SmaptyWolf said:
caryking said:
SmaptyWolf said:
caryking said:
SmaptyWolf said:
caryking said:
Let's see…. Liberals rave about the job creation numbers under the Biden admin. Then we find out that BLS revised the numbers down by around 1M. Now, these same liberals are concerned about the firing of this department head.
Please make that sensible for people, according Smapty, are basically dumb as ****…
Becaaaaaaause the BLS always revises the numbers after they get in more hard data.
Yes, the BLS revised Biden down A MILLION JOBS. In your mind, that wasn't the conspiracy, it was him getting the good job numbers in the first place. Oh, but in Trump's case you pranced around, crowing about his great numbers, and then when the hard data came in revising those numbers down, OMG IT'S THE DEEP STATE!!! FIRE EVERYONE!!!!!
Yes, the problem is in fact that you're dumb as sh**.
Now guess what happens next month when they release numbers? You think anyone will pay attention to them? How do you imagine a First World bond market is supposed to function with a Third World tin pot idiot threatening to fire everyone who doesn't drop golf balls for him?
And yes… you know a lot about numbers. Need I say why?
Continuously proving to be sub-par at one's job probably means…. You may not be very good. At some point, we need a change. Honestly, haven't you been finding the lack of solid numbers a little concerning? This isn't a new phenomenon, right?
Lol, it's very flattering that you think I was personally responsible for the demise of Lehman Brothers.
Anyway, no, the "lack of solid numbers" isn't concerning. The BLS uses wildly complicated mathematical models that produce projections because those projections are incredibly important to financial markets. BLS isn't doing all that work to make Presidents look good or bad. It's actually important that they could care less how it makes a President look. The reason that they "revise" the numbers is exactly because you want to base future projections on current reality, not previous projections... not revising the numbers as hard data trickles in would lead to drift that would quickly make important projections useless.
The key takeaway is this: When you and your moron-in-arms Wolfblood suggest that we should do away with BLS projections, all you're doing is revealing that you are clueless and have had your brains soaked in MAGA fan fiction. If you actually want to Make America Great Again, maybe clueless people should go back to the good ol' days when they kept their mouths shut until they read a book on the subject, instead of just raging that everything should be burned to the ground.
Need I say more (bolded above).
BTW, I have no belief that you single-handedly were responsible for the demise of Lehman Brothers. I really don't think, you alone, were smart enough to do so. That said, if you were surrounded by people with your thinking, then YES… you were a contributor.
Here's the part where you double down on the stupid.
What you call a "lack of solid numbers" is called a projection. If you can't comprehend why projections and other types of predictive analytics are vital to being a first world country or a large cap company, then you really should spare the world your opinion on the topic.
Yep… and Boards remove CEO's for not hitting projections. It is the very thinking, you have, that allows for companies, like Lehman, to get the ultimate CEO removal…. You know, shut it down!
Your condescending arrogance is not impressive at all…. Every retort you make shows me how effed up your thinking really is.
Just remember, many companies, agencies, independent organizations rely on labor statistics to make decisions. Let's continue to accept poor projections (as you call it) and try to manage economic conditions. Go ahead and accept mediocrity…. It's certainly your prerogative.
