Claims[edit]
Regarding inflation statistics, Williams says that some of the biggest changes to the Consumer Price Index were made between 1997-1999 in an effort to reduce Social Security outlays, using controversial changes by Alan Greenspan that include “hedonic regression”, or the increased quality of goods.[2] Some other investors have echoed Williams’ views, most prominently Bill Gross, who reportedly called the US CPI an “haute con job”.[2] John S. Greenlees and Robert B. McClelland, staff economists at the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, wrote a paper to address CPI “misconceptions”, such as those of Williams.[3]
Regarding unemployment statistics, Williams points out that under President Lyndon B. Johnson, the U-3 unemployment rate series was created, which excludes people who stopped looking for work for more than a year ago as well as part-time workers who are seeking full-time employment. Although the old unemployment rate series’, which include part time workers looking for full time work and unemployed who stopped looking over a year ago, is still published monthly by BLS, the U-3 series is generally considered more meaningful and is the headline rate picked up by most media outlets.[4]
Regarding growth statistics, Williams reports that the official numbers for U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and jobs growth range from “deceptive”[5] to “rigged” and “manipulated”.
Critical reception[edit]
Shadowstats has been strongly criticized, particularly on its estimates of inflation. Market participants, economists and bloggers frequently point out that basic math shows that the Shadowstats CPI is an extreme overestimate. [6][7][8][3]
University of Maryland Professor Katharine Abraham, who previously headed the agency responsible for publishing official unemployment and inflation data, says of Williams’ claims, “The culture of the Bureau of Labor Statistics is so strong that it’s not going to happen.” Steve Landefeld, former director of the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the Commerce Department agency that prepares quarterly GDP reports, said in response to an article about Williams, “the bureau rigorously follows guidelines designed to ensure its work remains totally transparent and absolutely unbiased.” In the same article, UC San Diego economist Valerie Ramey, a member of the Federal Economic Statistics Advisory Committee, defended the methodological changes claiming they were only made “after academic economists did decades of research and said they should be done.”[9]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadowstats.com
That is BS. I had a golfing buddy a while back who was a PhD mathematician at BLS. And even then there was intense pressure from the political appointees to adjust the numbers to look better.
“after [left-wing] academic economists did decades of research and said they should be done.” My addition in [].