Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Laura PourMeADrink

(42,770 posts)

3. Yes. Something totally amiss here. Economists

Reply to Proud liberal 80 (Original post)

Fri Jun 5, 2020, 08:53 AM

Jun 2020

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)

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

26 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Cooking the numbers [View all] Proud liberal 80 Jun 2020 OP

That was my first thought idziak4ever1234 Jun 2020 #1

Exactly. moondust Jun 2020 #2

Yes. Something totally amiss here. Economists Laura PourMeADrink Jun 2020 #3

I think Radner's point is that Claustrum Jun 2020 #4

And there's also the effect of the "enhanced" unemployment Laura PourMeADrink Jun 2020 #8

somebody on Twitter said that furloughed octoberlib Jun 2020 #5

That's interesting. Even if their employer didn't really Laura PourMeADrink Jun 2020 #9

Yep. If they're furloughed they haven't been octoberlib Jun 2020 #11

Maybe they didn't adjust for non-farm Bettie Jun 2020 #6

You mean adjust when they predicted? Laura PourMeADrink Jun 2020 #10

Generally, they adjust for seasonal workers Bettie Jun 2020 #15

I know! Delphinus Jun 2020 #7

Yeah the numbers look like total BS and contradict earlier reports this week. lark Jun 2020 #12

No one can cook Dept Labor job stats Cicada Jun 2020 #13

And you think trump wouldn't Proud liberal 80 Jun 2020 #14

Too many documents must match Cicada Jun 2020 #16

"DOL would refuse to lie!" - hahahahaha! lagomorph777 Jun 2020 #20

No. Former Obama official say you are zero percent likely to be correct on motive Cicada Jun 2020 #22

I don't think former officials have any idea how much damage Turd has done to agencies. lagomorph777 Jun 2020 #26

Oh, please. Millions of payroll reports mean nothing. lagomorph777 Jun 2020 #19

No. Cicada Jun 2020 #23

It's Still 13+% ProfessorGAC Jun 2020 #17

I have been having the same suspicion. Just too wildly discordant from expectatiopns. lagomorph777 Jun 2020 #18

The BLS is staffed by career professionals, they are not Trump lackeys. tritsofme Jun 2020 #21

Here is why it is discordant Cicada Jun 2020 #24

I believe you have responded to the wrong post. tritsofme Jun 2020 #25