broad weakening in April as conditions weakened across more than half of the contributing early reporters in the S&P survey of manufacturing. Of the 18 early reporting countries, more than half of them showed deceleration over six months and 12 months. Over three months, only 8 of 18 showed deterioration and that's about as good as it got in this report. In the current month, month-to-month changes showed more than half of the survey contributors showing weaker results than the month before. In the S&P framework, manufacturing improved month-to-month for the U.S.; however, looking at sequential averages for the U.S., U.K., European monetary union, Canada, and Japan, we see a steady weakening and results over 12 months, over six months versus 12 months, and for three months versus 6 months. The highly developed countries are not doing particularly well.

Asian economies are also showing slight deterioration but doing a little better than the developed countries in general.

Only five of the 18 reporting countries have queue percentile standings in their data back to January 2021 that are above their medians. Readings at or above the 50% mark are at or above the median standing. Canada is showing the weakest manufacturing result on record over this span, in terms of its queue percentile standing which is at 0 in the current month.

I showed the graphic for the Baltic dry goods index in this report rather than statistics on the manufacturing PMI data because the Baltic data, which reflect shipping volume for dry goods - that is excluding things like oil - is weak but it's only in the neighborhood where it's been for some time. There has been a great deal of talk about how tariffs may have impacted trade flows, expected trade flows, shipping, shipping rates, and the like. However, according to the Baltic dry goods index, there isn't much evidence that this is occurring right now and affecting the current data. That may still lie ahead but for now it's not baked in the cake.

250502.jpg

Globally Manufacturing Weakens

Andrew Cates

**China-US shipping activity** 
The economic fallout from escalating US-China trade tensions is becoming increasingly visible in the data. A clear example is the chart below, which highlights a sharp drop in vessel arrivals at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, along with a notable decline in ships waiting offshore. These trends point to a tangible weakening in bilateral trade flows, as the effects of tit-for-tat tariffs imposed by both countries begin to bite. Given the outsized role the US and China play in global commerce, this slowdown is likely to reverberate through global supply chains, weighing on trade volumes, dampening demand, and curbing economic growth worldwide.

250501Z1.jpg

**GDP growth in Q1**
Data this week showed that the US economy contracted, albeit modestly, in Q1 even as the euro area recorded a modest expansion—an unusual divergence. The contraction in US GDP can be largely attributed to a sharp increase in imports, as firms rushed to front-load purchases ahead of anticipated tariff hikes. In addition, domestic demand was subdued, with weaker contributions from both consumer spending and government consumption. This decoupling between the US and euro area economies is particularly striking given the current global focus on the US dollar. While the euro area has shown unexpected signs of resilience, the US downturn raises important questions about its underlying momentum, especially as trade dynamics and policy uncertainty continue to cloud the outlook.

250501Z2.jpg

**The US dollar versus yield differentials**
Chart 3 below illustrates a sharp breakdown in the correlation between the US-Germany 10-year yield differential and the EUR/USD exchange rate. Historically, the dollar has moved closely with interest rate spreads, as yield-seeking capital flowed into US assets. But since early 2025—and more acutely following the April tariff actions—the dollar has weakened markedly even as the yield spread has narrowed only modestly. This decoupling underscores a critical shift: capital markets are reacting not just to monetary policy, but to rising trade and geopolitical uncertainty. In other words, the exchange rate is now being driven as much by risk sentiment as by interest rate arbitrage.

250501Z3.jpg

**The US economy’s structural outperformance and the dollar**
A second dynamic, captured in the next chart, reveals a tight correlation between the US real effective exchange rate and the potential GDP growth differential between the US and euro area over the past 50-60 years. This raises the question: has dollar strength (until recently) merely been a reflection of US growth leadership—or are capital inflows themselves helping to sustain this growth outperformance? In effect, the tail may be wagging the dog. Global investors have long allocated capital to the US, attracted by its macroeconomic resilience, technological leadership, and deep, liquid financial markets. The danger now is that the US trade war may disrupt this equilibrium. A sharp or sustained reduction in capital inflows could undermine growth, weaken the dollar, and trigger broader financial instability. Moreover, reversing this dynamic is not straightforward—barring a credible structural resurgence in European (or Asian) growth, the global investment landscape remains tilted toward the US.

250501Z4.jpg

**US competitiveness versus Europe, China and Japan** 
The next chart below examines relative unit labour costs across major economies since 2011. The US and China have seen a broadly similar trajectory, with steady increases in relative cost structures, while the euro area has remained flat and Japan has seen dramatic improvement. This suggests that, from a cost competitiveness standpoint, the US is not uniquely disadvantaged vis-à-vis China. However, as we discuss further below, this parallel erosion of cost competitiveness is occurring at much higher nominal wage levels in the US, which blunts its ability to regain export share through tariff-related shifts alone. The trade war strategy—absent a corresponding improvement in productivity or structural reforms—risks imposing costs without delivering material competitiveness gains.

