Liberal Forum

Trump redoubles attack on federal jobs data, calls numbers ‘political'.

“It’s a highly political situation,” Trump said Tuesday morning on CNBC’s “Squawk Box.” “It’s totally rigged.” Trump offered no evidence for his assertion, which his former BLS commissioner has said is not true.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business ... tatistics/

The guy who admitted, under oath, that the numbers to which he appended his signature are fiction. Whose auditor walked away from a DECADE'S worth of work.

TOADIES

ALLONS-Y!
 
 

Defending his action in the CNBC interview, Trump complained about the timing of previous jobs reports released by the bureau, but he got the timeline wrong. He said downward revisions of the number of new jobs in the economy happened only after he was elected president. Early last August, during Joe Biden’s presidency, the agency reported rising unemployment and a cooling jobs market. Later that month the bureau reported that the economy had created 818,000 fewer jobs than it had previously reported from April 2023 through March 2024, marking the largest annual revision to federal jobs data in 15 years.“STOCK MARKETS ARE CRASHING, JOBS NUMBERS ARE TERRIBLE, WE ARE HEADING TO WORLD WAR III, AND WE HAVE TWO OF THE MOST INCOMPETENT ‘LEADERS’ IN HISTORY,” Trump posted to Truth Social on Aug. 5, 2024, as he campaigned to replace Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris."THIS IS NOT GOOD!!!"

That downward revision was eclipsed by what the bureau reported Friday: Hiring in May and June dropped by a quarter-million jobs, a bigger decrease than previously reported. It is the steepest two-month downward revision on record outside the pandemic. Economists have attributed the slowdown in hiring in part to uncertainty fueled by Trump administration policies, including an erratic approach to trade, as well as elevated interest rates and federal spending cuts.
 
Ibid.


an unvarnished asshole.

A senior White House official, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss Trump’s thinking, said that the president’s objections to the BLS have “always been on his mind” and that the most recent revisions of the data were “the final step” that brought him to the decision to fire McEntarfer



Ibid.

Why would you request anonymity to offer such a statement?

To spare yourself the ruthless judgment of History. 

Trump sidestepped a question about whether his firing of McEntarfer would undermine confidence in the accuracy of the government’s number-crunching system if a future BLS report shows improvements. He instead pivoted back to his victory in the 2024 presidential race and maintained that this month’s weak unemployment report was driven by political interests.

 “When they say that nobody was involved, that it wasn’t political, give me a break,” Trump said.

Ibid.

Give us a break from the whinging, Donnie...

Ron Hetrick, a former BLS economist who oversaw the monthly employment statistics program, said he hopes McEntarfer’s ousting will put pressure on the next commissioner to provide transparency about the process behind the reports.

 “If the data comes in and continues to paint a story that isn’t popular, at least if someone is explaining it, then maybe it puts people at ease,” said Hetrick, now a principal economist at Lightcast, which provides labor market analytics. “That will make them more successful in light of what we’ve seen.”

Ibid.

Yes, Ron....we live in an Idiocracy...

Blackvegetable » 06 Aug 2025, 5:09 am » wrote: ↑

06 Aug 2025, 5:09 am

Trump redoubles attack on federal jobs data, calls numbers ‘political'.

“It’s a highly political situation,” Trump said Tuesday morning on CNBC’s “Squawk Box.” “It’s totally rigged.” Trump offered no evidence for his assertion, which his former BLS commissioner has said is not true.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business ... tatistics/

The guy who admitted, under oath, that the numbers to which he appended his signature are fiction. Whose auditor walked away from a DECADE'S worth of work.

TOADIES

ALLONS-Y!

Just for you: "**** you if you think I am going to define that for you.  Like I said, I am not your mother. Look it up."

Which scenario is an example of survivorship bias in evaluating business success?

