e-EDGE is now available as an RSS feed. [Click here to subscribe to it.]Figures released last week by the California Employment Development Department (EDD) showed California’s unemployment rate decreased from May. The seasonally adjusted unemployment rate for June fell to 12.3 percent. On a year-to-year basis, the unemployment rate has increased by +0.7 percentage points.
The U.S. unemployment rate also declined in June to 9.5 percent. Thus, joblessness in California continued to be higher than the nation, the trend since September 2008. Only two other states have higher unemployment rates than California: Nevada (14.2%) and Michigan (13.2%). Out of the three, only Nevada saw its unemployment rate rise in June.
Within the five-county Southern California area, all of the counties experienced increases in non-seasonally adjusted unemployment rates during June when compared to a year ago. In addition, all of the counties had double-digit unemployment rates in June with the exception of Orange County. The San Bernardino County unemployment rate increased from 13.5 percent a year earlier to 14.3 percent in June. Riverside County’s unemployment rate also rose on a year-to-year basis, moving from 13.7 percent to 14.5 percent in June. Los Angeles County’s June rate moved upward from 11.7 percent a year ago to 12.3 percent. Ventura County’s June rate increased from 10.0 percent a year earlier to 10.6 percent.
In Orange County, the unadjusted unemployment rate moved upward from 9.4 percent in June 2009 to 9.5 percent in June 2010. San Diego County’s rate rose from 10.0 percent to 10.5 percent over the past year. (Ferdinando Guerra)
Source: http://www.edd.ca.gov/About_EDD/pdf/urate201009.pdf
There was disappointment over the June data from the Employment Development Department, as the State lost -27,600 jobs over the month. However, this decline was due entirely to the federal government sector shedding Census jobs. Taking out government from the seasonally adjusted data yields a +1,300 private sector job increase from May to June. Of special note was the gain of +7,300 jobs in manufacturing.
Looking at the unadjusted data, over the year, the State saw nonfarm employment decline by -1.5% or by -186,700 jobs. The largest losses over the year came in construction (-78,800 jobs), manufacturing (-34,800 jobs), and wholesale trade (-31,500 jobs). Gains were recorded in administrative services (+19,200 jobs, with a +36,000 increase in employment services), (private) education (+16,100 jobs), information (+3,000 jobs), and health services (+600 jobs).
Los Angeles County saw seasonally adjusted nonfarm employment decline by -13,400 jobs from May to June. Over the year, the County lost an unadjusted -65,000 jobs, a decline of -1.7%. Looking at the detail, the largest losses over the year were in: manufacturing (-17,500 jobs), construction (-15,900 jobs), government (-15,100 jobs), and wholesale trade (-8,600 jobs). Increases were recorded in information (+23,900 jobs, with an increase of +21,600 jobs in motion picture & sound recording), and education (+600 jobs).
The June news for Orange County was better. Seasonally adjusted nonfarm employment increased by +2,000 jobs from May to June. Over the year, there was a modest unadjusted loss of -0.2% or -3,200 jobs. Eight of the county’s employment sectors saw year-to-year gains, with the largest in leisure & hospitality services (+10,100 jobs), and administrative services (+2,400 jobs, with +1,500 in employment services).
The data for the Riverside-San Bernardino area were more restrained, with a seasonally adjusted loss from May to June of -4,700 jobs. Over the year, nonfarm employment (NSA) declined by -2.8% or by -32,000 jobs. Looking at the detail, the largest losses over the year were in: construction (-10,800 jobs), leisure & hospitality services (-4,200 jobs0, manufacturing (-3,400 jobs), and retailing (-3,100 jobs). The only increase over the year was a wan gain of +200 jobs in education.
On a seasonally adjusted basis, San Diego County saw nonfarm employment decline by -6,000 jobs from May to June. Over the year, the unadjusted loss was -1.0% or -12,500 jobs. Looking at the unadjusted detail, the largest losses over the year were in manufacturing (-4,100 jobs), construction (-3,000 jobs), and retailing (-2,600 jobs). Increases over the year were found in administrative services (+3,000 jobs, with a gain of +3,600 jobs in employment services), health services (+1,600 jobs), education (+400 jobs), and wholesale trade (+300 jobs).
Ventura County saw seasonally adjusted nonfarm employment decline by -1,500 jobs from May to June. Over the year, there was an unadjusted decline of -1.9% or -5,300 jobs. The largest losses over the year were in: construction (-1,700 jobs), leisure & hospitality services (-1,300 jobs), and manufacturing (-1,200 jobs). Increases over the year came in education & health (+400 jobs), administrative services (+300 jobs), finance & insurance (+200 jobs), and transportation & warehousing (+100 jobs).
In the Bay Area, the Oakland metro area saw seasonally adjusted nonfarm employment fall from May to June by -3,800 jobs. Over the year, there was a loss (NSA) of -3.0% or -29,300 jobs. In the San Francisco metro area, the May to June loss was -3,500 jobs. Over the year, the area saw nonfarm employment fall by -2.4% or by -23,100 jobs. The most positive news came out of the San Jose area, where the May to June decline was just -700 jobs. Over the year, the area recorded a decline of -0.8% or -6,700 jobs. (Jack Kyser)
Source: http://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/?pageid=1003
June was a mixed month in the retail world. Total U.S. retail and food service sales decreased by -0.5% last month. Sales had previously fallen by -1.1% in May after increasing for seven straight months. Despite June’s negative total, eight sectors (out of 14) registered higher sales. The biggest increases were reported by: electronics & appliance stores (rising by +1.3% compared with May); department stores (up by +1.1%); miscellaneous store retailers (also +1.1%); and nonstore retailers (mostly catalog and internet, +1.0% over the month). Six retail categories reported lower sales in June. Recording the biggest losses were: motor vehicle & parts dealers (falling by -2.3%); gasoline stations (-2.0%); followed by sporting goods, hobby, book & music stores (-1.4% over the month). [All figures in this paragraph are seasonally adjusted.]
Comparing January-June 2010 sales with the same months last year gives a rather different perspective. [All figures in this paragraph are actuals, not seasonally adjusted.] Total retail and food service sales were up by +6.5% compared with the first six months of 2009. The details by store type were very positive, as thirteen store types reported higher sales so far this year while just one store type reported lower sales. Sectors that gained over the year were led by: gasoline stations (rising by +23.2%, due to much lower prices early in 2009); nonstore retailers (up by +12.5%); and motor vehicle & parts dealers (+9.8%); followed by other general merchandise stores (excluding department stores, +5.3%). Only department stores reported lower sales year to date, and they were down by just -0.4%.
Retail sales paused for breath in May and June after a seven-month run-up through April. Economists worried about the near-term outlook won't get much comfort from the first quarter-second quarter comparisons. [On the other hand, their worries shouldn't increase much either, as most changes—up or down—were small.] Total retail and food service sales increased by just +1.0% between January-March and the April-June period. Nine retail sectors recorded higher sales in the second quarter, led by building material & garden equipment & supplies dealers, which grew by +6.8% over the 1st quarter; miscellaneous store retailers (+3.2%); and motor vehicle & parts dealers (+2.7%). Of the five retail sectors with lower sales last quarter, department stores gave the worst report, as sales fell by -2.0% from 2010q1 to 2010q2. Gasoline stations were a bit "less worse," with sales down by -1.3%, while sales of furniture & home furnishings stores decreased by -1.0%. It looks like we'll have to wait for a few more months to get a more definitive read on retail sales. (Nancy D. Sidhu)
Source: http://www.census.gov/retail/marts/www/marts_current.pdf
The State of California reached the end of its 2009-2010 fiscal year in June. While the second half of the year saw improvement in the state’s fiscal position, California’s cash position remains precarious. Total receipts for the year ($88.7 billion) were up were up compared with last year and outpaced disbursements ($86.7 billion) by $2 billion for the year. The State’s cash balance stood at -$9.9 billion (a vast improvement compared with the -$18.6 billion reported last month). The latest financial results released by the State Controller for the General Fund show that during FY 2009-2010, total receipts increased by +1.0% compared to the previous year while total disbursements fell by -11.8%.
Looking at the “big three” revenue sources for the fiscal year, corporate tax receipts plunged by -23.0% to $9.4 billion (compared with FY 2008-2009) while personal income taxes increased by +2.1% to $44.6 billion. Revenues from retail sales and use taxes jumped by +12.5% to $26.7 billion. That was just enough of an increase to pull revenues from the “big three” into positive territory (+1.3%).
On the expenditure side, Local K-12 Education received $29.1 billion during FY 2009-2010, down by $3.1 billion (-6.5%) from the previous year. Community Colleges received $3.8 billion, a decline of -$311.5 million (-7.7%). Contributions to CALSTERS (the K-12 teachers’ pension fund) were up for the year – rising by +10.1% to $1.2 billion.
Spending for the Department of Corrections was down for the year, declining by -10.0% to $8.1 billion compared with $9.0 billion spent during the prior year. Outlays for Health and Human Services dropped by -11.7% to $1.8 billion. Payments to General Government were up by +1.0% to $1.5 billion and Legislative/Judicial/Executive was almost flat (-0.2%) at $1.5 billion.
