There are revisions every year, although this year's is extraordinary. Last year's preliminary revision was 306,000 (a 0.2% downward revision).
The finalized benchmark update for 2023 was published in February of this year and was -187,000 (a 0.1% revision).
For 2022 the preliminary revision was +462,000 (a 0.3% revision) and the final benchmark update was 506,000 (also 0.3%)
Accuracy in the data has been a growing problem, and as you can see the 2022 revision to the upside also calls into question the quality of the monthly data, although not by as much.
The BLS does not archive the benchmark announcements the way they do the monthly CES announcements, but the Wayback Machine does a pretty good job of archiving both, so it's easy to assess the history of the benchmark revisions.
The magnitude of this latest preliminary revision is roughly double that of the 2022 preliminary revision.
I don't doubt it. But as we poor Yanks are in the midst of that quadrennial soap opera we call an election, Bidenomics has the most immediate relevance!
I have this bad habit of actually looking at the numbers--and I keep thinking they're supposed to add up (part of the dain bramage from my cost accounting days)!
Nah. I tried that whole education thing. Kept annoying the hell out of my professors.
Apparently asking awkward questions that embarrs the instructor is considered bad form?
(Except for one of my econ professors. He thought enough of my smartass attitude that he offered to sponsor me for the PhD program at UH. Often wonder if I should have taken him up on the offer)
Seriously, they couldn't see this coming???? Correction is a huge under statement in this case!!!
They never see it coming.
There are revisions every year, although this year's is extraordinary. Last year's preliminary revision was 306,000 (a 0.2% downward revision).
The finalized benchmark update for 2023 was published in February of this year and was -187,000 (a 0.1% revision).
For 2022 the preliminary revision was +462,000 (a 0.3% revision) and the final benchmark update was 506,000 (also 0.3%)
Accuracy in the data has been a growing problem, and as you can see the 2022 revision to the upside also calls into question the quality of the monthly data, although not by as much.
The BLS does not archive the benchmark announcements the way they do the monthly CES announcements, but the Wayback Machine does a pretty good job of archiving both, so it's easy to assess the history of the benchmark revisions.
The magnitude of this latest preliminary revision is roughly double that of the 2022 preliminary revision.
Someone should tell Don Lemon.
I think his was the one actual job that disappeared.....
🤣
Btw, I think you see the same tactic in all the 5 Eyes countries, possibly all the developed countries.
It's not just a "Bidonomics" thing.😉
I don't doubt it. But as we poor Yanks are in the midst of that quadrennial soap opera we call an election, Bidenomics has the most immediate relevance!
💯👍
"statisticians should not drop acid"
🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣
That's a t-shirt I want!!!
Are you questioning the Ministry of Truth?!!
Yep!
I have this bad habit of actually looking at the numbers--and I keep thinking they're supposed to add up (part of the dain bramage from my cost accounting days)!
You need re-education! 😆
Nah. I tried that whole education thing. Kept annoying the hell out of my professors.
Apparently asking awkward questions that embarrs the instructor is considered bad form?
(Except for one of my econ professors. He thought enough of my smartass attitude that he offered to sponsor me for the PhD program at UH. Often wonder if I should have taken him up on the offer)
What a bunch of Bozos! “...to publish numbers that do nothing but remind us why statisticians should not drop acid.” Heeheehee.
Place your bets folks. Will Harris completely ignore this, or spin it in some pathetic way?
She'll ignore it. To do otherwise would involve actually talking to the press.
Thought you'd get a kick out of that!
Ah, you remember that I’m a child of the 60s!
Bidenomics!
Is working!