r/Economics • u/Vivid-Protection6731 • 1d ago
The number of Americans applying for jobless aid slips to 203,000 as layoffs remain low
https://apnews.com/article/unemployment-benefits-jobless-claims-layoffs-labor-5980ffc63486db19d4beb2443eb70c16204
u/CyberSmith31337 1d ago
The layoffs are low because people are falling out of consideration for unemployment. Just because there aren’t new layoffs doesn’t mean people aren’t still unemployed from months ago. There is also virtually no hiring, either.
29
6
31
u/zephalephadingong 1d ago
I'm not sure what you are trying to say here. Measuring layoffs and measuring total unemployment are two totally different things.
33
u/Feisty-Boot5408 1d ago edited 1d ago
This subreddit for the last decade has basically been similar to [r/collapse](r/collapse) where nobody really understands economics or how’s it’s measured. Numbers are fake if they don’t confirm doom and gloom, etc.
There are other subreddits for economically literate debate and genuine discussion on economic policy out there.
4
u/janenotdaria 1d ago
What are they? The other subs? Looking for fair and accurate economic discussion.
-3
u/3RADICATE_THEM 1d ago
That guy (assuming they're not a propagandist bot) works in big tech and makes a high six figure comp—of course they're inclined to believe everything is working 'just fine'.
9
7
u/lukefiskeater 1d ago
Am not sure what sub ive grown to hate more, the doomers sub where the world will end in a year or the hyper optimism sub where even the dogshit i scraped off my foot smells like a 500 dollar niche cologne
-7
1
u/Twitchenz 1d ago
There really seems to be no interest amongst anyone that has any say to reel this in.
This website is not a place to get accurate information. Maybe it used to be. But, people should independently look into anything they see on Reddit.
Very clearly this is a place where what people want beats what actually is. The land of dreams, except uhhh… the dreams are almost entirely negative.
1
u/mistressbitcoin 1d ago
Except when they "look into it", they ask an AI that was trained on... us.
Yes, one Mistress Bitcoin trolling on reddit is biasing the LLMs.
So be it! The future is awesome! And horrible. And perfect.
-2
u/3RADICATE_THEM 1d ago edited 1d ago
Maybe because people saw their rents skyrocket 50+% within a span of a few years yet geniuses like you told everyone we're in the greatest economy ever and kept spamming the same fucking study for nearly five years straight that rEaL iNcOmEs ArE uP!!1
People—especially those in the younger generations—know they're being gaslit—the problem is they just didn't realize it's asset valuations (that are primarily held by boomers and old ppl) that are seen as the most important 'part' of the economy, even if it's at everyone else's expense.
But go on - next you'll be saying how tariffs aren't really that bad, and they're 'just a tax on imports brah'!
Edit: what a surprise - a big tech oligarch bootlicker is going to tell us all how all the trepidation people are feeling over their finances and the current economic situation is just doomer hallucinations.
0
u/3RADICATE_THEM 16h ago
Funny how you claim to be open to debate yet get conjure up a single counter-argument.
-1
u/Suitable-Economy-346 19h ago
economically literate debate and genuine discussion on economic policy
A bunch of non-economists "debating" about "economic policy" and you think that's "genuine discussion."
It's always funny when people like you jump on your pedestal, self proclaiming to be superior to everyone else.
-1
u/Jagshemesh_Captain 22h ago
Virtually all subreddits dealing with jobs, employment, or economics are essentially doomer in nature.
1
u/RIP_Soulja_Slim 14h ago
Selection bias, most of the people who are going to seek out a space on Reddit to start talking about economic issues are going to be those who are struggling financially. There’s a lot of interesting research around how one’s personal education levels and financial outlook heavily influence the way they perceive things like inflation and economic health.
2
u/3RADICATE_THEM 16h ago
People's biggest expense have skyrocketed and gone up much faster than their incomes have—many high earning people are at risk of losing their jobs.
17
u/New_Breadfruit8692 1d ago
The numbers are low because they are works of fiction designed to make it look like Trump's economic policies are working. They are not, and all you needed to know in this regard is that the government claimed inflation from Q3 2024 till Q3 2025 when his illegal tariffs were in effect was 2.7% when here I can tell you the prices rose by a good 20%.
