The White House comedy minute

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by PracticalMac, Mar 13, 2017.

  1. PracticalMac, Mar 13, 2017
    Last edited: Mar 13, 2017

    PracticalMac macrumors 68030

    PracticalMac

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #1
    New topic on comments from White House or TrumpTwitter that would be funny, where it not from the most powerful office on earth.

    Applies to everyone working in WH, and Congress acting on WH efforts.

    Starting off Mar 10, 2017 press briefing on jobs report
     
  2. ibookg409 Suspended

    ibookg409

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2016
    Location:
    Portsmouth, NH
    #2
    A minuet? Were they dancing in a ballroom?
     
  3. PracticalMac thread starter macrumors 68030

    PracticalMac

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #3
    Fixed it just before I read your post.

    BTW, you think previous reports were wrong?
     
  4. ibookg409 Suspended

    ibookg409

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2016
    Location:
    Portsmouth, NH
    #4
    Previous reports of what?
     
  5. PracticalMac thread starter macrumors 68030

    PracticalMac

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #5
    Previous jobs reports reporting gains of tens of thousands of jobs (around 200,000) per month under Obama.
     
  6. ibookg409 Suspended

    ibookg409

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2016
    Location:
    Portsmouth, NH
    #6
    I honestly don't care. Every jobs report for the past 16 years has been BS, with the number constantly being amended months after being issued and felonious twisting of the numbers to include certain people but other others. It's all upside down. I am sure they are lying about the numbers now just as they have lied about them for the past 180 months.
     
  7. PracticalMac, Mar 13, 2017
    Last edited: Mar 13, 2017

    PracticalMac thread starter macrumors 68030

    PracticalMac

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #7
    1. Jobs Report has always been a best estimate, it is not exact and they will admit
    2. Revisions are usually less than 10%
    3. US business heavily rely on that report for business decisions, including prices of goods we buy.
     
  8. samcraig macrumors P6

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    #8
    The "issue" for me is less about the actual accuracy but rather the pivots Trump makes whether he wants to claim credit or blame the previous administration. The formulas haven't changed. The way of reporting hasn't changed.
     
  9. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #9
    Um, no. There are revisions because additional data comes in later. Same as lots of things in life and the business world.
     
  10. Raid macrumors 68020

    Raid

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    Toronto
    #10
    I'm puzzled by your opinion on the work of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Is it based in the removal of people not actively looking for work? That would be a definition issue, an issue which is not new, and yes problematic but not "lying". There are both pro's and con's to including this segment in over-all unemployment figures; but the hard line many federal agencies have been using is that you have to be looking for work, but not have a job to be considered unemployed.
     
  11. ibookg409 Suspended

    ibookg409

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2016
    Location:
    Portsmouth, NH
    #11
    Perhaps it doesn't fit the definition of lying but it isn't an accurate reporting of the percentage. Having different values for people out of the workforce, people on unemployment, people under employed, etc. is an issue. Depending on which value is used paints a different picture of what the state of the employment force and economy really is. I take issue with that. And when ALL of the parameters aren't discussed openly I consider that misleading the public. And it has been going on for a long time.
     
  12. Raid macrumors 68020

    Raid

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    Toronto
    #12
    Basic math tells us that if you change one variable in the equation the result would be different, so obviously the picture it paints would be different. So I'm not sure what your issue is other than who is included and excluded in which statistic. The BLS does a pretty good job at not only being detailed about the factors it uses, but the changes in definitions over time, and the reasoning behind the changes. Perhaps it seems like 'ALL parameters aren't discussed openly' because getting into the low level details (like underemployment and those not seeking work) have different nuances to them that are both difficult to gather and longer to process. It's not misleading, just problematic. I will say at times it's important to track, but the better indicators of the changes to the labour force and the economy are still represented well.
     
  13. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #13
    Right. The argument that the BLS analysis might hold some water, but it's clear that the Trumpers only thought the BLS numbers were rigged when the reports undercut their ideological arguments. Now that their man is in town, suddenly good BLS numbers are reasons for celebration.

    These people are liars.
     

Share This Page