Wth is wrong with the 'experts'

"U.S reports economy shed 467,000 jobs in June, much higher than expected; unemployment rate ticks up to 9.5 percent."

That is a headline today...

Why is it always a surprise when each month when the reports come out that they got it wrong? The 'experts' are the people who let the economy get to this point in the first place, all the while saying everything was great.

Why does anyone expect them to be right now??

 

.

 

lol, while I will agree with part of that, these experts put us in this position long before Obama was on the scene.

edited to add... LMFAO...

I missed what that pic was named... come now, lets have full disclosure here... lol

SheepWatchingGeorgeWBushOnTV3.jpg

you do have to love it when you can recycle AND have fun though... lol

 

Experts believe that a broke government can spend money to fix a broke economy. Somehow millions of people can't figure out how they need to reestablish their lives, but some guy thousands of miles away in Washington D.C. knows!

 

OK then what's your estimate for how many jobs the US economy will shed in July?

 

I'm not saying that I can give an estimate. I just know that when trying to predict large amounts of people's behavior, you gotta consider the butterfly effect.

 

I don't think they want an accurate forecast. I think employment stats are being used intentionally to slow big jumps and slumps.

 

Who is 'they'? Do you even know who is making these forecasts?

 

David Rockefeller!

 

Lmfao. So true.

 

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/07/jobs-contract-18th-straight-month.html

The US Department of Labour manipulates unemployment figures


How Washington is Fooling You: Manipulated Employment Data


Birth-Death - May Employment Report Not Believable - Jun. 5, 2009


Who Cares About The Birth/Death Model?

 

You have missed the point - the government is not the one making the estimates.

Also, you might have noticed that the OP was talking about how forecasters underestimated job losses compared to actual government data. If the government was faking the numbers to produce a rosy picture, they would have done better than the estimates, not worse.

Also, can you really trust a markets website that doesn't even know how to spell 'tech'?

 

California says it has a money problem , but its has a dead cash cow that millions want to see and they aint charging admission..
And let me tell you something else. That asshole Ben Stein and $99.00 comcast deal. WTF kinda economist is this dickhead.. 99 fucking dollars for idle Cable.. fuck I dont even use 99 dollars in Electricity and that shit is running running..

just another retarded post by me..

 

Okay, first off, when I said 'expert's, I was referring to those that keep getting quoted on the news about this stuff.

They (the ones that get quoted, and shown in little bites on tv/net), do indeed paint a rosier picture then the facts show a month later. This has been going on big time since the slide started.

Every week, they put someone in front of a camera who says "Yeah, things are rough, but next week they will be better"

.... next week, there is a new 'expert' .... repeat til (and if) it becomes true

My question, was in reference to why in the hell these people would do it in the first place?

Is it like a lottery? 'It's your turn this week Bob, best of luck, hope you are the one who gets to be right'????

Do they have a desire to commit professional suicide? Would you invest with someone (or their company) if they got on tv and made predictions that were totally wrong? lol I sure wouldn't...

So, in other words..... wtf is wrong with them....

 

The media surveys economists and their estimates. The number the media uses is an average of the estimates. Some economists may be more consistently close to the actual figure than others, so they would attract more interest in their research, get a bigger bonus etc etc. Bad ones should eventually drop out of the survey.

As Yogi Berra said, "It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future".

 

How does it matter where they get their numbers?I'm not talking about when the newscaster says this stuff, they are nothing but mouthpieces for the teleprompter.

I'm talking about when they quote a person who works in the financial industry, and has been interviewed as an 'expert', putting their reputation on the line that things are getting better, when week after week, the only thing that changes, (besides the situation getting worse) is the expert that you hear from.

The one from the previous week is never seen being quoted again.

 

Just an offshoot of this...

It reminds me of that old 80's show 'V' (I think it was) where they had machines that humans walked into one side and stacks of meat came out the other... except that in this case, the people walking in, can see what happens to those who walk before them....

 

Because its a survey. They may choose someone who was in the survey, or someone who is an economist but was not in the survey, and interview them. Why would the only talk to the same person every time? The media doesn't work that way, they try to use a diversity of sources.

The figure that the media uses when they say whether the actual number was above or below expectations is an average. Whatever talking head they have on TV really makes no difference.

And there are plenty of bears out there predicting doom and gloom. Jim Rogers, Nouriel Roubini, many others.

 

This is all awesome... lol

How much crack do you have to smoke to think that looking at the last five years (mostly before the crash started) and say, 'based on that', 200,000 jobs came into existence this month... lol

 

It's a survey???

When they get Joe Barrymore (random made up name), who works in ABC investments as a financial advisor to stand in front of a camera and say this stuff, what he says, is not based on a survey. It is him, giving his view, based on his supposed 'expertise' and experience on what is happening.

The rest of what the newscasters and reports say, as I already said, isn't what I was talking about.