My Thoughts on the firing of the BLS Commissioner
I spent over 6 years working for the Census Bureau, of which three and a half were spent in Statistical Methods Division
https://x.com/JDVance/status/19654403060...
JD Vance
@JDVance
It’s difficult to overstate how useless BLS data had become. A change was necessary ton restore confidence.
/
Context: BLS revised april 24-march25 jobs -900k (!!!!)
This size of a revision without anything unusual going on (no dramatic crisis or whatever) is actually unprecedented.
Maybe something is actually rotten in BLS measuring? obviously a ******ed new boss and 1/3 of high level vacancies won't fix it so let's be clear i am not revising my previous takes.
But *we should all be worried about that big of a revision under normal macroeconomic conditions* regardless of political leaning. Especially because the actual experts i follow are puzzled by it as well and don't seem to have an easy answer about how to avoid it in the future, or what to fix
https://x.com/JDVance/status/19654403060...JD Vance@JDVanceIt’s difficult to overstate how useless BLS data had become. A change was necessary ton restore confidence./Context: BLS revised april 24-march25 jobs -900k (!!!!)This size of a revision without anything unusual going on (no dramatic crisis or whatever) is actually unprecedented.Maybe something is actually rotten i
Like I said, a feature not a bug. "The only reliable information is that which comes directly from me" is Authoritarianism 101.
JD Vance@JDVanceIt’s difficult to overstate how useless BLS data had become. A change was neceBut *we should all be worried about that big of a revision under normal macroeconomic conditions* regardless of political leaning. Especially because the actual experts i follow are puzzled by it as well and don't seem to have an easy answer about how to avoid it in the future, or what
Cmon dude, trump wants people to think "his" economy is great when it clearly isn't--which will benefit his billionaire friends. That's pretty much the beginning and end of it.
Cmon dude, trump wants people to think "his" economy is great when it clearly isn't--which will benefit his billionaire friends. That's pretty much the beginning and end of it.
clearly the normal way to do that would be to fill the agency with sycophants who are skilled enough to produce credible enough numbers, like china does.
not by nominating a ****** who knows nothing of the topic at the head and leaving major coordinating roles empty.
and btw if he generates Better numbers than reality that will make the fed less likely to cut which is what he wants to achieve.
clearly the normal way to do that would be to fill the agency with sycophants who are skilled enough to produce credible enough numbers, like china does.
not by nominating a ****** who knows nothing of the topic at the head and leaving major coordinating roles empty.
This makes sense because finding compete, intelligent Trump sycophants who are good at their highly technical job is super easy! Obama had Steve Chu in his cabinet, I'm sure Trump has dozens of people at that level.
This makes sense because finding compete, intelligent Trump sycophants who are good at their highly technical job is super easy! Obama had Steve Chu in his cabinet, I'm sure Trump has dozens of people at that level.
I mean there is a large number of quants who would be willing to sell their souls for money (they actually already do), and it's VERY easy to make A LOT of money as a key BLS employee that has advanced notice on key macro data and colleagues still managing billions, if the doj/sec are complacent with that.
at least that's how I would set it up
https://x.com/JDVance/status/19654403060...JD Vance@JDVanceIt’s difficult to overstate how useless BLS data had become. A change was necessary ton restore confidence./Context: BLS revised april 24-march25 jobs -900k (!!!!)This size of a revision without anything unusual going on (no dramatic crisis or whatever) is actually unprecedented.Maybe something is actually rotten i
The data is actually collected by the Census Bureau through "The Current Population Survey (CPS)."
"The Current Population Survey (CPS), sponsored jointly by the U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), is the primary source of labor force statistics for the population of the United States."
I actually worked a little bit on CPS when I worked for the Census Bureau from 1975-1981. So the problem could actually be here and not with BLS.
clearly the normal way to do that would be to fill the agency with sycophants who are skilled enough to produce credible enough numbers, like china does.
Trump and his merry band of pranksters aren't as skilled as Chinese leadership at this sort thing.
