Data indicates that DOL rigged claims of recent job growth.. 73
On Fri, 13 May 2005 16:03:07 -0400, alexy
Not really. Those who are that naive don't recognize the complexity of what is being measured, and want it to be some simply measurable and unchanging thing like a...
Oh come now. Random over and under estimates would offer some evidence of honesty. But a consistant bias toward low numbers rapidly starts to stink.
Well now isn't that convenient. There was a time when this country was still young when the definition of a "gallon" or a "bushel" varied from state to state and county to county. What a boon to honest commerce that one can no longer define his own units of measure and swindlers can no longer rely on the general confusion to enrich themselves.
Okay. How about government adhering to their own standards? If you look at todays official inflation number - is it the same measure that was being reported 5 or 10 years ago? Swindlers - I say.
I can see the point you are making very well. Can you see the point I...
Ohhh! The bushel is smaller but better! Then pray tell. What items has the Fed adjust "downwards" when quality deteriorates? Or are all those lower priced chinese goods we buy in Wal Mart also improving in quality and service life.
Do we only notice the improvements that allow us to lower inflation figures or does it cut both ways? Please enlighten me because I do not believe the Fed would ever make such an "adjustment" unless it served to lower the inflation numbers.
Seriously. There is no honest justification for such finagling. A measure is just measure. A (any!) metric has no value to honest accounting if it is not consistent. Let people debate whether a particular inflation value is good, bad, or indifferent under changing circumstances. But tinkering with measuring techniques proves that honest accounting is not the goal.
Thomas Bartkus