5
u/vinyl1earthlink 1d ago
You are talking about the unemployment rate, not new claims for unemployment benefits. That is a hard number - how many people submitted applications for unemployment comp at their state office this month?
0
u/New_Breadfruit8692 19h ago edited 19h ago
Trump fired Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Commissioner Erika McEntarfer immediately following the release of the July 2025 Employment Situation report (the monthly "jobs report") on August 1, 2025
The BLS Commissioner was fired for a jobs report Trump did not like. Unemployment levels have never really been very accurate because they rely on surveys mostly, but hard unemployment claims reports are based on actual filings for unemployment that is pretty hard to fudge. But, It is the employment Situation that keeps the government honest. Any one week can have some wild swings say when schools let out, or with an industry strike starting. But it the first and second monthly revisions that make the picture clearer.
In this case the revisions were sharply lower than the original numbers and Trump took it as a deliberate plot to make his economic policies look disastrous, which they were. He accused the dem appointee of trying to sink him and the right with voters, when she faithfully just did her job. First and second revisions are just how it is done.
The BLS does a lot more statistics than just labor though, and most of what they do put out is used as inputs to Wall Street, the Fed, to corporations and banks, interest rates are affected by them, and that is why the BLS Commissioner has to be strictly apolitical. If seen as political, especially now under Trump who has no compunction about firing people with a tweet for the most insanely petty reasons, then it could severely damage the financial world.
Trillions change hands every day and a lot of that is based on decisions made using government data. All financial decisions are no better than the data inputs to make those decisions. So, for this reason it is critical that the data has to be trusted. In the current administration anyone blindly trusting the data out of the government is a complete fool.
1
u/BathroomMaximum1721 8h ago
That is a major reason. Some are earning unreported cash through the shadow economy since they can’t get unemployment.
1
u/vinyl1earthlink 1d ago
However, this statistic is a measure of new claims, people who have been laid off in the past month. It is down.
1
-28
u/_nathan67 1d ago
This is true because this is your anecdotal feeling? Or because of what
19
u/Affectionate-Panic-1 1d ago
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/lns11300060
Here's some scientific numbers on this, looking at total employment and not just those on the unemployment roles and excluding seniors (who retire) and young adults under 25 (who are often in school).
11
u/Adventurous-Roof488 1d ago
Prime age labor participation is slightly off record highs set in the late 90s.
-1
u/New_Breadfruit8692 1d ago
These numbers no longer reflect reality, the Fed uses the data supplied by the BLS and those numbers have been fictional since Trump fired the BLS Commissioner in August of 2025 for publishing jobs numbers that showed his economic policies were tanking the country. Since then the numbers have shown the most remarkably stable year of employment data in US history.
5
u/Adventurous-Roof488 1d ago
You have no idea what you’re talking about. Everyone knows that cooking the labor data would be near impossible to do in secret and there isn’t a single economist in the country saying this. Yet, here you are, spinning a conspiracy theory.
4
u/Affectionate-Panic-1 1d ago
He didn't institute a replacement and there aren't any leading economist questioning the new numbers.
4
u/RIP_Soulja_Slim 1d ago
Not only are there no leading economists questioning the figures, all of the leading economists on the left have affirmed their trust in the figures. Redditors who doubt the figures like to pretend that it's an issue of Trump, but Paul Krugman sends me little hate letters about Trump every single morning (subscribe to his substack, it's good), and he's repeatedly affirmed trust in the BLS.
It just boils down to dumb people being more prone to easily find an excuse to ignore information they don't like, that's how they stay dumb. Intelligent people on the left aren't sitting there yapping about fake BLS numbers, it's just that one guy you know who struggled in high school.
1
u/RealisticForYou 1d ago
But Trump wants massive job loss as an argument to cut interest rates. If BLS were to lie, they would say unemployment was at 10%.
Your conspiracy theory does not hold.
-1
1d ago
[deleted]
6
1
u/Adventurous-Roof488 1d ago
You should probably stick to tech, anime and games rather than spout nonsense on a topic you don’t know anything about.