Vance’s statement is a blatant lie. They don’t care at all about restoring confidence. Like with election fraud or 125 year olds getting social security checks they will never come back and say “after detailed investigation this is not actually happening so the public can be confident eections are secure and money is not being wasted on massive fraud”. Lying to undermine confidence is their whole goal.
Correct. People like Trump want the public to be as cynical as possible. Cynicism is a great friend of authoritarianism.
I mean there is a large number of quants who would be willing to sell their souls for money (they actually already do), and it's VERY easy to make A LOT of money as a key BLS employee that has advanced notice on key macro data and colleagues still managing billions, if the doj/sec are complacent with that.
at least that's how I would set it up
No reason to think quants with no experience in even collecting and compiling this kind of data could come in and convincingly peddle BS numbers.
Vance’s statement is a blatant lie. They don’t care at all about restoring confidence. Like with election fraud or 125 year olds getting social security checks they will never come back and say “after detailed investigation this is not actually happening so the public can be confident eections are secure and money is not being wasted on massive fraud”.
How do you know this?
It seems obvious to me that there are problems with the numbers. The revisions that the numbers are going through are too large and too frequent for anyone to have much confidence in them. And again, while it was some time ago, I do have direct experience working with this stuff.
Also, whether you think Trump is wonderful or the opposite, the numbers that BLS/Census are producing should speak for themselves.
It comes down to having a working brain mostly. The election and social security lies have already happened with 0 effort to restore public trust. You have to be pretty uninformed to think they suddenly care about public trust now.
https://x.com/JDVance/status/19654403060...JD Vance@JDVanceIt’s difficult to overstate how useless BLS data had become. A change was necessary ton restore confidence./Context: BLS revised april 24-march25 jobs -900k (!!!!)This size of a revision without anything unusual going on (no dramatic crisis or whatever) is actually unprecedented.Maybe something is actually ro
You said something accurate for once... I had to double-check the username. lol
I posted some links to bipartisan and neutral domestic and international economic analysis in the Trump thread, on the state of the economy when Trump took over in January. There are many ways to evaluate the state of the US economy, outside of just BLS numbers, as we all know. All indicators were that it was in a great place on hand off.
In order to believe there isn't some funny business happening w/ these two recent unprecedented revisions by Trump's team, that has never happened in US history outside of times of major economic disaster is, you'd also need to believe:
1) Trump doesn't have a history of asking people to preform illegal actions, like changing the number of votes in Georgia.
2) The White House’s public narrative about “bad” numbers, followed by “the revisions will prove us right,” did not influence methodological choices or post-hoc justifications at the agencies.
3) External economists’ reactions (including market voices like Jamie Dimon flagging weakness post-revision) reflect independent analysis rather than politicized amplification, and they see the revisions as methodologically sound.
4) The administration’s criticism of BLS integrity on the one hand, and reliance on the revised figures on the other, are consistent positions rather than selective skepticism.
5) Independent fact-checkers finding no evidence of “rigged” jobs numbers are correct on the merits, and their conclusions hold even after the record payroll revision.
I think you're absent a brain quite frankly, if you don't think this isn't about Trump's long history of blame shifting when his bad ideas fail.
They revised -800k last year
This is normal
The absolute numbers are high because our population is high. 900k is like .5% of our jobs market
They revised -800k last year
This is normal
The absolute numbers are high because our population is high. 900k is like .5% of our jobs market
Are you playing Fox news devil's advocate? 😀
They revised -800k last year
This is normal
The absolute numbers are high because our population is high. 900k is like .5% of our jobs market
It isn't normal. -800k was till for a covid year. -900 on a non-covid , non -macro absurd event is a lot more than the biggest ever before.
It's not normal at all and the fed decides monetary policy on far smaller variations than that routinely.
It isn't normal. -800k was till for a covid year. -900 on a non-covid , non -macro absurd event is a lot more than the biggest ever before.
It's not normal at all and the fed decides monetary policy on far smaller variations than that routinely.
And yet the market doesnt care much about revised numbers.
We are at all time high in a variety of assets shrug.
