I doubt he can be more inaccurate than the person being replaced…and this isn’t a challenge?
2 Likes
Let’s look at the bright side.
Can’t have a depression if no one reports unemployment numbers 
1 Like
FromWSJ:
Trump has complained publicly and privately that jobs report data is designed to hurt him politically, taking aim at large revisions to the numbers that have complicated his contention that the economy is soaring in his second term. Trump has told his advisers that he doesn’t want large revisions to the data in the future, the officials said.
Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, said on Tuesday that Trump was looking at “means and methods” behind the jobs data.
https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/trump-jobs-report-data-bureau-labor-statistics-0fb71568
I am NOT saying I agree with Trump firing Dr. McEntarfer , nor even with the logic of what he said here,
but from minute #1 Trump was focused on the size of those revisions.
So Dear Leader found someone who will cook the books for him. Congratulations - I guess
1 Like
The anti-Trumpers have told themselves that narrative so many times, they now believe it (Even though from Day 1 Donald Trunp has been focused not on the size of the numbers but on the size of the revisions.)
This time around it is definitely left who are the whack job conspiracy theorists fomenting distrust in gov’t numbers they have not even seen yet.
1 Like
To the bolded:
That is not true at all. Since Day 1 Trump has been focused on a sinister motivation for the numbers he doesn’t like.
It’s just who he is.
2 Likes
Read his statement.
If that does not save you from your pre-concieived lunacy I will not try.
I read his statement on Aug 4 and again above.
I will say the same about you.
“Rigged, rigged, faked, cover up”. His motivations are perfectly clear here
The cons have been talking about the adjustments since at least 2024. If you can’t remember, I dunno, try smoking less pot.
ADP grew sick of the adjustments circa 2020 and switched to using s multiplier developed by Stanford U.
The presidents short statement mentioned the adjustments twice and clearly stated that he believes the revisions/adjustments are at the core of the rigging."
there was massive, record setting -->revisions,<-‘in favor of the Radical Left Democrats. -->Those big adjustments<-’ were made to cover up, and level out, the FAKE political numbers that were CONCOCTED in order to make a great Republican Success look less stellar!!!
You have repeated some other story so many times(without ever bothering to ask 'what is the other side saying?") you now apparently feel compelled to defend that false narrative.
1 Like
Old adjustments averaged 9,000 jobs per month. Half on one side half on the other.
Adjustments now?
120,000 a month, 133,000 and always in the same direction.
Hmmm, no wonder the president keeps saying the revisions are too big.
That’s fine. Then publish low or high numbers up front so no revisions are necessary.
And when was the last time their numbers were actually correct as compared to bls post adjustment
I am seriously asking. Not a gotcha.
I didn’t know he needs to be approved by the senate. Could be interesting though unlikely.
What you are failing to acknowledge is Trump’s motivation. He is not making a process argument, he is making a bias argument.
Not a bad idea.
Another idea is:
Since the BLS periodicall revises its methods and multipliers anyway,
make the next change ASAP, instead of at the regularly scheduled time.
.
.
.
(Trump should not have fired McEntarfer He should have ordered her to do this.
He is an ass and an ■■■■■■■ boss, not an Orwellian trying to cook the books.)
1 Like
I’d have to check, but the conventional wisdom is they (the preliminary estimates) began deteriorating pre-COVID but went completely off the rails post COVID
Yes and his argument is wrong.
Nonetheless a bias can -hypothetically- cause someone to refuse to fix something that should be fixed.
Factory foreman: “The assembly line is broken but I’m not going to fix it because I hate my boss and fixing it would help him.”
1 Like
Well then the question becomes why is the acceptable solution firing the head of the bureau? For a fellow who’s so fond of executive orders, why doesn’t he direct a new methodology to be found and used? For that matter if a legislative fix is required, he’s got an extremely compliant Congress: he could fix it.
