From march 24 to march 25
Revised figures show U.S. added 900,000 fewer jobs than previously estimated - POLITICO https://share.google/m6q9gNGZ6nPlCypfD

Jobs report revisions September 2025: https://share.google/RyNVTF3sByAmffEUl

Aparently they didn't include North Texas.

quote:

Originally posted by ANTELOPEDUNDEE:
Aparently they didn't include North Texas.

Or south Texas. Things are great here.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
From march 24 to march 25
Revised figures show U.S. added 900,000 fewer jobs than previously estimated - POLITICO https://share.google/m6q9gNGZ6nPlCypfD

...But, but, but J6 and Trumps a liar.

Good piece of distraction from Trump’s last two dismal Jon reports.

If Biden were still president this post would have some meaning.

And Yes to the post above. Those things are worth more than job reports.

Yet, Trump is still bleeding jobs. He has run out of people to fire over his mismanagement.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Good piece of distraction from Trump’s last two dismal Jon reports.

If Biden were still president this post would have some meaning.

And Yes to the post above. Those things are worth more than job reports.

Yet, Trump is still bleeding jobs. He has run out of people to fire over his mismanagement.

Is a "jon report" a legal instrument?

Love the spin job, though. You were LIED to, in addition to the over 500,000 downward adjustment in 24... for those counting st home, that 1.3 and a bit less jobs than reported to prop up the prior regime

If you are going to play "factual reporter" then do so. If you are going to play partisan hack, then own it

b and n are next to each other on the keyboaard for the fat fingered among us.

I can interpret most mis-types so no need to have a fit over every one. Still there is proofread.

quote:

Originally posted by ANTELOPEDUNDEE:
b and n are next to each other on the keyboaard for the fat fingered among us.

I can interpret most mis-types so no need to have a fit over every one. Still there is proofread.

Yes they are. But you don't present yourself as an accurate purveyor of absolute truth. It's REALLY funny when one makes huge typos when calling someone else illiterate.

I make typos all the time, and sometimes autocorrect changes to the wrong word. I am open to correction. Oh, and it's not a habit for you.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by ANTELOPEDUNDEE:
b and n are next to each other on the keyboaard for the fat fingered among us.

I can interpret most mis-types so no need to have a fit over every one. Still there is proofread.

Yes they are. But you don't present yourself as an accurate purveyor of absolute truth. It's REALLY funny when one makes huge typos when calling someone else illiterate.

I make typos all the time, and sometimes autocorrect changes to the wrong word. I am open to correction. Oh, and it's not a habit for you.

If I see typos in my posts I go back and fix them.

So Trump fires the head of the BLS, then a few weeks later, the BLS revises down the number of jobs during Biden's last year in office? Huh. Interesting.

quote:

Originally posted by ANTELOPEDUNDEE:
So Trump fires the head of the BLS, then a few weeks later, the BLS revises down the number of jobs during Biden's last year in office? Huh. Interesting.

that's a little whacked -- but what about the 500k markdown during biden? what about NOT declaring a recession in 23?

government officials LIE - as a wrap around to the typos

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by ANTELOPEDUNDEE:
So Trump fires the head of the BLS, then a few weeks later, the BLS revises down the number of jobs during Biden's last year in office? Huh. Interesting.

that's a little whacked -- but what about the 500k markdown during biden? what about NOT declaring a recession in 23?

government officials LIE - as a wrap around to the typos

Whose responsibility is it to declare a recession?
I don't put anything past anyone in this administration. Maybe they should all get into fist fights and beat each other to a fucking pulp.

oh, just the sec of treasury - 2 quarters with less than 0 growth -- who appointed the prior?

biden was a TRAIN WRECK - zero accountability, his :handlers: making every decision .. it was obiden 3.0-

but sure, blame trump for stuff -

anyway, my stock market, k1s, and quarterly statements are pretty good for me -- i make more from investments than my, well, decent, salary

ask me again in a couple months, i might be able to retire "early" - which means a hut in the UP and a shack in the hill country -- when it's hot, i go north, when it's cold, i wait THEN go south ..

in texas we have
sum
sum-more
sum-morest
fake fall
sum-est
2 days of winter
then sum

it's literally "high in the 90s, 20% chance of rain" here for 8 months of the year

side note -- fist fights forged genx -- these pansy youngsters aint never been punched in the mouth, and it SHOWS

quote:

Originally posted by ANTELOPEDUNDEE:
So Trump fires the head of the BLS, then a few weeks later, the BLS revises down the number of jobs during Biden's last year in office? Huh. Interesting.

