"Trump fires commissioner of labor statistics after weaker-than-expected jobs figures slam markets"
I mean if you don't like the figure or statistics... just fire the person who created them!!!
Perfect!!!
pull down to refresh
0 new comment
15 sats \ 9 replies \ @Undisciplined 1 Aug
I’ve heard from more than one federal researcher who’s work was held up or stopped because it didn’t support the current regime’s policies.
reply
0 new comment
42 sats \ 3 replies \ @sudonaka 2 Aug
They should all be fired. Working for the government is robbing your neighbor
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @Undisciplined 2 Aug
I agree with the first part, but working for the government isn't what causes taxes. Congress steals and then spends.
reply
0 new comment
42 sats \ 1 reply \ @sudonaka 3 Aug
It absolutely does. If the normal people “working” as a jackboot government enabler just quit and got a real job- the government would cease to exist.
If you “work for the government” You are enabling tyranny
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 3 Aug
“If everyone would just…” is not a useful line of thinking.
Someone will accept that money. So, your neighbor who works at the post office isn’t adding to the problem.
reply
0 new comment
42 sats \ 1 reply \ @Bell_curve 2 Aug
is it possible the bureau of labor statistics needs a shakeup because of their gross revisions in the last 2 years?
reply
0 new comment
11 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 2 Aug
Of course. I've heard that the BEA was created because the BLS was such a bunch of commies.
I'm just saying that Trump is squashing research findings, regardless of their veracity, when they differ from what he wants to be true.
reply
0 new comment
47 sats \ 2 replies \ @028559d218 OP 1 Aug
It seems to me that if you don't like the statistics from some government bureaucracy... you'll just keeping firing people until they give 'the statistics' you do like.
Reminds me of USSR
reply
0 new comment
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @Turdinthepunchbowl 1 Aug
Wherever you go, there you are.
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 1 Aug
From what I can gather, they don’t want the bad press of being that blatant.
But, basically, yes.
reply
0 new comment
11 sats \ 0 replies \ @justin_shocknet 2 Aug
Revisions so wildly off has been the case for awhile, disclosure op, reveals the data has always been a fugaz
reply
0 new comment
5 sats \ 0 replies \ @sudonaka 1 Aug
Socialist end of empire vibes
reply
0 new comment
7 sats \ 0 replies \ @euthymic 1 Aug
Sounds like North Korea
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @03cf4d95fc 2 Aug freebie
seems to me that if you don't like the statistics from some government bureaucracy... you'll just keeping firing people until they give 'the statistics' you do like.
Reminds me of USSR
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @spiderman 2 Aug
I suspect the core reason is not the number but the wild revisions? I kean if one has to revise so drastically, then best not to publish the number at all until one has more reliable data available.
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Machiavelli23 2 Aug
Trump probably like the stats so much that he wanted to contribute to the jobs report by firing the guy.
“You’re fired”
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Fabs 1 Aug
Trump in a nutshell.
reply
0 new comment