250501Z5.jpg

**Average wages in selected developed and developing economies**
This point is reinforced by the final chart, which shows estimates for average monthly wages across countries in 2024. US labour remains much more expensive than in peer or emerging economies. So even if China’s costs rise in tandem with the US, the global supply chain has ample alternatives. 'China plus one' strategies are accelerating, and the US remains structurally misaligned with low-cost production hubs. Tariffs aimed at reshoring supply chains are unlikely to deliver sustained gains unless accompanied by deep supply-side reforms, and risk further disincentivizing foreign direct investment if global firms perceive US trade policy as erratic or punitive.

250501Z6.jpg

Financial markets found a measure of calm this week, buoyed by some subtle shifts in tone from US policymakers. A softening in the administration’s rhetoric around trade tariffs coupled with a less confrontational stance toward Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, helped ease tensions that had roiled markets earlier in the month. Equities rebounded modestly, and volatility indicators edged lower, reflecting cautious optimism that the worst of the policy shocks may be behind us. But beneath the surface, significant downside risks persist. New shipping data point to a pronounced slowdown in US-China trade flows (chart 1), suggesting the damage from recent tariff escalations is already rippling through global supply chains. Meanwhile, incoming data for the US revealed an unexpected contraction in the economy in Q1 and further signs of weakness in the labour market (chart 2). The US dollar, in the meantime, while long supported by superior growth and yield differentials, has begun to decouple from traditional drivers (charts 3 and 4) suggesting growing pressure on capital flows. At the same time, structural imbalances are drawing renewed scrutiny: unit labour cost comparisons show the US steadily losing competitiveness (chart 5), while nominal wage disparities remain stark versus China and other Asian economies, further complicating any effort to restore trade balance without broader reforms (chart 6). In short, while markets may be drawing temporary comfort from a pause in tariff brinkmanship, the deeper economic and financial vulnerabilities exposed this month remain unresolved—and increasingly central to the global macro narrative.

<iframe style="border-radius:12px" src="https://open.spotify.com/embed/episode/3PzXXKrkHcwtOLipohEdnB?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: Tariff Truce, Tenuous Trust

250501F20.jpg

250501G20.jpg

U.S. light vehicle sales dropped 2.9% (+6.5% y/y) to 17.31 million units (SAAR) in April after surging 10.8% to 17.82 million units in March. The retreat in April vehicle sales accompanied a 1.7% y/y rise in real disposable income through March, which compared to 2.0% growth last year.

Sales declines were broad-based last month. Light truck sales fell 1.3% (+9.9% y/y) during April to 14.34 million units (SAAR), after rising 12.4% in March. Purchases of domestically-made light trucks declined 1.2% (+11.9% y/y) to 11.02 million units, after jumping 12.5% in March. Sales of imported light trucks fell 1.8% (+4.4% y/y) to 3.32 million units, following an 11.6% March surge.

Trucks’ record 82.8% share of the light vehicle market last month compared to 81.5% in March and 80.3% in April of last year. The share averaged 80.3% during all of 2024 versus 53.3% ten years earlier.

Auto sales also declined last month, down 9.5% (-7.5%) to 2.97 million units (SAAR) following a 3.5% March rise. The decline reversed all of the increase over the prior two months. Purchases of domestically-produced cars fell 9.8% (-4.3% y/y) last month to 2.22 million units, after rising 3.8% in March. Sales of imported autos declined 9.6% (-15.7% y/y) to 0.75 million units, following a 2.5% March increase.

Imports' 23.5% share of the U.S. light vehicle market was little changed from 23.6% in March and compared to a May 2023 low of 22.9% and a high of 26.3% in November of 2023. Imports' share of the passenger car market held steady at 25.3% last month and compared to 27.7% in April of last year. It reached a high of 38.7% in September 2021. Imports' share of the light truck market eased to 23.2% last month after falling to 23.3% in March.

U.S. vehicle sales figures can be found in Haver's **USECON** database. Additional detail by manufacturer is in the I**NDUSTRY** database.

250501H20.jpg

250501I20.jpg

- Light truck sales pull back, while auto sales tumble.
- Both domestic and imported sales decline.
- Imports' market share slips further.

Economy in Brief: October 2011

Jump to:

U.S. Consumer Credit Extension Pulls Back

U.S. Nonfarm Payrolls' Modest Rise Aided By Strike's End

U.S. Weekly Initial Claims for Jobless Insurance Tick Higher But Trend Sideways

German Order Growth Spirals Lower

U.S. Weekly Initial Claims for Jobless Insurance Tick Higher But Trend Sideways

U.S. Mortgage Applications Slip W/W But Rise M/M

U.S. Challenger Reports Widespread Increase In Job Cut Announcements

U.S. ISM Nonmanufacturing Index Remains Flat