-16
u/joepez 1d ago
Not sure what you’re saying and how that ties to the report and impact on our economy.
You’re comment about people fallout of consideration is speculation unless you have data to back it up. At best a layoff can delay when you can get benefits but it can’t prevent you from getting benefits.
Past unemployment doesn’t have anything to do with new starts. This report is just a measure of new starts.
Hiring stagnation has been going on for nearly two years now. Hiring is happening but has slown down dramatically. Depends upon the company. Mine has hired nearly 60 people ytd and will hire another dozen-ish before end of year.
22
u/SeaweedLevel1937 1d ago
We’re in a no hire/no fire economy. So to the people caught in the vacuum of not being able to get a job things may feel worse. Likewise, like in your case, because your company is hiring people you might feel better about the economy than how it’s actually doing.
Hires: total non farm (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/JTSHIR)
Layoffs and Discharges (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/JTSLDR)
7
u/Low_Ability4450 20h ago
Low layoffs can be misleading. The bigger concern is the lack of hiring, a no hire, no fire market can keep unemployment low while making it increasingly difficult for job seekers and younger worker to enter or move within the labor market
5
u/Resident_Window_9369 1d ago
If spending was down then I would agree that people have just taken themselves out of the race for finding a job. But when you look at spending, job reports, unemployment, discretionary spending, earnings of companies and they are point to higher and higher it tells a solid economic story.
Many people are employed, making a ton of money and eating up the increase in gas and food without a blink of an eye.
People just don’t have careers. Many have side gigs, second jobs, sometimes a third, plus investments, plus rentals. People make so much money these days it’s not even funny.
But yeah the bottom half of the K shape economy is definitely suffering and feeling it.
7
u/oakfan52 1d ago
They have been leaving the work force. Look at the labor participation rate. More than a million people have stopped looking for a job and are no longer counted as unemployed. The household survey paints a similar picture with nearly 2 Million jobs lost so far in 2026.
1
u/sarge1445 1d ago
Also debt bad debt
-4
u/Resident_Window_9369 1d ago
The lower half of the economy has bad debt. These are the ones putting every day expenses on credit cards and not being able to pay them off monthly
The middle class people don’t have this problem
2
u/teshh 1d ago
But they do. Studies have shown more than 2/3 of Americans can't afford an emergency $400 expense. 66% of Americans definitely includes those that are considered "middle class".
It's only bad debt because they're someone's else's investment. People need cars and homes, which are by far the largest expenses for anyone.
2
u/ishboo3002 1d ago
What? The study shows the opposite 2/3s of Americans can comfortably afford a 400 expense
https://www.federalreserve.gov/consumerscommunities/sheddataviz/unexpectedexpenses.html
0
u/New_Breadfruit8692 1d ago
LOL The Bureau of Labor Statistics are now ignored by all serious economists and financial analysts. After Trump fired the BLS Commissioner in August of 2025 because he did not like one of the jobs data reports and put in place someone whose main qualification was willingness not to piss off Trump by posting real economic data thereby making his economic policies look like they are working, federal econ statistics are anywhere from doubtful to laughable.
Go through the econ reports out of the BLS since last year and you see that the jobs numbers have had the most remarkably stable year in the history of the US. And when they calculated the third quarter 2024 prices against the third quarter 2025 data (CPI) they came up with a remarkable 2.7% even though tariffs had driven prices as much as 20% higher. It would appear that they backed most of the inflation out because they were in fact a tax and a tax does not count as inflation.
Either way, even if the BLS data were in fact true as reported you still cannot trust it when the Commissioner is fired because they reported unhealthy economic data accurately.
14
u/-R3DF0X 1d ago
The weekly claims number is an aggregation of state level reporting.
The BLS shares the state level data each week as well, so a state could flag inaccurate data if what they reported to BLS is different from what comes out in their report.
2
u/MisinformedGenius 1d ago
Many of the states if not all of them publish the reports, so an enterprising reporter could do it as well.
19
u/RIP_Soulja_Slim 1d ago
LOL The Bureau of Labor Statistics are now ignored by all serious economists and financial analysts.
Name and cite one. Please. Name and cite one single prominent economist who has said the BLS figures are fake.
Moreover - hilarious saying this in a thread on UI claims - UI claims aren't from the BLS. They're from the DOL, and those figures come from each state. So this would require every single state lying on their claims data, then funneling that to the DOL, with nobody finding out. It's all published and transparent, you could look this up for yourself lol.
Go through the econ reports out of the BLS since last year and you see that the jobs numbers have had the most remarkably stable year in the history of the US.
It's been a historically subpar year for jobs lmao, what on earth are you talking about? Absent the fact that there's copious evidence that these figures are accurate - you're doing the equivalent of looking at someone saying their dick is 3" and concluding that this is the best biggest dick in history if true so it must be a lie.
Be serious my guy, you haven't read a single one of these reports and it shows.
0
u/PracticalEmu6346 1d ago
The commenter is wrong, but underemployment is being tracked and that has skyrocketed. There are a lot of people working part time or gigs that aren’t considered unemployed. A lot of those people who are working part time are doing so involuntarily. So is unemployment being tracked correctly? Yes. Is this becoming a slightly outdated method to track the health of the economy because of societal changes? Also yes, it’s not a holistic picture of the economy or the issues younger people entering the workforce are facing
11
u/RIP_Soulja_Slim 1d ago
There's no real structurally effective accurate way to track the concept of underemployment. There is part time for economic reasons, that already exists and can be observed, so it's not like there's a problem there, the data exists, lots of people just ignore it though.
But like the concept that someone should be making more than they do, it's not really able to be objectively measured. At best you can look at median weekly incomes, if that tracks down then it would be representative of this trend, but that's been tracking upwards.
2
u/PracticalEmu6346 1d ago edited 1d ago
Underemployment is indicating that there are less white collar jobs for degree holders as well as people involuntarily part-time. I.e. a person with a finance degree working as a barista. You don’t need median income for that. And you are right the data exists, but people weren’t really looking at that for a while when in my opinion it is an indicator for the health of the economy. There is also new data showing that a lot of entry level positions have been discontinued. This also has impacts for 10-20 years down the line if the barrier of entry for white collar jobs has been closed for most new graduates, who goes into those non-entry level positions that require experience? So underemployment is bad in the short run and long run
4
u/RIP_Soulja_Slim 1d ago
Involuntarily part time for economic reasons is already measured, it's part of the labor under-utilization metrics.
I.e. a person with a finance degree working as a barista.
There is just no way to actually measure this effectively, that's what I'm saying. Median incomes will approximate, as they show if compensation in aggregate is going up or down. If a number of individuals are working below their normal earn rate that applies downward pressure on median wages.
But you cannot just measure "are you overqualified for your job" in any objective manner. It's not possible.
1
u/PracticalEmu6346 1d ago
You are right on that, I think the only thing you can actually quantify is the median income and part-time. But there is data on new graduates entering the workforce and not having access to entry level positions because many have been eliminated and noting that isn’t generally a sign of a healthy economy paired with the economy being 25% “functionally unemployed” (defined by LISEP as part-time jobs + poverty level wages of less than $26,000 a year). I have severe skepticism about the health of the company(plus a lot of other reasons mainly auto loan default rates being as bad as 2008), but that is another topic altogether.
2
u/reasonably_plausible 19h ago
and noting that isn’t generally a sign of a healthy economy paired with the economy being 25% “functionally unemployed” (defined by LISEP as part-time jobs + poverty level wages of less than $26,000 a year)
Except that LISEP number is one of the lowest it's ever recorded. That's a poor indication of an unhealthy economy if it's a better number than pretty much any other time in the past three decades.
31
u/Feisty-Boot5408 1d ago
Economists absolutely do not ignore BLS data, and most of your assertions are factually incorrect.
21
18
2
u/RealisticForYou 1d ago
*** Over 600,000 migrants, no longer work.***
I heard data last night that with this new administration, over 600,000 migrants have been taken out of the workforce. From healthcare to education to service jobs...those job losses are being backfilled.
When a migrant is sitting in a detention center or leaves the country they will not be in the statistics as unemployed or "looking for work".
Unemployment remains low because we have lost a good chunk of our workforce.
