statistics. And it's clear, nobody has any clue how the BLS does their jobs and they don't want to know. It's no secret how the numbers are calculated. Their website contains the handbook of methods for each program so absolutely anybody can go in and see how the data is developed. For example, here is a link to the handbook for the CES program (jobs count).
https://www.bls.gov/opub/hom/ces/design.htm
A Trump idiot was on Fox this morning and spouted this nonsense:
https://www.axios.com/2025/08/03/trump-jobs-labor-statistics-fired
"I don't think it was explained very well and I think that markets might be as much unsettled by the fact that the data are so noisy," Hassett told "Fox News Sunday."
"So imagine if the revision in the data — so the correction of errors — is five times bigger than the number itself. Then that makes you wonder 'well can I believe this number at all?' And I think that that's actually something that needs to be fixed, it needs to be fixed fast," Hassent said.
"I think that the president is right to call for new leadership. I think Erika is a terrific person, but I think that it's time for someone to get in there and fix this," Hassett said, arguing that the data never recovered from problems that began during the pandemic.
"If the data aren't that good, then it's a real problem for the U.S. And right now the data are — have become very unreliable with these massive revisions over the last few years."
and on Meet the Press:
Hassett, in a subsequent interview with NBC's "Meet the Press," said Trump wanted his own people running BLS to achieve "more transparent and more reliable" data.
"If there are big changes and big revisions — we expect more big revisions for the jobs data in September, for example — then we want to know why," he said.
But pressed repeatedly for hard evidence that the data were rigged or manipulated for political reasons, Hassett would say only that the revisions proved the data were wrong.
The reason for revisions is explained very clearly on BLS' website. BLS surveys employers to get a job count for the week of the 12th each month. In order to report data in a timely manner, that generally gives them at most about 2 weeks to collect as many employers responses as possible while still giving them time to calculate the estimates. Of course, many employers are unable to report their data that quickly so their data is included in the calculation for the revision but not the initial estimate. It's that simple. Why were May and June revised down so much? Because a lot of employers who reported late showed decreases in their employment for those months. The data must be kept confidential so individual employers can't be named, but again, it's a simple explanation. No manipulation. No conspiracy. Straightforward statistics.
You know what hurts the quality of the estimates? Many employers who were randomly selected for the sample refuse to report their data monthly. I can't report specific numbers, but I can say that a large percentage of those employers selected for the sample refuse to report. The sample is drawn to maximize accuracy under the scenario where they get 100% response. Of course they don't get anywhere close to that. And the right wingers who complain about the data are the same ones who refuse to participate. You want better data? Every business organization in the country should demand of their members that they report their data to BLS when they are selected for the survey. And report in as timely a manner as possible. Of course that will never happen....
= new reply since forum marked as read