As of June 30, the State had $18.7 billion in borrowable resources against $9.9 billion in outstanding loans, which left $8.8 billion in unused borrowable resources. The outstanding loan balance is being covered entirely by internal borrowing. (Kimberly Ritter)
PR: http://www.sco.ca.gov/eo_pressrel.html
Home sales in Southern California (houses, townhomes and condominiums) rose last month to 23,871 units (new and resale homes), edging up by +2.6% compared to June of 2009. On a month-over basis, June sales rose by +7.2% and were the strongest since July 2009 when 24,104 homes were sold.
The average median price in the six-county region increased by +13.2% (to $300,000) over the year, but was down slightly (by -1.6%) compared with May. June marked the seventh consecutive month that Southern California home prices increased on a year-over-year basis.
Riverside and San Bernardino counties posted the largest percentage increases in median price, rising by +13.5% (to $210,000) and by +14.3% (to $160,000) respectively. However, both suffered declines in sales volume. The number of transactions dipped by -1.0% in Riverside County and by -7.5% in San Bernardino County. There were still good buys to be had in the Inland Empire, but as fire-sale deals give way to mere “bargains”, competition for these properties is driving up prices.
In June, the median price in Los Angeles County increased by +4.7% to $335,000 and sales ticked up by +2.8%. Orange County saw its median home price increase by +6.5% to $445,000 while sales jumped by +15.7%. In San Diego County, the median price rose by +6.8% (to $335,500) and sales were up by +5.2%. In Ventura County, the median home price was $384,000 (+5.2%), with sales rising by +5.5%
Southern California’s housing market is still troubled, but compared with last year, there has been a great deal of improvement. Prices and sales have been trending up the last several months, but we don’t know yet how much of that was attributable to government support – the coming months will tell. There are still not a lot of discretionary buyers in the market. Bargain hunting is still driving sales and the number of absentee buyers (mostly investors and second-home purchasers) was up last month, accounting for 19.7% of the homes sold in June.
More money was spent buying homes in June than in the past two years. Still, mortgage financing (or the lack thereof) remains a pressing issue. It doesn’t matter how low mortgage rates fall if lenders won’t qualify buyers. This is especially worrying for high-end sales which accounted for just 20.8% of home transaction in June (last year the proportion was 19.3%). More expensive home sales typically rely more heavily on adjustable rate mortgages and “jumbo loans” both of which have become much more difficult to obtain. The low volume of sales at the mid to high-end of the market means the housing recovery will be that much slower and less robust. (Kimberly Ritter)
|
Sales Volume |
Median Price |
||||
County |
June 2009 |
June 2010 |
%Change |
June 2009 |
June 2010 |
%Change |
Los Angeles |
7,636 |
7,849 |
2.8% |
$320,000 |
$335,000 |
4.7% |
Orange |
2,958 |
3,423 |
15.7% |
$418,000 |
$445,000 |
6.5% |
Riverside |
4,694 |
4,645 |
-1.0% |
$185,000 |
$210,000 |
13.5% |
San Bernardino |
3,438 |
3,179 |
-7.5% |
$140,000 |
$160,000 |
14.3% |
San Diego |
3,692 |
3,885 |
5.2% |
$314,250 |
$335,500 |
6.8% |
Ventura |
844 |
890 |
5.5% |
$365,000 |
$384,000 |
5.2% |
Southern California |
23,262 |
23,871 |
2.6% |
$265,000 |
$300,000 |
13.2% |
Source: Data Quick News
Source: http://www.dqnews.com/, http://www.census.gov/retail/marts/www/marts_current.pdf
The total number of containers handled in June at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach rose by +29.6 percent on a year-over-year basis to 1,250,418 TEUs (twenty-foot equivalent units). This was the seventh consecutive month of year-to-year increases and third consecutive month of TEU totals above one million. The Port of Los Angeles experienced the largest gain in trade volumes over the year, as total containers grew by +32.3 percent in June. It was the busiest June in the history of the Port of Los Angeles even surpassing June in the peak year of 2006. The Port of Long Beach also witnessed a very strong gain in volumes as total containers were up by +25.8 percent on a year-to-year basis.
The Port of Los Angeles reported a robust increase in the total number of inbound loaded containers, to 371,889 TEUs in June 2010 compared with 281,175 TEUs in June 2009, a rise of +32.3 percent. Loaded inbound traffic at the Port of Long Beach rose by +27.0 percent from June 2009 to June 2010, rising from 206,358 TEUs to 262,053 TEUs (excluding empties).
The Port of Los Angeles saw a total of 154,558 loaded outbound TEUs for the month of June, an increase of +12.6 percent from June 2009. The Port of Long Beach reported a total of 116,112 loaded outbound TEUs (excluding empties) in the month of June, an increase from 114,107 TEUs in June 2009 (+1.8%).
