HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Cooking the numbers

Fri Jun 5, 2020, 08:43 AM

Cooking the numbers

Remember how Trump use to say Obama was cooking the jobs report numbers....he reflects things on people that he would do....

26 replies, 1235 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 26 replies Author Time Post
Reply Cooking the numbers (Original post)
Proud liberal 80 Jun 2020 OP
idziak4ever1234 Jun 2020 #1
moondust Jun 2020 #2
Laura PourMeADrink Jun 2020 #3
Claustrum Jun 2020 #4
Laura PourMeADrink Jun 2020 #8
octoberlib Jun 2020 #5
Laura PourMeADrink Jun 2020 #9
octoberlib Jun 2020 #11
Bettie Jun 2020 #6
Laura PourMeADrink Jun 2020 #10
Bettie Jun 2020 #15
Delphinus Jun 2020 #7
lark Jun 2020 #12
Cicada Jun 2020 #13
Proud liberal 80 Jun 2020 #14
Cicada Jun 2020 #16
lagomorph777 Jun 2020 #20
Cicada Jun 2020 #22
lagomorph777 Jun 2020 #26
lagomorph777 Jun 2020 #19
Cicada Jun 2020 #23
ProfessorGAC Jun 2020 #17
lagomorph777 Jun 2020 #18
tritsofme Jun 2020 #21
Cicada Jun 2020 #24
tritsofme Jun 2020 #25

Response to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Fri Jun 5, 2020, 08:48 AM

1. That was my first thought

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Fri Jun 5, 2020, 08:49 AM

2. Exactly.

Everybody knows he'll just get rid of anybody who won't cook the books to make him look good and replace them with a spineless toady.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Fri Jun 5, 2020, 08:53 AM

3. Yes. Something totally amiss here. Economists

expected 7.5 m in job losses, ADP payrolls showed a couple mill in job losses. And now labor reporting gain of 2.5 m?

There's gotta be an explanation.

Trump forcing someone to tinker?

Of course you've got possible PPP rehires? Steve Radner said maybe businesses who were closed didn't report last month? ( not sure how that would help)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Laura PourMeADrink (Reply #3)

Fri Jun 5, 2020, 09:01 AM

4. I think Radner's point is that

I think Radner's point (clearly his guess) is that the job loss is calculated by self report from the businesses. If the businesses are closed and don't self report, then there would be no job loss reported.

Anyways, the math doesn't seem to add up. While a lot of the country has reopen (even so, I don't think anywhere has re-open 100%), it just doesn't make sense that half of the 40 millions that went on unemployment in the last 3 months has already gone back to work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Claustrum (Reply #4)

Fri Jun 5, 2020, 09:11 AM

8. And there's also the effect of the "enhanced" unemployment

dollars - the extra $600 - which gave some people more than usual take home pay who might wait it out?

On the other side, companies who received PPP money, may have rehired people who went on unemployment initially, so they could pay them with PPP $ ?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Fri Jun 5, 2020, 09:05 AM

5. somebody on Twitter said that furloughed

workers were counted as unemployed then when states open up they’re counted as employed .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to octoberlib (Reply #5)

Fri Jun 5, 2020, 09:13 AM

9. That's interesting. Even if their employer didn't really

Open back up? Not sure I understand the difference between furloughed and unemployed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Laura PourMeADrink (Reply #9)

Fri Jun 5, 2020, 09:24 AM

11. Yep. If they're furloughed they haven't been

laid off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Fri Jun 5, 2020, 09:05 AM

6. Maybe they didn't adjust for non-farm

payroll.

A lot of seasonal farm work right now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bettie (Reply #6)

Fri Jun 5, 2020, 09:15 AM

10. You mean adjust when they predicted?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Laura PourMeADrink (Reply #10)

Fri Jun 5, 2020, 11:39 AM

15. Generally, they adjust for seasonal workers

when calculating it.