Just ask a recent graduate conducting a job search, for a little supporting data...

. . . the WSJ sounds the alarm, again, on the economy and yet the North Texas prognosticator on the economy says all is booming.

Job Revisions and the Trump Economy
Blaming Biden and the Federal Reserve for slow growth won’t work forever.
By The Editorial Board
The Wall Street Journal

President Trump finds vindication wherever he looks. So it’s no surprise that he blamed a big downward revision in job growth announced Tuesday on the Federal Reserve and Joe Biden. He’d be wiser to see it as a warning about the current fragile labor market.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that 911,000 fewer jobs were created between April 2024 and March 2025 than it previously estimated. That means job creation was about half of what monthly surveys showed, averaging about 75,000 a month.

Jobs were revised down in nearly every industry, especially leisure and hospitality (176,000), professional and business services (158,000), and retail (126,200). The revisions come from the agency’s annual benchmark, which aligns its monthly surveys of some 631,000 workplaces with state unemployment insurance tax records.

Mr. Trump has good reason to be frustrated with the reliability of the monthly surveys, though there’s no evidence they were “rigged,” as he has claimed. As we’ve pointed out, BLS has overestimated job growth in recent years owing to declining survey response rates. Only 43% of employers respond to the survey, down from 60% before the pandemic.

Larger businesses that consistently respond may differ from smaller ones that don’t, especially during turbulent economic times. Monthly surveys also rely on models to estimate job changes from businesses being created and closing. When the economy slows, the model tends to overestimate jobs from new business formation.

A White House statement claimed the President inherited an economy “even weaker than we thought,” which is true as far as it goes. Polls last fall showed that most Americans thought the economy was in recession. But blaming Joe Biden for bad economic news won’t work as an excuse for much longer.

For more evidence of economic malaise, see the U.S. Census Bureau’s report released Tuesday on household income for 2024. Real median household incomes rose last year by a mere $1,040, which wasn’t statistically significant. Real median incomes for blacks fell $2,060.

The rich continued to do well, but most Americans treaded water. Real incomes among the top 5% increased by $11,500 on average last year (which notably doesn’t include capital gains), but barely budged for the bottom 50%. This is why Americans elected Mr. Trump: To lift real wages as he did during his first term with tax cuts and deregulation.

His border taxes and deportations are doing the opposite. Job growth stalled this summer amid his tariff barrage. The BLS establishment survey showed that an average of 27,000 jobs were created over the last four months. The number of Americans not in the labor force has increased by 1.2 million since April, more than half of whom said they want a job. The share of teens who are employed has fallen 2.1 percentage points since April, and they are usually the first let go when employers do layoffs.

Mr. Trump says Tuesday’s “revisions make clear that the Fed’s monetary policy is far too restrictive and interest rates remain too high.” But frothy financial market conditions—see shrinking junk-bond spreads, elevated stock prices and a surge in corporate debt issuance—suggest otherwise.

The August consumer-price report arrives Thursday, but recent data indicate that inflation isn’t vanquished and tariffs are contributing to higher prices in some goods. Mr. Trump ignores these dummy lights about the economy at his own political peril.

The Fed is likely to cut rates by 25 or perhaps even 50 points next week. But the President could do far more to help businesses, workers and consumers by dropping his anti-growth policies. He may have inherited a weak economy, but he’s in charge now.

I wonder how many farmers regret/FAFO voting for him a second time. Didn't learn from the first time.

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/...ation-100300012.html

Meanwhile Aregentinians are destroying the rain forests as fast as they can in order to supply more cheap soybeans.

Dept. of Labor launches investigation into data collection process at BLS | CNN Business https://share.google/oaQIMl7mfenSfhYtH

. . . I realize that these folks do not enjoy the same reputation as the Gainesville Prognosticator but geez they seem to be convinced that all is not rosy in the Trump economy.


Jamie Dimon isn’t convinced by the market’s theory that huge job revisions aren’t a recession indicator
Story by Eleanor Pringle
Fortune

Jamie Dimon, chief executive officer of JPMorgan Chase, said jobs revision data is a signal the economy is weakening.

