This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Slaying the sacred cow: Biderman
I can see what reverence people on this site have for data. Government data are not good. If it is seasonally adjusted it has been contaminated. Government surveys are crap. And private data are better.
Well are they really?
And if you reject so much government data how you know anything about anything? Or do we just make it up from our own neighborhood experience like we are Mr. Rogers or something?
Today Tyler put up a video of the revered Mr. Biderman of Trim Tabs fame. Mr. B was making an absolute fool of himself while trying to be critical of government reports. The video is embarrassing to watch.
It’s his right to do that of course. Just as it’s your right ( I guess) to reply snarkily to what I write using profanity. But as sacred cows go this guy is probably better off on the grill than being worshipped. I’d like mine well done, please.
Where to start?
Advance release: Retail sales every month comes out as an advance release… I know how stupid that is; they should release the final report first then the prelim then the advance! But they don’t you actually have to wait for the final report for two more months. Then they are revising data in each of the next two months. Of course we analyze the report for what it is when it’s released. Economists are well aware that for retail sales sometimes the revisions bring a bigger change than the original release. It’s why the retail sales report is not just about the headline. And no Mr. B did not discover this; no he did not discover America either.
Maybe we economists and those in the press do not stress that this is the advance report enough? But the report write up usually features comments about how previous data were revised. I’d assume the ‘we have a brain in our head crowd’ would realize that next month this number, too, could be revised. It’s not final. Admittedly that’s s a subtlety.
Auto sales; Biderman does his worst when he takes a pot shot at auto sales. The BLS reported that the advance report’s value of retail auto sales rose. But Biderman insists that - and everyone knows that - this last month unit sales fell in March from Feb. Well, yes but…
Production is not consumption: I just went through this subtlety with something I wrote on industrial production. Apparently some people do not make a distinction between production and consumption or producer good and consumer goods. . We economists do. Biderman is so confused in this rant I hope he is embarrassed to have gone on so smugly on and on about something he was just dead wrong about. The auto figures reported as unit sales by the industry are about all units produced and imported, they are not about consumption at the retail level.
Dollars are not units- The retail sales report is a dollar-value report not a volume report. So that is the first disconnect for Biderman. When you look at car production in the US you get unit sales the percentage change is volume percentage. Retail sales is a dollar-value report.
Investment goods are not consumer goods - You might be aware that businesses use vehicles. In the GDP accounts we keep separate data for investment and for consumption. So all the vehicles that are produced each month plus imported do not go into retail sales…big mistake here Mr B. When businesses buy cars or trucks the amount of domestic production allocated to consumption will differ from the headline on unit sales. One big factor here is the auto rental companies who periodically need to upgrade their fleet. When they buy to renew their product it makes a big subtraction relative to the headline reported that month.
Used cars sales are in retails sales- Retail sales have yet another fly in the ointment. Retail sales are about all sales, not just the sale of new production. Used car sales are in the BLS mix but are not in Biderman’s. Yet another reason why monthly retail car sales expressed in dollars are different from the monthly production and import numbers.
And you guys LIKE his data? And he is going to save us?
He is so confused I don’t know what you can learn by listening to him. You cannot even compare the monthly unit sales numbers to car sales in retailing. It makes no sense. Yet, go to the tape, there he is spouting off and smug.
BLS data collection is archaic but….Now this is always a problem because economists have lots of rules. Data are carefully collected to ensure things get counted up correctly. And if they are not careful then they can undercount or double count so data in the economics system are put though very specific processes. I’m sure that there are ways to make things more up to date. The BLS system is old and it an old technology system. But there are issues in collecting data if you want to report out data that really make sense.
USING FICA tax receipts as a jobs proxy – Next, the idea of using the FICA taxes data as a proxy for job growth may seem like a good idea – a no brainer. Economists do look at it as a gauge but it is a very flawed gauge. There are some major assumptions in doing that which is to say several ways in which there is actual slippage so that the gauge may actually be wrong. .
Wage/salary differences are an issue- The employment tax is a flat rate tax but it’s assessed on the income you make that week until you reach the max. So there is a big zone in between a zero pay check and the max. There is no way of knowing when workers are added if they are higher or lower paid than the average for workers as a whole last week or last month.