A) Believing that reading business books increases revenue after finding many CEOs recommend them.
B) Concluding that most startups fail after analyzing bankrupt companies.
C) Thinking entrepreneurship is easy because most media profiles focus on successful founders.
D) Surveying customers to understand why they chose your product over competitors 

1. "I posted my definition of survivorship bias..." To which I will reply with the usual and the video. 
2. Continue with your step 4 evasion
3. Continue to copy me
4. Continue with non-answers.
5. November, 2022.
6. Continue to lie about me posting my definition in my example, while he continues to refuse to read it. 

 

Vegas » 06 Aug 2025, 9:12 am » wrote: ↑

06 Aug 2025, 9:12 am

Just for you: "**** you if you think I am going to define that for you.  Like I said, I am not your mother. Look it up."

Which scenario is an example of survivorship bias in evaluating business success?

A) Believing that reading business books increases revenue after finding many CEOs recommend them.
B) Concluding that most startups fail after analyzing bankrupt companies.
C) Thinking entrepreneurship is easy because most media profiles focus on successful founders.
D) Surveying customers to understand why they chose your product over competitors

Here's one now...


You there....idiot!

Post a definition of Survivorship bias in your own words.


 

Blackvegetable » 06 Aug 2025, 9:24 am » wrote: ↑

06 Aug 2025, 9:24 am

Here's one now...

You there....idiot!

Post a definition of Survivorship bias in your own words.

Just for you: "**** you if you think I am going to define that for you.  Like I said, I am not your mother. Look it up."

Which scenario is an example of survivorship bias in evaluating business success?

A) Believing that reading business books increases revenue after finding many CEOs recommend them.
B) Concluding that most startups fail after analyzing bankrupt companies.
C) Thinking entrepreneurship is easy because most media profiles focus on successful founders.
D) Surveying customers to understand why they chose your product over competitors 

1. "I posted my definition of survivorship bias..." To which I will reply with the usual and the video. 
2. Continue with your step 4 evasion
3. Continue to copy me
4. Continue with non-answers.
5. November, 2022.
6. Continue to lie about me posting my definition in my example, while he continues to refuse to read it.

 
 

Vegas » 06 Aug 2025, 9:26 am » wrote: ↑

06 Aug 2025, 9:26 am

Just for you: "**** you if you think I am going to define that for you.  Like I said, I am not your mother. Look it up."

Which scenario is an example of survivorship bias in evaluating business success?

A) Believing that reading business books increases revenue after finding many CEOs recommend them.
B) Concluding that most startups fail after analyzing bankrupt companies.
C) Thinking entrepreneurship is easy because most media profiles focus on successful founders.
D) Surveying customers to understand why they chose your product over competitors

Notice how @*VegasVagina avoids all mention of his "definition"

Blackvegetable » 06 Aug 2025, 9:37 am » wrote: ↑

06 Aug 2025, 9:37 am

Notice how @*VegasVagina avoids all mention of his "definition"

Just for you: "**** you if you think I am going to define that for you.  Like I said, I am not your mother. Look it up."

Which scenario is an example of survivorship bias in evaluating business success?

A) Believing that reading business books increases revenue after finding many CEOs recommend them.
B) Concluding that most startups fail after analyzing bankrupt companies.
C) Thinking entrepreneurship is easy because most media profiles focus on successful founders.
D) Surveying customers to understand why they chose your product over competitors 

1. "I posted my definition of survivorship bias..." To which I will reply with the usual and the video. 
2. Continue with your step 4 evasion
3. Continue to copy me
4. Continue with non-answers.
5. November, 2022.
6. Continue to lie about me posting my definition in my example, while he continues to refuse to read it. 

 

Blackvegetable » 06 Aug 2025, 9:37 am » wrote: ↑

06 Aug 2025, 9:37 am

Notice how @*VegasVagina avoids all mention of his "definition"

He seems stuck on a loop

Did you see where tRump said that they were gonna lower drug prices by “up to 1500%”?

can’t wait 

must mean that I get paid 1400% of the price for just picking them up 

Mrkelly » 06 Aug 2025, 6:35 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Aug 2025, 6:35 pm

He seems stuck on a loop

Did you see where tRump said that they were gonna lower drug prices by “up to 1500%”?

can’t wait 

must mean that I get paid 1400% of the price for just picking them up

B...b...b...b...but age related cognitive decline!