The Port of Oakland also reported a strong climb in its total inbound container traffic as imports (excluding empties) rose by +30.8 percent compared to a year earlier. However, total exports declined by -11.5 percent on a year-to-year basis. Over the year, Oakland’s total TEU count was up by +21.0 percent, to 186,317 TEUs in June. (Ferdinando Guerra)
Source:http://www.portoflosangeles.org/maritime/stats.asp,http://www.polb.com/, http://www.portofoakland.com/
California maintained its position as the second largest exporting state in May (Texas #1, New York #3, Florida #4 and Illinois #5), with total exports valued at $11.9 billion. Merchandise exports in May were up by +25.7% over the year, the seventh consecutive year-to-year increase.
The top California export markets in May were Mexico, China, Canada, Japan, and South Korea. All of California’s top export markets experienced significant gains. Exports to Mexico, California’s largest market, recorded the second highest annual increase, with a climb of +32.0% over the year. California’s fifth largest market, South Korea, witnessed the highest annual increase for the fourth consecutive month, with a surge of +39.3% over the year to May. The state’s second largest market, China, experienced the third largest year-to-year increase, with a +26.3% rise in May. Exports to Japan and Canada strengthened by +21.5% and +17.2%, respectively. From an industry standpoint, the top three product exports (ranked by dollar value) were computers & electronic products, transportation equipment and machinery.
On the import side, California remained the top importing state in May, with total imports valued at $26.8 billion. Texas, New Jersey, New York and Illinois were the other top importers. California imports increased by $900 million from April to May. Imports in May were up by +29.9% over the year. (Ferdinando Guerra)
The U.S. Commerce Department reported that the U.S. trade deficit expanded to $42.3 billion in the month of May, up from $40.3 billion in April. The May trade deficit was at its highest level since January 2009. Overall, the U.S. trade deficit has surged by +56% since reaching its low in June 2009.
U.S. imports rose by +2.9% in May to $194.5 billion. The $5.5 billion monthly increase in imports reflected a climb in demand for consumer goods (televisions & VCRs), autos & auto parts and capital goods. Some imports did fall, including industrial supplies & materials. Other goods remained unchanged in May.
U.S. exports grew by +2.4% to $152.3 billion in May due to an increase in foreign demand for U.S. made industrial materials, business equipment and semiconductors. The only major category of exports that actually experienced a decline was “other goods”. Meanwhile, exports of foods, feeds and beverages remained unchanged.
The U.S bilateral trade deficit with China expanded in May to $22.3 billion from $19.3 billion in April and continued to be the largest trade deficit with any country. Imports from China were $29.0 billion in May, while exports were $6.7 billion. Year-to-date imports from China have grown by +16.7% relative to last year, while exports to China have jumped by +39.1%. Despite May’s increase, the monthly trade deficit with China remained below its record level of $28 billion in October 2008. U.S. trade deficits with Japan and Germany declined in May, while the deficit with Mexico and the European Union widened. (Ferdinando Guerra)
PR: http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/international/trade/2010/pdf/trad0510.pdf
REGISTER NOW!
Wednesday, July 21, 2010: LAEDC 2010 Mid-year Economic Forecast
7:00 a.m. Breakfast & Networking. 8:00 a.m. - 10:30 a.m. Program. Los Angeles Marriott Downtown.
The LAEDC Mid-year Economic Forecast is the premier source for in-depth economic information and analysis on Los Angeles County and the surrounding areas. Jack Kyser, the Kyser Center for Economic Research Founding Economist, announced his retirement after nearly 30 years as the chief interpreter of the L.A. County economy. This Mid-year Forecast event will be his final official presentation. Jack will be joined by LAEDC Chief Economist Dr. Nancy Sidhu and Dr. Richard Green of the USC Lusk Center for Real Estate as they update the economic outlook for the housing industry, the 5-County Southern California region, California, and the nation in the second half of the program. Our other panel will discuss critical infrastructure improvement projects. L.A. County residents and government organizations have committed more than $50 billion in public dollars to upgrade our region’s infrastructure, but will that be enough money to meet our needs?
The Economic Data Global Express (e-EDGE) is a free service of the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation (LAEDC). Permission to quote any proprietary part of this release is granted given proper credit. Distribution is allowed provided that no modifications are made to the original content. Sponsors of this service do not necessarily endorse all opinions stated herein. For more information, please e-mail to eedge@laedc.org. To contact LAEDC, please call 213-622-4300.
Subscribe to e-EDGE and receive current economic news and major developments. Your e-mail address will not be disclosed to any outside party (including e-EDGE sponsors) under any circumstances.
To send us comments regarding e-EDGE, please e-mail to eedge@laedc.org.