Hours or length of the work week - Another little wrinkle is that hours-worked change. As that happens comparisons wills change week to week or month to month even if the number of workers does not change.
Overtime- If you get paid more for working overtime that could be another factor causing this tax data to shift without any link to new employment.
So you have several disconnects that make this approach only a very raw proxy for what Mr B uses it. He acts like its gospel and it is only a ballpark sort of guess-timate. Yet he wants you to think it is superior to government data? Actually it is government data and it is being tortured when put to that use.
Interesting.
So thumb your nose at me, at economists, whatever. But at least after posting this I can say I told ya so or that I explained it to you.
You can ignore this or read it and learn something the choice is yours. But in my opinion the government data are not cooked. They have not been bent for any election cycle, though that allegation is often made. And private-sector data are rarely are offered up with the kind of attention that would allow them to compete in any way with the government’s reports. The only exception to this is the ADP which is often different from the government report it tries to track and is derided mercilessly despite the great effort put into that report.
I just think some people want data that go the other way because they want to be contrary. So be contrary and don’t change your opinion. But I will continue to try and point out how things are shifting and some of you will appreciate it and a few of you will continue to make fools of yourselves.
Your choice.
Bidermans’ data are flawed. He has no insight on job growth or on retail sales. He does not even understand the concepts.
- advertisements -


Mr. Brusca,
Slaying the Sacred Cow huh. Okay.
The fundamental problem is the Sheeple have been brain washed into believing the field of Economics, as well as Sociology, Criminal Justice, Political Science, etc., etc., etc., are sciences like Physics, Chemistry, Biology, or Mathematics.
That of course is utter BS.
The former are of course NOT science but rather opinions argued by way of subjective and insufficient data sets to which a "scientific method" of analysis is applied.
That business finance applies derivative calculus and statistical analysis used to make atomic bombs does not change a thing. It is no different than taking crayons from a child and giving them the oil paints used by Michelangelo, the result is just much much messier.
Hence all the BS you parade in defense of the data. This fact is why fiat currency based economies are preferred by politicians and business leaders.
If a system like the gold standard were used, there would still be economic swings and market bubbles and crashes. But, the politicians and business men wouldn't be able to jawbone the Sheeple as effectively. Nor as easily deceive them with promised entitlements to be paid later.
Regardless, the fundamental problem I have with men like yourself is you are either completely morally corrupt [i.e. you know where the BS line is but cross it because it is so easy to deceive] or you are a complete moron who really thinks the BS spouted is really legitimately "scientific" analysis worthy of being taken seriously. Either way, you are pathetic. I for one, especially after this piece, think the former. However, in your defense. Your inability to write well tells me you are rather poorly educated; yes I've seen your CV, but I'm sorry the positive correlation between pedigree of institution and education is a ship that has long since sailed. Seriously, whomever gave you a PhD must look down and shake their head in disgust every time you write commentary. Robert, you have a PhD and you write like an 8th grader.
Of course you may consider my points ad hominem, but that's common in situations where one's intelligence is the central point in question.
A Dismal Science? Pre-fiat currency system, yes. Post-fiat currency, it's just BS.
AMDG
Centurion
Now explain the whistleblowers who were forced to alter government data. Yeah. stfu until you can say the numbers are even remotely an attempt to find accurate information and not a political process. Smug ass with basic flawed assumption about your own data quality. Sorry. Biderman predicted the fall off in hiring that was going on even as the gov reported pumped up their numbers.
It doesn't matter how much you cry and make excuses. If the data has to be revised the wrong way, EVERY SINGLE TIME, there is a problem with the way it is being collected. There is a PROBLEM that needs to be fixed.
The game as always is survival..Since he depends on the system he must defend the system to the end or until his death...He probably has no idea how to live without being an "Economist" and when the system collapses, which it will, he will no longer be needed.
His rather foolish effort is to try to convince someone that what the BLS/Government/"Federal" "Reserve" (Where he seemingly has worked or is a contractor for) produces very real and accurate data that you should trust...