These people need to be euthanized...for the children.

Blackvegetable » 06 Aug 2025, 5:09 am » wrote: ↑

06 Aug 2025, 5:09 am

Trump redoubles attack on federal jobs data, calls numbers ‘political'.

“It’s a highly political situation,” Trump said Tuesday morning on CNBC’s “Squawk Box.” “It’s totally rigged.” Trump offered no evidence for his assertion, which his former BLS commissioner has said is not true.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business ... tatistics/

The guy who admitted, under oath, that the numbers to which he appended his signature are fiction. Whose auditor walked away from a DECADE'S worth of work.

TOADIES

ALLONS-Y!

         

The numbers my administration is turning out are NOT TO BE TRUSTED. 

You have my word on it!!!
 

Cannonpointer » 06 Aug 2025, 7:23 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Aug 2025, 7:23 pm

Blackvegetable » 06 Aug 2025, 5:09 am » wrote: ↑

06 Aug 2025, 5:09 am

Trump redoubles attack on federal jobs data, calls numbers ‘political'.

“It’s a highly political situation,” Trump said Tuesday morning on CNBC’s “Squawk Box.” “It’s totally rigged.” Trump offered no evidence for his assertion, which his former BLS commissioner has said is not true.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business ... tatistics/

The guy who admitted, under oath, that the numbers to which he appended his signature are fiction. Whose auditor walked away from a DECADE'S worth of work.

TOADIES

ALLONS-Y!

         

The numbers my administration is turning out are NOT TO BE TRUSTED. 

You have my word on it!!!

My apologies.

I was doing an impression, and I failed - failed critically - to make it ALL CAPS!!!!!

Blackvegetable » 06 Aug 2025, 8:26 am » wrote: ↑

06 Aug 2025, 8:26 am

Ron Hetrick, a former BLS economist who oversaw the monthly employment statistics program, said he hopes McEntarfer’s ousting will put pressure on the next commissioner to provide transparency about the process behind the reports.

 “If the data comes in and continues to paint a story that isn’t popular, at least if someone is explaining it, then maybe it puts people at ease,” said Hetrick, now a principal economist at Lightcast, which provides labor market analytics. “That will make them more successful in light of what we’ve seen.”

Ibid.

Yes, Ron....we live in an Idiocracy...

Okay, I took in all five of your posts. I have seen the evidence. And I have worked out a response.

Why are you a communist?

Mrkelly » 06 Aug 2025, 6:35 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Aug 2025, 6:35 pm

He seems stuck on a loop

Did you see where tRump said that they were gonna lower drug prices by “up to 1500%”?

can’t wait 

must mean that I get paid 1400% of the price for just picking them up

Oh, I think you will find you are incorrect about that.     

Cannonpointer » 06 Aug 2025, 7:27 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Aug 2025, 7:27 pm

Okay, I took in all five of your posts. I have seen the evidence. And I have worked out a response.

Why are you a communist?

I like the gruel.

Blackvegetable » 06 Aug 2025, 7:36 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Aug 2025, 7:36 pm

I like the gruel.

That's a good answer. Every man has a right to his tastes. 
 

Cannonpointer » 06 Aug 2025, 7:38 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Aug 2025, 7:38 pm

That's a good answer. Every man has a right to his tastes.

The Krispi Gnomes ain't bad..  

Mrkelly » 06 Aug 2025, 6:35 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Aug 2025, 6:35 pm

He seems stuck on a loop

Did you see where tRump said that they were gonna lower drug prices by “up to 1500%”?

can’t wait 

must mean that I get paid 1400% of the price for just picking them up