Some time ago, Prof. Brad DeLong of Berkeley, thinking aloud with graph, drew a line across the 1991 and 2001 recessions and recoveries, making a "note to self" that it appeared that Initial Jobless Claims post those recessions had to decline to 400,000 or less before payroll jobs were added. Thus, mused Prof. DeLong, it must be so as well, post this "Great Recession." This "note to self" was subsequently repeated by Bill McBride at Calculated Risk, from which it has now been picked up and repeated at Prof. James Hamilton's site, Econbrowser. It is well on its way to becoming Holy Writ.
Let me say first of all that I have the highest respect for all 3 of the above gentlemen. Nevertheless...
IT IS WRONG.
The 1991 and 2001 recessions were very mild. Peak initial jobless claims in those recessions were 501,250 and 489,250, respectively. It would be nuts to think that jobs would be added to the economy anywhere near the 500,000 high water mark in jobless claims from those recessions.
The 1973-4 and 1981-2 recessions are much better comparisons. They were the two most severe post-WW2 recessions up until now, respectively featuring 9% and 10%+ unemployment. Furthermore, peak initial jobless claims in those recessions were 560,750 on February 1, 1975 and 674,250 on October 9, 1982, respectively; both peaks being much closer to our recession's peak initial claims number of 658,750 on April 4, 2009.
In the case of the recoveries from both of those recessions, payrolls started to grow as the ievel of initial jobless claims crossed 500,000, not 400,000.
Here it is in graph form, including initial jobless claims (in blue and green respectively) ending as of the week each crossed below 500,000, together with nonfarm payrolls (in red and orange) ending the same month:


It is easy to see that nonfarm payrolls troughed in the preceding month, and grew during that month that initial claims crossed below 500,000.
Here is the raw data from the St. Louis Fred site:
1975 Recovery
Initial jobless claims:
1975-02-01 560750 (peak)
1975-04-05 543250
1975-04-12 540500
1975-04-19 535750
1975-04-26 525250
1975-05-03 517250
1975-05-10 514000
1975-05-17 509750
1975-05-24 504750
1975-05-31 497250
1975-04-12 540500
1975-04-19 535750
1975-04-26 525250
1975-05-03 517250
1975-05-10 514000
1975-05-17 509750
1975-05-24 504750
1975-05-31 497250
and Nonfarm Payrolls:
1975-01-01 77297
1975-02-01 76919
1975-03-01 76649
1975-04-01 76463
1975-05-01 76623
1975-06-01 76519
1975-07-01 76768
1975-08-01 77154
1975-02-01 76919
1975-03-01 76649
1975-04-01 76463
1975-05-01 76623
1975-06-01 76519
1975-07-01 76768
1975-08-01 77154
1982-3 Recovery
Initial Jobless claims
1982-10-09 674250 (peak)
1982-12-04 586250
1982-12-11 569750
1982-12-18 554500
1982-12-25 523750
1983-01-01 518000
1983-01-08 512250
1983-01-15 503000
1983-01-22 500500
1983-01-29 492750
1982-12-11 569750
1982-12-18 554500
1982-12-25 523750
1983-01-01 518000
1983-01-08 512250
1983-01-15 503000
1983-01-22 500500
1983-01-29 492750
and Nonfarm Payrolls:
1982-10-01 88894
1982-11-01 88770
1982-12-01 88756
1983-01-01 88981
1983-02-01 88903
1983-03-01 89076
For good measure, in the 1980 Recession, in which unemployment peaked at 7.8%, jobs showed growth in August 1980 at the same time as Initial Claims averaged 546,000:
Initial Claims:
1980-06-07 629000 (peak)
1980-07-05 599250
1980-07-12 584500
1980-07-19 576500
1980-07-26 559250
1980-08-02 556750
1980-08-09 556750
1980-08-16 546250
1980-08-23 534750
1980-08-30 518000
Nonfarm Payrolls:
1980-05-01 90415
1980-06-01 90095
1980-07-01 89832
1980-08-01 90092
IT IS SIMPLY NOT TRUE THAT INITIAL JOBLESS CLAIMS MUST DECLINE TO 400,000 BEFORE NONFARM PAYROLLS TURN POSITIVE.
1982-11-01 88770
1982-12-01 88756
1983-01-01 88981
1983-02-01 88903
1983-03-01 89076
For good measure, in the 1980 Recession, in which unemployment peaked at 7.8%, jobs showed growth in August 1980 at the same time as Initial Claims averaged 546,000:
Initial Claims:
1980-06-07 629000 (peak)
1980-07-05 599250
1980-07-12 584500
1980-07-19 576500
1980-07-26 559250
1980-08-02 556750
1980-08-09 556750
1980-08-16 546250
1980-08-23 534750
1980-08-30 518000
Nonfarm Payrolls:
1980-05-01 90415
1980-06-01 90095
1980-07-01 89832
1980-08-01 90092
IT IS SIMPLY NOT TRUE THAT INITIAL JOBLESS CLAIMS MUST DECLINE TO 400,000 BEFORE NONFARM PAYROLLS TURN POSITIVE.
Note that for all three Recessions/recoveries, I've included jobless claims from the previous month, when nonfarm payrolls troughed. In 1975, payrolls actually troughed at 536,000 new jobless claims. In 1980, they troughed at 580,000. In 1982, they troughed at 559,000 (the 4 week average of the months involved).
That is partly why I have taken the position that in this recession/recovery, payrolls will trough once there is a sustained reading of ~530,000 if there is a slow decline in initial claims, and 500,000 if the decline quickens.
I am utterly confident that there will be job growth long before jobless claims fall to 400,000.

6 comments:
Different times. We had a significantly larger manufacturing employment base during those years, which tends to bounce back much faster. With the decline in manufacturing payrolls over time, comparisons to those recessions are simply moot, as the economy is a completely different animal now. This is not to say I disagree with you about when we start adding jobs, as the more important variable, population, means that 400,000 today is not equivalent to 400,000 in 1991.
I didn't note any plus or minus signs on the supporting data that corresponded to the graphic data. I assume it changes where bold type is used. I am also not sanguine with an apples to apples correlation with those time periods as much has changed since then. It is an interesting comparison though. There is no substitute for additional data.
SOz:
I am not claiming that 500,000 is "the magic number." I am claiming that 400,000 is NOT "the magic number" just because Prof. Delong's drew a line across the 1991 and 2001 graphs.
I wasn't trying to insinuate that. What I was getting at is that it is virtually impossible to rely on historic gross numeric data that is not adjusted to the current population, let alone changes in the economy as a whole.
seems to me that initial claims measures job losses, whereas net jobs is the difference between jobs added and jobs lost. we're ignoring jobs added to our peril here.
and that's what i find problematic. with household credit clearly on the decline now -- securitization collapsed, loans and leases contracting -- it looks more and more like the great calling forward of future demand represented by the secular trend in household leveraging has gone into reverse. if demand per capita is going to now be permanently and significantly lower as household repair balance sheet liabilities to match written-down assets, how do jobs get added? previous cycles here examined all fall within the great household leveraging cycle, where the answer to that question was more demand through greater borrowing -- lowering interest rates, etc.
it seems to me that jobs added may be relatively unresponsive this time around, meaning that initial claims may have to fall lower than 500k, lower than 400k to get things moving in the right direction.
Olephart:
All of the data is positive, e.g., +536,000 new jobless claims.
The bolded numbers are the low point for payrolls during each recession, e.g., 76,463(,000) in 1975; and the two weeks marking where initial jobless claims crossed the 500,000 mark.
Hope that helps.
Post a Comment