It's just survival...Lying to people on ZH makes him feel a little better about what he knows himself, is actually going on..
The system is in a downward spiral, but since he's been BS'ed to believe the lie that this ship won't go down, He thinks it's perfectly OK to try to convince you of the same thing ..Because he's obviously smarter than you. Even though every intuitive perception you have tells you something different..
He's lying..But he has to..and he wants you to believe him, he is part of the system and needs you to be in it too...Too many escapees from the madhouse would cause the system to break and we can't have that (even though it's the best thing to do for humanity's sake..)
Status Quo or die..
Yep. There are two kinds of economists. There are those who understand cause and effect in economics. And there are those who are paid to engineer short term political outcomes.
Ok, I would like to submit my critical analysis of your post now.
I believe you are correct in criticizing Biderman's work, afterall he is not an economist and his views are biased, just as any other who are skeptical of governemnt data. In fact, I believe his alternate viewpoint resonate so well in here BECAUSE he is critical of government data. If you feed people who like red meat redmeat, guess what? They will love it! Obvious logic here
Your point, however, that government does not massage data is nonsense. We have seen many times over the years on how data just somehow conveniently "drops off the radar". Prime example is the BLS and unemployment vs labor participation. How many times have we all looked into the news and see "unemployment getting better, at 8.x%, down from 8,x+1%" in the news, while concurrently labor participation is actually lower than in any other point during the past 2 decades? Data massaging is obvious.
In addition, as we can see in CBO projections, government data projections can be horrendously wrong. If we look into GWB CBO projections, military expenditures are excluded. This is PRECISELY political interference.
Let us examine some more other points: SS projections and Medicare. CBO data projects current rate of expenditure and extrapolates the data. This, however, ignores the fact that demographics are only one part of the equation. If we also assume non-linear increases in expenditure for medical cost as well as increased living expenses, with SS money account tied to inflation projection, input of monies vs output will decrease, relating to social security deficit perhaps decades earlier than projection. The important part is the VELOCITY. whereas currently it seems most economist only look at the absolute amount. If I lose water 5 times faster right now than 1 minute ago, and 1 minute ago I had my cup filled, and my cup is only halfway filled, I can be sure that it will be gone in < 1 minute. Data massaging is also apparent within the CBO projections as it makes assumptions based on successful implementation of executive orders that may be delayed by years due to political theater.
So therefore you cannot say that goverment does not massage data. And at any point it does, it loses the trust of certain segments of the population. People who read Zerohedge ALREADY HAVE DOUBTS of the system, you must therefore find alternatives to bring the message across that governement isn't full of stooges. Unfortunately the government shoots itself in the foot more times than not.
One can surmise that this detest of the system is Libertarian in nature, and these boards are full of those Libertarians whom you cannot make logical arguments to, however there are still those who might actually look into the post and decide the merits without pre-conceptions. You may need to reframe your posts better to allow for such individuals to make informed decisions. Your post smacks of puerile arguments without facts to back your assertions, a juvenile hit job if anything. If you wish to present counterarguments, I would expect a more thorough job. I will keep in mind your future posts, however I must say I am quite disappointed. It may also be that Tyler wants to forward a puerile counterpoint to begin with, therefore slanting the argument further towards his/her/their Libertarian goal. Being posted in a forum is great honor, but be careful what you post. It can be construed in a most defeatest manner by the people who select you. Do not become the poster boy for puerile arguments again while making counterfactual arguments, it defeats the purpose. I do acknowledge taht Zerohedge is definitely slanted in its coverage, although attendance to this forum pretty much gives you the clue to the type of message Zerohedge would like to project. At least they are honest about it *cough* MSM
"I'll have to learn to juggle better to fool the likes of you."
Outing yourself again Brusca.
We could settle this rather quickly. Let's go back and see what Biderman and Brusca were saying about the economy back in 2007 and see who was right. I just read a pice quoting Brusca as saying the economy was stronger than most thought based on government jobs data. Biderman, you're up.
