Weekly unemployment claims will be released Thursday. There has been request to the states to delay the release of unemployment data..
Goldman Sachs estimated the number would climb to 2.25 million from March 15 to 21.
Economists at Morgan Stanley said they expect jobless claims for the most recent week (ended Saturday) to come in at 3.4 million—about five times the previous record.
For historical perspective, the economists note that initial claims peaked at 695,000 in October 1982, and at 517,000 two weeks after Sept 11, 2001. The figure hit 570,000 in December 2008, following the disruptions around the collapse of Lehman Brothers, and peaked again at 665,000 in March 2009 during the financial crisis.
Morgan Stanley’s jobless forecast is one of the most grim yet.
The American Gaming Association (AGA) has revealed that 100% of the United States’ 465 commercial casinos will be closed as of midday on Wednesday. ...
The mass, unprecedented closures affect almost the entire US Casino workforce of 649,000 people and are expected to see a combined US$43.5 billion stripped from the economy assuming the casino remain closed for two months. https://www.asgam.com/index.php/2020/03 ... wednesday/
I'll be surprised if the estimates aren't on the low side.
I guess it all could be much worse. |
They could be warming up my hearse.
YAWN! Meaningless number. It will be high, it will be horrific and it is expected. From an investing perspective a huge yawn to me, from a human perspective a real tragedy.
IMHO, Investing should be about living the life you want, not avoiding the life you fear. |
Run, You Clever Boy! [9085]
7eight9 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 4:25 pm
The American Gaming Association (AGA) has revealed that 100% of the United States’ 465 commercial casinos will be closed as of midday on Wednesday. ...
The mass, unprecedented closures affect almost the entire US Casino workforce of 649,000 people and are expected to see a combined US$43.5 billion stripped from the economy assuming the casino remain closed for two months. https://www.asgam.com/index.php/2020/03 ... wednesday/
I'll be surprised if the estimates aren't on the low side.
The authors of the article cited in the OP say that Morgan Stanley's 3.4 million estimate is "one of the most grim yet." Frankly, I think that it's at least somewhat on the low side. I would not be shocked to see the report at 5+ million.
I went for my 1 hour solo run today (permitted activity) and basically saw EVERY business closed. Other than large corporations with employees working from home or paid to stay home the remainder would otherwise be eligible and apply for unemployment insurance.
I fear that the small business’ employ much more individuals that the large corporations. As result I suspect the unemployment numbers will be shockingly high (if not this report than next report particular if home and shelter orders remain)
To keep in perspective there are about 130 million full time workers in the US and about 160 million employed total (something like that if I read the statistics correctly).
willthrill81 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 4:23 pm
Buckle up ladies and gentlemen. I wouldn't bet that the market has priced in 3+ million being suddenly unemployed with more to surely follow.
why woudnt it be priced in? its been all over the news and talked about since early last week how millions will be unemployed last week alone, and we could end up with 20-40% unemployment.
willthrill81 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 4:23 pm
Buckle up ladies and gentlemen. I wouldn't bet that the market has priced in 3+ million being suddenly unemployed with more to surely follow.
why woudnt it be priced in? its been all over the news and talked about since early last week how millions will be unemployed last week alone, and we could end up with 20-40% unemployment.
The Coronavirus was all over the news when it was in China, but apparently Mr. Market believed that China could completely contain a virus, even after it spread to Italy and was infecting people left and right.
Several major firms have put out estimates of unemployment claims that are 'only' in the hundreds of thousands. Mr. Market may have listened to those claims, looking for anything optimistic after a precipitous fall. I will not be at all surprised if the cold water of millions of such claims reminds Mr. Market that the worst is far from over.
willthrill81 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:36 pm
The Coronavirus was all over the news when it was in China, but apparently Mr. Market believed that China could completely contain a virus, even after it spread to Italy and was infecting people left and right.
It's trivially easy to call Mr. Market wrong about a risk assessment after the outcome has obtained. Mr. Market may have been remembering previous viral outbreaks that were contained and did not become pandemics, and considered a risk (rather than certainty) that this would turn out worse.
If you're so certain, then the only rational position is to be shorting the market, right? Or maybe you're not actually certain what will happen, and therefore roughly in agreement with the market by maintaining a long-equities position with a lower valuation than we had in February.
So as a small business owner who has thus far avoided laying off any workers because I am desperately waiting to hear about the stimulus, my question is if they allot 350 billion for loans to small businesses, how do they know this will meet the need? Is it based on any real data? We have lost over 50 percent of our business in three weeks (child care center) most of us have not yet laid off... so our numbers will be added soon.
willthrill81 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:36 pm
The Coronavirus was all over the news when it was in China, but apparently Mr. Market believed that China could completely contain a virus, even after it spread to Italy and was infecting people left and right.
It's trivially easy to call Mr. Market wrong about a risk assessment after the outcome has obtained.
I strongly suspected that this would happen way back on 2/25, well before Mr. Market was proven wrong.
le_sacre wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 9:38 pmMr. Market may have been remembering previous viral outbreaks that were contained and did not become pandemics, and considered a risk (rather than certainty) that this would turn out worse.
If you're so certain, then the only rational position is to be shorting the market, right? Or maybe you're not actually certain what will happen, and therefore roughly in agreement with the market by maintaining a long-equities position with a lower valuation than we had in February.
Investing isn't about certainties; it's about the likelihood of various outcomes (e.g. expected value).
I think there is a good chance that the report is better than the worst case estimates from the major banks. Bear in mind that there's essentially a fixed infrastructure to process claims, and the reported number will simply be whatever claims states were able to process by the reporting deadline, rather than the true number of people who would make an initial claim if they could. Even unemployed, many people cannot wait on hold for eight hours.
Last edited by CoinCounter on Wed Mar 25, 2020 9:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I think what I am seeing here is the ol' behavioral finance trap of loss aversion. Namely, folks rate losses twice as bad as the corresponding gains. Get over it. Get over loss aversion. - livesoft
SilverGirl wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 9:42 pm
So as a small business owner who has thus far avoided laying off any workers because I am desperately waiting to hear about the stimulus, my question is if they allot 350 billion for loans to small businesses, how do they know this will meet the need? Is it based on any real data? We have lost over 50 percent of our business in three weeks (child care center) most of us have not yet laid off... so our numbers will be added soon.
when/if the bill passes we can discuss it. I am anticipating a separate thread dedicated to it, like the TCJA when it passed.
willthrill81 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 9:44 pm
Investing isn't about certainties; it's about the likelihood of various outcomes (e.g. expected value).
So your claim here is that you're not certain... but you are certain the market is not certain enough about lower-than-expected future growth? I don't see any support for (what I see as) your assertion that the market has failed to price in the risk given publicly available information, but maybe I've misapprehended your point.
willthrill81 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 4:23 pm
Buckle up ladies and gentlemen. I wouldn't bet that the market has priced in 3+ million being suddenly unemployed with more to surely follow.
why woudnt it be priced in? its been all over the news and talked about since early last week how millions will be unemployed last week alone, and we could end up with 20-40% unemployment.
Let's revisit this at 4 pm on Thursday. I was skeptical that we would see 2 days in a row of a positive market and I was wrong. But I'm pretty confident that Thursday is going to be rough sledding.