Did you guys just see the latest job report? The forecast was so off

[Anonymous]

data is fake, nothing they say you can believe as others have said

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also regarding BLS numbers. They're not reporting all of the numbers like they have in the past. They're only reporting certain data points and that helps them skew their numbers to fit their narrative. The data points, which will show huge swings in the negative are not even being reported so they're not impacting the statistical calculation.

Lying about jobs numbers actually makes it less likely the Fed will cut rates. For instance, the market had been pricing in a rate cut in June. Now due to these "better than expected" numbers, it's being priced in for July. If they want their rate cuts, it would actually behoove them to lie in the opposite direction, though of course then that would conflict with the "best economy ever" narrative.

Why do you think the Fed will consider data any longer after May?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also regarding BLS numbers. They're not reporting all of the numbers like they have in the past. They're only reporting certain data points and that helps them skew their numbers to fit their narrative. The data points, which will show huge swings in the negative are not even being reported so they're not impacting the statistical calculation.

Lying about jobs numbers actually makes it less likely the Fed will cut rates. For instance, the market had been pricing in a rate cut in June. Now due to these "better than expected" numbers, it's being priced in for July. If they want their rate cuts, it would actually behoove them to lie in the opposite direction, though of course then that would conflict with the "best economy ever" narrative.

Why do you think the Fed will consider data any longer after May?

The new Fed chair is on record saying that he won’t cut rates just for mortgages.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also regarding BLS numbers. They're not reporting all of the numbers like they have in the past. They're only reporting certain data points and that helps them skew their numbers to fit their narrative. The data points, which will show huge swings in the negative are not even being reported so they're not impacting the statistical calculation.

Lying about jobs numbers actually makes it less likely the Fed will cut rates. For instance, the market had been pricing in a rate cut in June. Now due to these "better than expected" numbers, it's being priced in for July. If they want their rate cuts, it would actually behoove them to lie in the opposite direction, though of course then that would conflict with the "best economy ever" narrative.

Why do you think the Fed will consider data any longer after May?

You do realize the FOMC consists of more voting members than just the chair right? There is nothing to suggest the rest of the board is going to just magically fall in line.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The data is not fake. I am a Democrat so sure I could jump on it to fit a narrative, but that will disingenuous.

There is raw data available for this. The methodology has not changed.

What people forget is that under all previous administration BLS has always been the punching bag as far as agency experiencing budget cut.

The BLS is under staffed. And the methodology they use require lots of human resources. And response rates have been decreasing. This explain the wild revisions we have been seeing lately.

Read the report closely.

Let me ask you a question. If you think this is fa, do you also think that the revisions that essentially wiped out all jobs created for 2025 were also fake? There were from the same report.

This. The people here are crackpot conspiracy theorists. Monthly data gets revised after its first estimate. November and December were both revised down in this report. Annual data gets revised regularly too. The downward revision for the past year is a level change to re-anchor the series based on complete data, not a flow change like the monthly data. Basically, there were 158,377,000 people employed in March 2025 instead of the previous reported 159,275,000. The monthly revisions (reflecting actual developments in the labor market) were much less.

There is more data than just the BLS surveys. The Fed is not making decisions off of one data point.

Finally, don’t hang on to one month’s data. Data is noisy.

[Anonymous]

Lies! All lies!

Does anyone actually believe anything from this administration? Seriously!

[Anonymous]

It's all manipulated now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
This part actually doesn't surprise me because the jobs that are being added are low paying jobs in Healthcare and social services.

Yeah, losing 100k hybrid analyst jobs and gaining 18/hr butt wiping jobs isn't a great thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The data is not fake. I am a Democrat so sure I could jump on it to fit a narrative, but that will disingenuous.

There is raw data available for this. The methodology has not changed.

What people forget is that under all previous administration BLS has always been the punching bag as far as agency experiencing budget cut.

The BLS is under staffed. And the methodology they use require lots of human resources. And response rates have been decreasing. This explain the wild revisions we have been seeing lately.

Read the report closely.

Let me ask you a question. If you think this is fa, do you also think that the revisions that essentially wiped out all jobs created for 2025 were also fake? There were from the same report.

This. The people here are crackpot conspiracy theorists. Monthly data gets revised after its first estimate. November and December were both revised down in this report. Annual data gets revised regularly too. The downward revision for the past year is a level change to re-anchor the series based on complete data, not a flow change like the monthly data. Basically, there were 158,377,000 people employed in March 2025 instead of the previous reported 159,275,000. The monthly revisions (reflecting actual developments in the labor market) were much less.

There is more data than just the BLS surveys. The Fed is not making decisions off of one data point.

Finally, don’t hang on to one month’s data. Data is noisy.

