>This is technically news, but it struck me as funny so into the Humor section it goes. ;)
>
>I'm used to an article's title not always matching the content, after all, many are titled by an editor rather than the author. However, I'm not used to an author completely contradicting themselves not just in their article but sometimes in the same sentence.
>
>Unemployment Claims Edge Up Amid Wobbly Economy
>http://www.cnbc.com/id/44798718
>
>New U.S. claims for unemployment benefits rose less than expected last week, according to a government report on Thursday that hinted at an improvement in labor market conditions.
>
>Got that? Rising unemployment claims hints at improving labor market conditions. Huh?
>
>Initial claims for state unemployment benefits climbed 6,000 to a seasonally adjusted 401,000, the Labor Department said, from a revised 395,000 the prior week. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast claims rising to 410,000 from the previously reported 391,000.
>
>Got that? The previous week was revised up by 4k and this week climbed 6k from that revision. Is this also hinting at improving labor market conditions?
>
>Nonfarm payrolls likely increased 60,000 last month, according to a Reuters survey, after being flat in August. The anticipated gain in nonfarm employment will mostly reflect the return of 45,000 striking Verizon Communications workers to payrolls.
>
>Got that? 45k of the 60k increase are not really new hires but returning strikers.
>
>If those usefull idiots martching on Wall Street spent the past 17 days landing a job perhaps these numbers would improve. ;)

All I could read from the link was that things were expected to get worse but worsened less than was expected....?