Even the empirical government data that we do
have is subject to "criticism and doubt." For
example, how easy was it for the GOP to convince
us that teen pregnancy was going up in the
90's, even though according to the government
data it had decreased dramatically? And how
easily are they convincing us that this anemic
recovery is actually boundless prosperity? My
guess is, if Al Qaeda does nuke us,
the republicans will tell us to go outside
and enjoy the sunshine.

Nathan, frankly, you'e making yourself look ridiculous on this -- Doug Henwood is slciing you to bits over on LBO-Talk. The fact that we don't spend "enough" (how much would that be?) on collecting statistics says NOTHING in support any particular critique of the employment numbers.

BTW, you notice that Mickey kaus is another fan of Crudele?

Josh-- Doug Henwood doesn't like Crudele, but the fact remains that Crudele was one of the only major business analysts who called this low jobs report.

Doug and others might say that Crudele got the right answer for the wrong reason, but Crudele was consistently skeptical of the "job boom" in the Spring.

And part of the point of the criticism is not whether the current stats are even more "right" than in the past, but that they are a poor guide to comparison with past recessions because of changes in methodology. How many jobs "get created" today isn't comparable to stats from the past, which is a big problem since all of these numbers are meaningless in many ways except for such comparisons.

Hello? Is this thing on? BLS "seasonally-adjusts" its numbers, kiddies. Crudele is talking out his hat.

Nathan, I've read at elast a dozen long posts by you on this subject, plus this blog entry, and I still don't have a clue what your point is.

Is seasonal adjustment funadmentally illegitimate? (That seems to be Crudele's point.)

Do you have a specific criticism of the BLS's methods for making seasonal adjustments. (That's what seems to be implied by your handwave here toward "the economic models used by the Labor statisticians." But Crudele doesn;t offer any such criticism.)

Do you think we should not make any statements about the performance of the economy based on employment reports from the BLS? (That's what your response to me here seems to say. But come on.)

Also, what "changes in methodology" are you talking about? And what's your specific critique of the BLS's methods for accounting for those changes?

And finally, re Crudele, it's wrong to say, as you do, that "Doug might say Crudele got the right answer for the wrong reasons." He does say that, very forcefully. Crudele's only point, as far as I can tell, is that seasonal adjustments and models for firm birth/death are illegitimate because they sound kinda complicated. Neither here nor on LBO-Talk have you added anything to that point.

I'm harping on this so much b/c as someone who depends on your good judgement in our respetive professional lives, your inability to back down on a point where you're so obviously wrong is kind of troubling...

Seems to me like many of these reports are
designed to purposely confuse people like me
(who are not economists). What I know is
we need a certain number of jobs just to keep
up with population growth, and as the
poplulation grows that number also increases.
So the thing about old methodology being an
unreliable indicator of present conditions makes
perfect sense to me in that context. It also
makes sense to me that the government should
"apply more resources" (maybe "spend more money"
is too strong a term) to ensure that the numbers
are more reliable, since the BLS is constantly
having to do it over two or three times before
they get it right. Tell me, if we can't rely
on the government to provide solid numbers,
who do we turn to? Private firms who are more
susceptable to bribery and coersion?

Can someone please explain how to find out what the jobs reports (jobs created) really comes from. Is this also factoring in the jobs created by American companies that were outsourcing? My husband has been laid off (even if this really means that the jobs were filled by other less qualified less wage workers hired) for a year and a half. All our stock investments now gone and soon to lose a home that we had both worked for 20 years.
You would probably want to ask about me working, well I don't, I am disabled with MS, 2 strokes and 4 by-passes so my income is only 450.00 a month, and losing insurance in November.
So I need to know who how many of these jobs were actually in this country and does this number include part time jobs at minimum wage.
Hope I can get and answer.
Thank you for reading.

pat.healey@comcast.net

Can someone please explain how to find out what the jobs reports (jobs created) really comes from. Is this also factoring in the jobs created by American companies that were outsourcing? My husband has been laid off (even if this really means that the jobs were filled by other less qualified less wage workers hired) for a year and a half. All our stock investments now gone and soon to lose a home that we had both worked for 20 years.
You would probably want to ask about me working, well I don't, I am disabled with MS, 2 strokes and 4 by-passes so my income is only 450.00 a month, and losing insurance in November.
So I need to know who how many of these jobs were actually in this country and does this number include part time jobs at minimum wage.
Hope I can get and answer.
Thank you for reading.

pat.healey@comcast.net

The best online casino bonues online and much more right at your fingertips. If you're looking for great UK Casinos then you'll definatly want to check out some of the quality sites features here!