Unexpectedly according to whom, exactly? Certainly it comes as no surprise to me. And I'm not that bright.
The lede: "More Americans unexpectedly filed first-time claims for unemployment insurance last week, indicating companies lack confidence the economic recovery will be sustained."
Later on: "An unemployment rate that's projected to average 10 percent this year will likely weigh on consumer spending, preventing the biggest part of the economy from accelerating. Without additional gains in sales, companies will be forced to keep cutting costs, limiting staff in order to boost profits."
Still later: "Worker productivity kept surging in the fourth quarter as companies squeezed more out of remaining staff to boost earnings, another report from the Labor Department also showed."
I was going to comment further on this, but all of a sudden I'm just too tired. Instead I'll just repeat these wise words a friend of mine said to me today: "I just love your sense of humor. You take care now!"
2 comments:
I'll agree with you that financial reporting is of abysmal quality but the "expected" in this case is actually just poor English. The more appropriate word should have been "projected".
And despite the political shell game, yes these numbers ARE projected by "experts" so yes technically the number fell sort of the mark that was "expected" aka projected :)
Yeah, I guess know they mean "projected," but still: I projected that job loss would continue. Pay me, Business Week! But then I think we can all agree that the "experts" are expert at nothing aside from telling power what it wants to hear.
Post a Comment