Good point. I havent researched both enough to know how well their opinions lined up with actual events but it would certainly be good to know. If either were claiming 4 to 5 years ago that all was roses and sunshine it would certainly cut their legs out from under them, this would make them the equivalent of a weatherman who missed a Category 5 hurricane and as such their opinions should probably be dismissed outright.
Anyone have handy links showing what both were saying then?
At issue is the legitimacy of government reporting, and subsequently the impact accuracy or manipulation has on the market.
Having spent a short stint working for a government agency, I can say first hand that data as well as all other aspects of the operations are spun for political benefit just like any other business would. At the heart of the matter, how much spin is too much spin? After all, our interpretations are what lead us to both believe we are right from the same set of facts, yet exist in complete opposition.
All institutions suffer from the law of big numbers. The more complicated the system, the increased likelihood of inaccuracy, misinformation, or outright manipulation. To insist that the "government" is altruistic in their endeavors is ludicrous. Stupid people choose to believe stupid things because it satisfies their mindset. Human beings are fallable. We make mistakes. We do horrible things. Government is just going to multiply those characteristics. While these clear inconsistencies of government operations exist, we cannot exlude the equal likelihood that there are numerous individuals of character who make the best effort to be policemen, firefighters, city councilmen, etc. Most people are good. All we can conclude then, is that we should validate the accuracies of government reports before acting upon the information.
Which leaves us with the interpretation of the facts. Mr. Biderman's claim is that the main stream media makes no editorial effort to hold the accuracy of the government reports to any standard. And that the consistent inaccuracies of the government agencies has reached epic proportions of stupidity. These reports have long influenced the market, and lead the market astray from reality: a good example, when Mr. Bernanke informed us that the subprime problem was contained in 2007 in contrast to Meredith Whitney saying Citibank was bankrupt.
The media has become complicit in the oligarchies use of "facts" to influence the political debate. On the internet, we refer to this endless parade of "green shoots" as hopium. Hopium is the need to feel that things aren't all that bad. Markets work best when fear is not dominant ... but work best for who? In reality this is about price appreciation. Market prices appreciate best when fear is not dominant. Therefore, it should be plain to see that a company, like MSNBC, is influenced by their management to promote a perspective that leads to more ad revenue. Watch the broadcasts during the financial crisis, CNBC wouldn't even mention the bankrupt banks by name because the government identified their insolvency as a national secret. The internet free's us from the weighty chains of control by allowing ANY thought to disseminate among the public discourse. In true democratic fashion, the more popular ideas sift to the top and become marquee. As well as financial analysis ... we tend to gravitate towards reports from more credible sources who demonstrate accuracy over time.
Stupid people watch MSNBC, CNBC, and their local news that the AP controls.
Smart people read Zerohedge, Infowars, Naked Capitalism, CreditWriteDowns, etc ... and no longer are subject to the hopium.
Mr. Biderman's analysis of auto sales aside, his conclusions about the level of ineptness inside main stream media and the obvious manipulation of data/information by our government are solid conclusions any reasonable person can understand.
You may be eloquent and well educated, but that just makes it more sad to see how blind you are.
nicely written but not even to the point.
I'm not defending all government data as holy. I am showing you how out of touch is your alternative: Biderman.
I also seem to trust gov data more than you. it not perfect and I think it might 'go astray much more that it 'gets manipulated.
When people argue 'manipulation' I remind them that the data are bundled by a vast bureaucracy that is always populated by democrats and republicans at the same time. One side never fully controls the data and the other wont let the one that is in power cheat.
They can make mistakes but they can't cheat.
Sorry.
Government data is not manipulated because it is compiled by Republicans and Democrats? First, you have presented no evidence that there is not a major imbalance with one political party outweighing the other. Second, where are the independents, Libertarians or even Greens since you seem to think that 'balance' produces fair analysis. Third, it is not data that ZHers have a problem with, it is the adjustments and analysis. "Seasonally adjusted" is not data.
But your biggest flaw is presenting the straw man choice of government data OR Beiderman.
You still haven't answered bkrolik in an earlier post?
Can't cheat? Wow, you can't buy that kind of naivety. Robert I worked for a testing laboratory for years, and yes you can cheat. When politicians make statements like the following, "We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it". They do not care who is skewing information or if it is being skewed, they just want to look like the circus is under control.