There is another independent count of private sector job creation every month from a payroll company called ADP. Their count for January is 22k. The government count is 172k (private sector only). That's almost 8x bigger. For context both the ADP and gov average for 2025 is about 30k.

As for the revisions - no I don't believe them. The revisions serve two political purposes.

First it raises job creation in January 2026 by pushing it down in previous months. It's a shell game.

Second, the unrevised counts showed that job creation didn't fall off a cliff until 6 months after Trump took office. The revisions push job losses closer to Biden’s term.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The data is not fake. I am a Democrat so sure I could jump on it to fit a narrative, but that will disingenuous.

There is raw data available for this. The methodology has not changed.

What people forget is that under all previous administration BLS has always been the punching bag as far as agency experiencing budget cut.

The BLS is under staffed. And the methodology they use require lots of human resources. And response rates have been decreasing. This explain the wild revisions we have been seeing lately.

Read the report closely.

Let me ask you a question. If you think this is fa, do you also think that the revisions that essentially wiped out all jobs created for 2025 were also fake? There were from the same report.

This. The people here are crackpot conspiracy theorists. Monthly data gets revised after its first estimate. November and December were both revised down in this report. Annual data gets revised regularly too. The downward revision for the past year is a level change to re-anchor the series based on complete data, not a flow change like the monthly data. Basically, there were 158,377,000 people employed in March 2025 instead of the previous reported 159,275,000. The monthly revisions (reflecting actual developments in the labor market) were much less.

There is more data than just the BLS surveys. The Fed is not making decisions off of one data point.

Finally, don’t hang on to one month’s data. Data is noisy.

There is another independent count of private sector job creation every month from a payroll company called ADP. Their count for January is 22k. The government count is 172k (private sector only). That's almost 8x bigger. For context both the ADP and gov average for 2025 is about 30k.

As for the revisions - no I don't believe them. The revisions serve two political purposes.

First it raises job creation in January 2026 by pushing it down in previous months. It's a shell game.

Second, the unrevised counts showed that job creation didn't fall off a cliff until 6 months after Trump took office. The revisions push job losses closer to Biden’s term.

There are a lot of individual months where ADP and BLS diverge. When job growth was better (pre-Trump) there were months with discrepancies in the hundreds of thousands, especially with the first BLS estimate of the month.

There is no political gain in revising down past months’ jobs figures. If you believe the numbers are cooked, you don’t need to revise down past months to revise up this month. There is no political gain to revising down 11 of the past 12 months (during all of which Trump has been president). Again, if the numbers are cooked you simply would not do this.

[Anonymous]

A friend that was working at a 3 letter agency told me for the first time in 30+ years they were given directives that all information leaving the agency had to match the agenda of this presidency. Multiple people were fired for not conforming to a narrative, so I agree with others I do not believe a dang thing coming out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did you guys just see the latest job report?

Wow the forecast was so off. 130k jobs added vs 55k estimated.

health care led job gains in December, adding 82,000 positions. Social assistance also rose, up 42,000

The jobs added reinforced an aging population with only 1 sector namely health care being the only sector continually adding jobs.

The jobs numbers haven't been credible since Trump fired McEntarfer.

All of us with recent college graduates know the truth. There are no jobs. What a joke this corrupt, vile administration is.

My recent college grad has had 3 job offers (after applying to hundreds of jobs in DC area, he moved to south to a red state). It was the best decision he made.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The data is not fake. I am a Democrat so sure I could jump on it to fit a narrative, but that will disingenuous.

There is raw data available for this. The methodology has not changed.

What people forget is that under all previous administration BLS has always been the punching bag as far as agency experiencing budget cut.

The BLS is under staffed. And the methodology they use require lots of human resources. And response rates have been decreasing. This explain the wild revisions we have been seeing lately.

Read the report closely.

Let me ask you a question. If you think this is fa, do you also think that the revisions that essentially wiped out all jobs created for 2025 were also fake? There were from the same report.

This. The people here are crackpot conspiracy theorists. Monthly data gets revised after its first estimate. November and December were both revised down in this report. Annual data gets revised regularly too. The downward revision for the past year is a level change to re-anchor the series based on complete data, not a flow change like the monthly data. Basically, there were 158,377,000 people employed in March 2025 instead of the previous reported 159,275,000. The monthly revisions (reflecting actual developments in the labor market) were much less.

There is more data than just the BLS surveys. The Fed is not making decisions off of one data point.

Finally, don’t hang on to one month’s data. Data is noisy.

There is another independent count of private sector job creation every month from a payroll company called ADP. Their count for January is 22k. The government count is 172k (private sector only). That's almost 8x bigger. For context both the ADP and gov average for 2025 is about 30k.

As for the revisions - no I don't believe them. The revisions serve two political purposes.

First it raises job creation in January 2026 by pushing it down in previous months. It's a shell game.

Second, the unrevised counts showed that job creation didn't fall off a cliff until 6 months after Trump took office. The revisions push job losses closer to Biden’s term.

There are a lot of individual months where ADP and BLS diverge. When job growth was better (pre-Trump) there were months with discrepancies in the hundreds of thousands, especially with the first BLS estimate of the month.

There is no political gain in revising down past months’ jobs figures. If you believe the numbers are cooked, you don’t need to revise down past months to revise up this month. There is no political gain to revising down 11 of the past 12 months (during all of which Trump has been president). Again, if the numbers are cooked you simply would not do this.

The shell game with the monthly changes is limited by the unemployment rate, which they want to report mostly unchanged, so the monthly changes have to add up to the same total employment. Push it up here, and you have to push it down there.

And the political gain from revising further back? Economists have been pointing to how employment fell off a cliff 6 months into Trump's term as proof that tarriffs hurts the economy. The revisions take away that evidence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did you guys just see the latest job report?

Wow the forecast was so off. 130k jobs added vs 55k estimated.

health care led job gains in December, adding 82,000 positions. Social assistance also rose, up 42,000

The jobs added reinforced an aging population with only 1 sector namely health care being the only sector continually adding jobs.

The jobs numbers haven't been credible since Trump fired McEntarfer.

All of us with recent college graduates know the truth. There are no jobs. What a joke this corrupt, vile administration is.

My recent college grad has had 3 job offers (after applying to hundreds of jobs in DC area, he moved to south to a red state). It was the best decision he made.

Your anecdote is meaningless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The data is not fake. I am a Democrat so sure I could jump on it to fit a narrative, but that will disingenuous.

There is raw data available for this. The methodology has not changed.

What people forget is that under all previous administration BLS has always been the punching bag as far as agency experiencing budget cut.

The BLS is under staffed. And the methodology they use require lots of human resources. And response rates have been decreasing. This explain the wild revisions we have been seeing lately.

Read the report closely.

Let me ask you a question. If you think this is fa, do you also think that the revisions that essentially wiped out all jobs created for 2025 were also fake? There were from the same report.

This. The people here are crackpot conspiracy theorists. Monthly data gets revised after its first estimate. November and December were both revised down in this report. Annual data gets revised regularly too. The downward revision for the past year is a level change to re-anchor the series based on complete data, not a flow change like the monthly data. Basically, there were 158,377,000 people employed in March 2025 instead of the previous reported 159,275,000. The monthly revisions (reflecting actual developments in the labor market) were much less.

There is more data than just the BLS surveys. The Fed is not making decisions off of one data point.

Finally, don’t hang on to one month’s data. Data is noisy.

There is another independent count of private sector job creation every month from a payroll company called ADP. Their count for January is 22k. The government count is 172k (private sector only). That's almost 8x bigger. For context both the ADP and gov average for 2025 is about 30k.

As for the revisions - no I don't believe them. The revisions serve two political purposes.

First it raises job creation in January 2026 by pushing it down in previous months. It's a shell game.

Second, the unrevised counts showed that job creation didn't fall off a cliff until 6 months after Trump took office. The revisions push job losses closer to Biden’s term.

There are a lot of individual months where ADP and BLS diverge. When job growth was better (pre-Trump) there were months with discrepancies in the hundreds of thousands, especially with the first BLS estimate of the month.

There is no political gain in revising down past months’ jobs figures. If you believe the numbers are cooked, you don’t need to revise down past months to revise up this month. There is no political gain to revising down 11 of the past 12 months (during all of which Trump has been president). Again, if the numbers are cooked you simply would not do this.

The shell game with the monthly changes is limited by the unemployment rate, which they want to report mostly unchanged, so the monthly changes have to add up to the same total employment. Push it up here, and you have to push it down there.

And the political gain from revising further back? Economists have been pointing to how employment fell off a cliff 6 months into Trump's term as proof that tarriffs hurts the economy. The revisions take away that evidence.

No, this is completely wrong. The unemployment rate and the jobs numbers come from different surveys. They don’t (and don’t need to) match. One is not derived from or constrained by the other, especially in the short term when the data is noisy.

On your second point, you clearly don’t know what the revisions are. They didn’t just shift the lower jobs numbers earlier in the year. They lowered their previous estimates of the numbers of jobs created in 11 of 12 months in 2025. So their attempt at “political gain” was to lower the number of jobs created in Trump’s first year by 403,000 jobs. I know the Trump people are stupid but even they are not dumb enough to think that lowering the number of jobs created in the first year of the admin by 400k is a political winner.