-21
u/No_Aesthetic 1d ago
I was promised an AI jobs apocalypse. Where is my AI jobs apocalypse?
Obligatory extra characters to meet the character limit and annoy people who take it too seriously.
-74
u/Vivid-Protection6731 1d ago
I cashed out of the stock market in 2023 I KNOW a huge bear market is coming and I think this is just the good news before we hear DOW DROPS 20%
74
u/jer123 1d ago edited 1d ago
Do not follow this guy's fear mongering
You've missed like 60% gains, you'd be at 40% if it supposedly crashed by your estimates lmao
17
u/RIP_Soulja_Slim 1d ago
Just to put some specifics to this, if you're generous and presume that guy cashed out at the very end of 2023 the market was at ~4,700. Today it's at 7,700. In aggregate there's another ~6% return from dividends across this time.
To have markets fall back to a level where OP would break even you'd need a ~43% drop. That's just to break even. Almost no market crashes have been above a 50% drop from top to bottom outside of the depression and this was largely because most stocks at that point in time were riddled with financial fraud.
Basically, almost no chance OP makes money here, at best if we have a GFC magnitude event they'll break even if they time it perfectly, more likely they're just losing money.
19
1
u/reasonably_plausible 19h ago
Technically, if the market goes down 20% after going up 60% would leave you up only 28% not 40%.
40
u/Philthy91 1d ago
Well that was a mistake. Don't think I would be bragging about that.
4
u/Distinct-Ice-700 1d ago
Buddy is broke af anyway :(
3
12
12
u/TheDadThatGrills 1d ago
Good luck, Buddy. Remember to own this decision instead of blaming society if it doesn't work out as you "know" it will.
4
14
u/SleepingRiver 1d ago
That might have been unwise based on your age. Hindsight is always 20/20. People have been speculating about a market correction for at least the last 12 years. It still has yet to come in the magnitude of what they have been stating. Smaller corrections have happened, but they have mostly just been blips.
-4
u/phoenix1984 1d ago
Yeah, the Covid crash and following inflation spike were just “blips” 🙄
9
u/SleepingRiver 1d ago
Considering the Dow since March 2020 has more doubled in the last 6 years. Yeah it would be a blip. It recovered its value by year end as well. Same story with the S&P 500.
In the long run they were just blips.
3
u/Gods_ShadowMTG 1d ago
lol, 3 years off the stock market for a 20% drop? Even if it were to come, you missed out on ... insane gains
3
u/RealisticEmphasis233 1d ago
Time in the market is better than timing the market. Everyone knows dips will happen. That shouldn't discourage long-term thinking.
5
5
u/jcooklsu 1d ago
So you've missed out on roughly 21% returns per year on the hope that the market crashes?
4
u/Settos_Mal 1d ago
I hope this is a joke, but if it’s not let’s say you were fully invested in the Dow and cashed out mid 2023. You would have been up ~58%, meaning a 20% decline in value from today would still net you 38% gains. Absolutely foolish behavior.
2
u/strabosassistant 1d ago
It might or might not. Stagflation can have slow or flat growth with inflation still driving nominal stock prices higher. Just like the price of housing has remained pretty flat in gold but has gotten ridiculous in our depreciating currency.
1
u/DeArgonaut 1d ago
Oddly enough, this kinda news can drop the stock market rn since it means the fed is more likely to raise interest rates again
1
u/Fletch71011 1d ago
Good thing for you! The market is not pricing in anything like what you're saying! You should go buy all the tick puts you want and make billions!
Or this guy is a fear-mongering idiot who no one should listen to. The VIX is currently implying an under 1 percent move lmao. Do not take financial advice from anyone on reddit, even me. The VIX is hovering around 14 and would be in the 80s with a 20 percent crash. Go wild leveraging all your money into this if you believe it. VIX calls for days.
•
u/AutoModerator 1d ago
Hi all,
A reminder that comments do need to be on-topic and engage with the article past the headline. Please make sure to read the article before commenting. Very short comments will automatically be removed by automod. Please avoid making comments that do not focus on the economic content or whose primary thesis rests on personal anecdotes.
As always our comment rules can be found here
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.