You are lying.
well, for now it looks like dr. Brusca is choosing to respond to rather emotional and opinionated posts. Very little analysis and agruments so far even by "academic economics" standards...
You miss the point. You assume that this is a political issue by claiming political balance within the bureaucracy. If you have read the comments of most here on ZH, you would understand that its mostly a pox on both their houses.
Most anti-Obama comments come from people who worry about green and not red or blue, and from those who worry about individual rights slowly (or not so slowly) slipping away. Obama just happens to be the current chump with the title of president. He makes criticism easier by leading the charge to take away those rights.
You are seen as defending a system that is very political and, in the minds of many well-considered readers here, that makes you part of the problem.
Big fail.
This is a huge (and painfully naive) flaw in Mr. Brusca's thinking. It surprises me that a thinking adult can look at our political system and think that Teams Red and Blue balance each other in any way or in reality represent much of a difference. The rhetoric is different (read: the lies they publicly tell) but the reality of what they do is not. We have two parties that advocate increasingly centralized power, massive deficit spending, importation of vast amounts of illiterate illegal invaders for cheap labor, expensive foreign interventionism, an ever expanding police state, and unaffordable social spending.
I honestly think one either needs to be willfully blind or intensely stupid to look at current politics and think there is a difference. I suppose that deeply ingrained normalcy bias could be a factor also; my silent generation parents both have master degrees plus some change and insist that network news shows alternate points of view, both are befuddled by my argument that they show only minor differences in shading of the same color.
Great. I'll pass it on to Charles. He'll love to hear that his 'data are wrong'.
Your usual PhDeranged.
No one has to agree with the post but at least he took the time to write it and post it when he knew he would be slated here. I read ZH a lot but do feel there can at times be a lack of two sided debate on issues. Like it or not govt stats do move the markets so if you want to make any money you have to be aware of their effect.
While I agree that there should be a two-sided debate on all issues. Don't you think we are already subjected to the opposing debate well above what is called for?
This person knew full well the opinion he was expressing would draw ire from ZH readers, and I would venture to guess it is one reason he did it. His supporting arguments are weak at best. While I am not a devote of Biderman or his work, this whole exercise, from the title of the article, to the thoughts contained within were a childish attempt to stab back at Bidermans childish analysis. Two little kids, on the playground, duking it out over who gets to use the swing first.
Mr. MacroAndCheese, who pulled a similar stunt a few days ago, also got what he deserved.
This has to be MillionDollarBonus best work yet.
RobertBrusca
I interpret that you have a position at BLS.
Please answer one question from me before I seriously consider participating in the 'big census' that's done every couple of years...you know the one that mandates that I spend the week digging up numbers and counts, and capitalizations, expenses, personnel, etc...yet has no consequence for NOT complying, other than a bunch of whiny phone calls, that I'm aware of.
My question is this: In all of the idiotic surveys...transportation, mining, retail sales, fuel, etc. Why is it acceptable that every bit of bullshit I put on the form, even estimates is perfectly fine; my name, email, contact phone is just dandy yet I have to CERTIFY that my fucking FAX number is correct?
So they can send the thin-man alien invaders though the phone lines in the middle of the night.
Only a fax machine will do.
Great point!
Biderman explained things that make sense to even a laymen like me. But he is so right about the sampling method being flawed; 5000 businesses surveyed? Of which a majority respond! There are 50 states, so that's 100 businesses per state. Next we have the different types: supermarkets, electronic stores, petrol stations, and all the kinds of shops; there must be 10 different categories at least.
So for each state, for each category, an average of only 10 stores are surveyed? I know a little about statistics, but a sample of that size is way too small to be representative of one state. There are 300 million people in the USA, divided by 50 states gives an average of 6 million per state.
Imagine a country of 6 million people, would you safely rely on retail figures from a survey that only sampled a hundred businesses?
I give Mr. Brusca credit for defending the scientifically rigorous methods used by modern economists. After all, we're not dealing with witchcraft or sorcery here. The well established validity of these methods is perhaps best illustrated by the video clip below:
http://www.hulu.com/watch/3529/saturday-night-live-theodoric-of-york
Make me laugh!
It is clear that Mr. Bruscetta has been infected by the insidious virus of Chinese European Easter Island American Federal Reservist US citizenism, in which ALL data is blobbed-up, and the truth suppressed and sequestered, by rapacious and denialistic US Federal Reserve citizens, whose number-juggling nature is eternal.
oh yeah.
guilty as charged totally brainwashed
Yes, we knew that already, you Federal Reserve minion and government shill.
Tell me, how does it feel to be a complete sellout and willing slave to a corrupt and failing system? Do you sleep well at night? I know I would not, in your shoes.
akak said:
Excellent summation, especially the point about number juggling. Federal Reservism citizens spend years in training to perfect their juggling skills, after which they are awarded a PhD skill badge in economicationism. The PhD skill badge is required for employment in the field because, even though they call it data analysis, they are actually juggling piles of steaming crap gathered along the roadside.
Once they are juggling a sufficient amount of crap, they demonstrate their skills by assembling the suspended, spinning collection of crap into a large single pile known as a report. (Thus the PhD skill badge, which stands for piled high and deep.)
The problem with Federal Reserve citizenism economicationist steaming crap suspended spinnery is that they deny the fact that they are faeces flingers. This denial is a main factor in the eternal nature of Indo-European US Easter Island Federal Reserve citizenism.
At least paleontologists who analyze coprolites, being actual scientists, acknowledge that they are working with crap, albeit fossilized crap.
But hey, at least Indo-European US Easter Islandist Federal Reserve citizens are able to accomplish one amazing feat: they make the US citizenism commentary of AnAnonymous appear scientifically and historically robust in comparison.
Dang I did not know ZH had crapologists on board. I'll have to learn to juggle better to fool the likes of you.
some great insight there 'buddy'.
Its amazing that you write on things setting out clear here is why Biderman is wrong. And why his rant against the government is his spin and his attempt to make his own work seem more authentic than it it is. In fact it is pure crap.
Only one post in this whole lot even spoke to the points I made. You all love him so much. I'm sorry for attacking your patron saint despite his obvious failings.
Like everyone you love your mother - regardless.
RobertBrusca said:
Made me laugh. Federal Reserve Easter Islandism citizen is as Federal Reserve Easter Islandism citizen does.
I'm not your buddy, guy.
Very can kicking. Ad hominems as the only possible answer are so Federal Reserve Easter Island citizenish.
But hey, it is self justifying.
Alas, alas, more Federal Reserve Easter Island citizenism offuscation and can kicking. The depiction of a repeation of events grows a repeation itself. Do you have any solid element to offer comparison between what happened and what you predict would have happen if?
In the sequence of comments, where is that person speaking about occupation? The quest for symetry leads Federal Reserve Easter Island citizenism citizens on unbelievable paths.
That is quite a story. Never thought of applying for a hollywood script writer job?
As to your piece of advice, please feel free to address it to Federal Reserve Easter Island citizenism citizens, starting with you of course.
Leading by the example...
you obviously didn't get that biderman's comments were meant to be tongue-in-cheek, where he was just noting that the sample set was so far out of the realm of reality that his analysis would be better, shit, a dartboard would probably be closer to the mark. he was also underscoring that it is a deliberately terrible sample set to mask how bad things really are.
what do you do for a living again? not to judge, but ehhhhh....
His tongue in whose cheek?
and which one?
Come on guys. Show some pity. Look at all the time he took to defend his little article here. The poor dumb bastard must have no career at all.
Good job Mister Brusca. You get a gold star!
Mr. Brusca,
Something tells me you took Mr. Biderman's making fun of economists personally.
Yes, I read what you wrote, and it still sounds like a lot of fudge making and taffy pulling.
I'm sorry, to me Economics is not a science but a kind of alchemy; a mix between sociology, psychology, and pseudo-math wedded to the Bride of Frankenstein of mathematics, statistics.
Sure, economists attempt to count things and do predictive calculations; but you don't need more than an average IQ to understand how things are on main street and they ain't pretty and aren't getting better.
We are almost four years into a FED liquidity driven reflation of the artificial economy called the stock market which is underpinned by debt.
They have resuscitated the patient with adrenaline and electro-shock therapy via FED lightning bolts borrowed from the future, but that does not mean that Frankenstein is going back home to Mother or his Wife and Children, or that he can add 2 and 2 and lace his boots.
Yes its serious and your thinking other wise does not make it less so.
Wow - 2 *s. As Colin Quinn would say, "Tough crowd." Not that you deserve better.
robert
your credibility here is strained so leave to some other forum that needs your broad generalizations that you arrogantly think establish some intellectual superiority.
To my Zh brothers and sisters:
Turn your back on this asshole as I will no longer bother to read his dialectical bullshit and snotty responses.
Robert Brusca
Reads 0
I have to disagree here, if the Tylers only put up one viewpoint it becomes nothing but an echo chamber.
That isnt a Fight Club, its a knitting circle.
Your public education has defeated you. You are an embarrassment to your mother.
His mother was a hamster and his father smelt of elderberries.
Robert is right: anyone who could fathom that government data is skewed has not the fainstest idea how the system works. Why would government skew data points? Government is honest and open - it needs to find the truth for everyone who can not getthe facts. Why question the government? This would only create instability in the world where certain entities, ie governemnt, know best.
I hope this post was sarcasm. If not, I'm going to go puke.
You lost me at "we economists..." I hope all you FIRE economy retards eat each other.
One of my rules is "If someone is lying to you and you know that they know their lying, grab your wallet because they're trying to steal from you"
So Robert, what are you trying to steal from us? You heard the video the same as us and know Bidderman wasn't attacking the data he was attacking the way the data is gathered and reported by the MSM. You know that and you lie to us. What's your goal? You can't get to my wallet so why are you spouting these distortions? Why does the government still gather data the way my grandfather would, because it gives them a chance to massage and twist it. You don't address that issue here and haven't in any post I've seen. Why does the MSM present the data served up to them without a shred of critical thinking, because their role is propaganda not news. What you do present is strawman attacks. You know that you are lying to us. What is your game?
The game as always is survival..Since he depends on the system he must defend the system to the end or until his death...He probably has no idea how to live without being an "Economist" and when the system collapses, which it will, he will no longer be needed.
His rather foolish effort is to try to convince someone that what the BLS/Government/"Federal" "Reserve" (Where he seemingly has worked or is a contractor for) produces very real and accurate data that you should trust...
It's just survival...Lying to people on ZH makes him feel a little better about what he knows himself, is actually going on..
The system is in a downward spiral, but since he's been BS'ed to believe the lie that this ship won't go down, He thinks it's perfectly OK to try to convince you of the same thing ..Because he's obviously smarter than you. Even though every intuitive perception you have tells you something different..
He's lying..But he has to..and he wants you to believe him, he is part of the system and needs you to be in it too...Too many escapees from the madhouse would cause the system to break and we can't have that (even though it's the best thing to do for humanity's sake..)
Status Quo or die..
I suppose next the gov stats will show no inflation......
Why would you be embarrased by Bidermans post?
Your tall poppy syndrome is a bore as are your boyish retorts.
Dont attack the man, attack his reasoning. Next you'll be saying that you dont like his pink shirt!
yawn.
Putting aside the content for a moment - let me suggest before you post an article on ZH you want people to take seriously that you proof read it first.
Moving on - "government data are not cooked"
Of course it's cooked. Mark to market is the personification of "cooked". Just as not counting food or fuel as inflation is "cooked". Just as not counting unemployed people as unemployed if they are not receiving a check is "cooked". The metrics the government uses are designed to be spun positive. The media is too lazy to bother looking beyond the reported numbers because Joe Sixpack just reads the headline on his homepage before surfing for porn.
Agreed! Government data IS cooked. Oh yeah - read your headline, scanned rather quickly and then so the word "porn" and reminded me I must either go to bignaturals or persiankitty. The choices!!! Much better then reading some boring guy who talks numbers.
If you run across any sites featuring redheads you let me know....