The BLS’s significant downward revision has sparked concerns about a weakening U.S. economy, with JPMorgan’s Jamie Dimon warning the data “confirms what we already thought.” Still, economists from Macquarie and Goldman Sachs’s David Mericle argue more recent data suggests the economy is unlikely to tip into recession, though it strengthens the case for Fed rate cuts.

Despite a downward revision to U.S. labor data of near a million jobs over the past year, markets aren’t panicking this morning. It’s not like there’s going to be a recession … right?

Jamie Dimon isn’t entirely convinced. Of course, the JPMorgan Chase CEO is known for his “prepared-for-anything” approach, running America’s biggest bank on the basis of constant stress testing and risk assessments.

Confronted with the news that the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) recalibrated its reporting for the year ending March 25 downwards by some 911,000 roles, Dimon said the “economy is weakening.”

Asked moments after the data dropped, the billionaire CEO said to CNBC: “Whether that is on the way to recession or just weakening I don’t know—that just confirms what we already thought kind of. That’s a big revision.”

The magnitude of the alteration exceeded analysts’ expectations. Deutsche Bank, for example, wrote in a note to clients on Monday that it expected the downward revision to be around 50,000 to 60,000 jobs a month, which would have resulted in a 600,000 to 720,000 downgrade as opposed to the near-1 million figure.

Debate is also rife about whether or not criticism can be leveled at the BLS given the size of these revisions. Many economists argue the institution can only report based on the breadth of the evidence it receives—and responses to its surveys are falling. Likewise, experts point out that even a change of a fraction of a percentage can lead to huge swings in numbers, given the size of the U.S. labor force. In the case of this week’s data, the revision was just 0.6%.

Even then, organizations will be eyeing data out of government agencies with increased caution, particularly since the White House is also intervening more forcefully into the matter.

Dimon said his team has always taken into account federal data as well as reporting from within his own bank and other non-government bodies: “We get data like you wouldn’t believe. The government data is important, we get data from non-government sources and you can look at delinquency data, worldwide data, trade data, we get all of that. But trying to fit out what the economy is going to do is still hard to do with all that data. Maybe one day AI will fix that problem.

“Hopefully things will be OK, but you do see that kind of weakening.”

What recession?

Last week’s jobs data, which revealed the U.S. economy added just 22,000 jobs in August, wasn’t enough to shift the needle on recession odds.

As Joe Brusuelas, chief economist at RSM, wrote to clients in a note Friday: “Recession odds have not increased, and we do not expect one in the near term. But the labor market is losing momentum. The Fed will need to respond with a September rate cut to mitigate growing risks from a weakening jobs picture.”

Likewise, Macquarie’s chief U.S. economist David Doyle told Fortune last week that a lower “breakeven” jobs balance will help mitigate the American economy entering negative growth. Doyle was speaking ahead of this week’s 911,000 revision in relation to more recent data and how it charts the path ahead.

Doyle described the economy as a low-hire, low-fire environment, where new job roles aren’t being created in droves but massive layoffs aren’t occurring either. Slower hiring is also being offset by lower immigration and retirement, he added, maintaining an employment rate of 4.3%.

And while the sluggish environment isn’t much fun for jobseekers, it does “insulate” the economy from significant swings which might be seen in periods of greater activity he said. A lower breakeven means changes to the unemployment level are more “gradual,” adding: “So that acts as a bit of a ballast against a sharp rise in unemployment. Often … when we see recessions it’s that sharp, dramatic rise in unemployment and that creates negative cycle effects, reinforcing cycle effects, where unemployment hurts consumption, which in turn hurts unemployment.”

Adding further support to the notion that economic contraction can be avoided is Goldman Sachs’s David Mericle, who highlighted the “revisions provide limited information about the current state of the labor market because it applies to the year ending in March 2025, though we continue to believe that the labor market has softened materially.”

He also told clients the bank believes the revisions are “likely too large,” explaining: “The … source data itself has persistently been revised upward and it likely excludes many unauthorized immigrants who were initially accurately captured in payrolls. Our model of net job gains from firm births and deaths suggests a downward revision of 550k or 45k per month via that channel, which would imply that monthly job growth over this period was closer to 100k than the initially reported 147k.”

Mericle added the data will change the Fed’s thinking however, reinforcing confidence in Goldman’s call for three cuts of 25bps in September, October and November, with two more quarterly cuts in 2026 to bring the base rate to 3 to 3.25%.