Who knows what they did, but I expect there will be a quiet adjustment next week.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Fri Jun 5, 2020, 09:07 AM

7. I know!

I read it and said - no (colorful word) way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Fri Jun 5, 2020, 09:26 AM

12. Yeah the numbers look like total BS and contradict earlier reports this week.

Everything drumpf touches dies or is turned into a self-serving lie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Fri Jun 5, 2020, 10:21 AM

13. No one can cook Dept Labor job stats

It’s too complicated and millions of payroll reports will tie into dollars received for payroll taxes. Plus the states also get payroll tax reports which duplicate IRS job numbers. Plus the private payroll giant ADP publishes its reports which track Labor dept figures very closely. Dept Labor payroll reports are more reliable than the voice of god. When they release their reports the markets move trillions of dollars within 30 seconds, knowing its rock solid. So we know how many people worked. We have payroll tax received to prove it. Some items are based on surveys, just like opinion polls. People can give an incorrect answer to Are you looking for work. But the number who worked? Can’t be fudged.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cicada (Reply #13)

Fri Jun 5, 2020, 10:56 AM

14. And you think trump wouldn't

Tell them to report something different like he told his doctor To say he was 244 pounds

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud liberal 80 (Reply #14)

Fri Jun 5, 2020, 12:29 PM

16. Too many documents must match

DOL would refuse to lie. Jobs there aren’t valuable, easy to get a similar job. Alteration would be obvious so pointless.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cicada (Reply #16)

Fri Jun 5, 2020, 12:48 PM

20. "DOL would refuse to lie!" - hahahahaha!

That's so quaint. Anybody who refuses to lie for Trump gets immediately shitcanned.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lagomorph777 (Reply #20)

Sat Jun 6, 2020, 03:12 AM

22. No. Former Obama official say you are zero percent likely to be correct on motive

No one noticed a footnote added to the report today which stated that because of the virus the way they classify answers caused the Reported unemployment rate to be more than 3% too low. And that this issue about how to classify people home because of the virus first arose in March and continues. A former Obama official says that this peculiarity has zero percent chance, not one percent, not two percent chance of being due to intentional error, but precisely zero percent. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/06/05/may-2020-jobs-report-misclassification-error/?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_source=twitter

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cicada (Reply #22)

Sun Jun 7, 2020, 12:55 AM

26. I don't think former officials have any idea how much damage Turd has done to agencies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cicada (Reply #13)

Fri Jun 5, 2020, 12:47 PM

19. Oh, please. Millions of payroll reports mean nothing.

The only thing that matters is who writes the public report.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lagomorph777 (Reply #19)

Sat Jun 6, 2020, 03:19 AM

23. No.

No one initially noticed a footnote stating the reported unemployment rate understates the real rate by more than three percent. The reason for this discrepancy is not intentional error but a peculiarity of how those home because of virus are classified. The footnote says this problem in the way such answers are classified first arose in March and that the labor department is working on how to correct this. A former Obama official explained that the chance this arose from intentional desire to fudge the number is precisely zero percent. Not one percent, not two percent, but zero percent. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/06/05/may-2020-jobs-report-misclassification-error/?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_source=twitter

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Fri Jun 5, 2020, 12:44 PM

17. It's Still 13+%

Not exactly time for a victory lap!
All this report says is the situation sucks a bit less.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Fri Jun 5, 2020, 12:45 PM

18. I have been having the same suspicion. Just too wildly discordant from expectatiopns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Fri Jun 5, 2020, 12:49 PM

21. The BLS is staffed by career professionals, they are not Trump lackeys.

Trump made false charges about the Obama era BLS because he is a moron, let’s not emulate his stupidity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tritsofme (Reply #21)

Sat Jun 6, 2020, 03:27 AM

24. Here is why it is discordant

No one initially noticed a footnote explaining a problem in how staying home because of virus is classified. The report footnote explained the “real” unemployment rate is actually more than three percent higher. This issue in how “home because of virus” is classified first arose in March and DOL is working on how Best to correct this misclassification. A former Obama official explained how this classification issue has zero percent chance of being due to a decision to mislead to benefit Trump. So your instinct of something being off was 100% right. The idea that it was due to Trumpduggery is wrong. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/06/05/may-2020-jobs-report-misclassification-error/?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_source=twitter

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cicada (Reply #24)

Sat Jun 6, 2020, 06:17 AM

25. I believe you have responded to the wrong post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread