TQ: If you know that, give us evidence. Without support, such evidence is nothing but a defamation.
Marty: Look at the charts previously posted. Are you blind.
Apparently, I don't see. I told you so. I asked you to provide evidence of manipulation you claimed. Your reply: "Total ue in the teens."
How is this evidence of manipulation. Firstly, there are six meausre of unemployment, which of course yield difference numbers. If someone says "Measure U3 is..." and you say "but mesure U6" gives a difference number," that does not indicated a lie. It only says that YOU choose to look at a different measure.
Secondly, even if you did talk about the same thing and doubted the figures --- and, assuming that you, not BLS, were correct --- the BLS' schortcoming may be explained by lots of things: error, shorcoming of methodology, negligence, or deliberate manipulation of data (fraud).
So, what is your evidence that this manupulation and not error, methodological difficulties or something else? That is what I asked. You insist on your belief but offer not a shred of evidence. That is a pity: you appear to feel entitled to defame innocent people.
Frankly Government employees do what they are told. Period.
I am sorry you think of our entire government as if it were an army.
In this particular case you are gravely mistaken. Statistical data are collected by hundreds, if not thousands, of people, many of whom have advanced degrees in statistics and have allegence to their discipline. Great many of these people are in their positions for decades, hence worked under Bush Sr., Clinton, Bush Jr. as well. And, you want us to believe, they are marching in step, like good solders, to the orders of these different generals...
It is your right, of course, to be distrustful and even cynical. If so, you could say, "I don't believe those data." But you go much further and accuse people without a shred of evidence. Since when, Marty, defamation has become a conservative value?
“Marty: These figures are manipulated by the DOL.
TQ: If you know that, give us evidence. Without support, such evidence is nothing but a defamation.
Marty: Look at the charts previously posted. Are you blind?”
LOL, no, he is just unable to admit that he has no reading comprehension skills. Then, to hide it, he calls other Freeper’s who he harasses, commies.
OOPs guess I’m not the only one that isn’t buying the State Propaganda:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/41911006
OOPs guess I’m not the only one that isn’t buying the State Propaganda:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/41911006
TopQuark: “Secondly, even if you did talk about the same thing and doubted the figures -— and, assuming that you, not BLS, were correct -— the BLS’schortcoming may be explained by lots of things: error, shorcoming of methodology, negligence, or deliberate manipulation of data (fraud).
So, what is your evidence that this manupulation and not error, methodological difficulties or something else? That is what I asked. You insist on your belief but offer not a shred of evidence. That is a pity: you appear to feel entitled to defame innocent people.
In this particular case you are gravely mistaken. Statistical data are collected by hundreds, if not thousands, of people, many of whom have advanced degrees in statistics and have allegence to their discipline. Great many of these people are in their positions for decades, hence worked under Bush Sr., Clinton, Bush Jr. as well. And, you want us to believe, they are marching in step, like good solders, to the orders of these different generals...”
Are you suggesting that the final unemployment figure is the one reported by these thousands of statistical experts?
These thousands that you refer to are only employed for groundwork. They are scattered and fragmented and not a united whole. They report it to their superiors, who perform further analysis and then report it again to their superiors. In the process of filtering through such layers of reporting, the thousands who actually collected and worked on the data are never in the know of what the actual figure is.
Collusion, whenever it happens, happens at the highest level of authority. It works in a similar fashion with profit figures and audits. Despite of hundreds of audit staff working on raw data the final profit figure is undeniably incorrectly reported to suit the directors motives... and that happens without the hundreds of ground staff not registering a word of protest as the main figures of inventory value are always hidden from them (if you want evidence of this, then simply look at the supposedly big 4 and their frauds coming out in open in the recent days)
Coming back to the figure of unemployment, the thousands you say are never in the know of any single factor critical to reporting and that is the place where fraud can be permeated by their superiors(what that critical factor is I do not know, as I am not a statistician, sorry)
That does not mean ‘all’ are dishonest, it does however mean that in places where it serves personal agenda (in politics especially) these distorted figures are rampant.