From: "Patrick Wahl" <pjwahl@attbi.com>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Worley's Weekend Weeview
Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 19:48:58 -0600
Next Article (by Subject): Re: [CANSLIM] Worley's Weekend Weeview "Tom Worley"
Previous Article (by Subject): [CANSLIM] Worley's Weekend Weeview "Tom Worley"
Top of Thread: [CANSLIM] Worley's Weekend Weeview "Tom Worley"
Next in Thread: Re: [CANSLIM] Worley's Weekend Weeview "Tom Worley"
Articles sorted by: [Date]
[Author]
[Subject]
This seems a little confusing to me, probably some odd way the feds count workers and so on, maybe you can clear it up - how can expectations be for more jobs added than actually were, with a rise in unemployment, while in fact we had a fewer jobs added with a decrease in the unemployment rate. Something doesn't add up there. On 8 Jun 2002 at 20:27, Tom Worley wrote: > EMPLOYMENT > Friday's report surprised with positive news, overall unemployment dropping > to 5.8% from 6% instead of rising as expected to 6.1%. New jobs were well > under expectations, with 41K added instead of 75K. Revised new jobs in April > ended up only 6K. - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email.
Next Article (by Subject): Re: [CANSLIM] Worley's Weekend Weeview "Tom Worley"
Previous Article (by Subject): [CANSLIM] Worley's Weekend Weeview "Tom Worley"
Top of Thread: [CANSLIM] Worley's Weekend Weeview "Tom Worley"
Next in Thread: Re: [CANSLIM] Worley's Weekend Weeview "Tom Worley"
Articles sorted by: [Date]
[Author]
[Subject]