Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Wiz Imp

(7,526 posts)
47. The process makes it virtually impossible.
Fri Sep 26, 2025, 09:24 AM
Friday

As someone extremely familiar with the process, I'm going to copy the summary from Google's AI overview. In this case, I can attest to it being completely accurate. This overview summarizes it more clearly and succinctly than I could do myself.

The commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) does not even see the jobs numbers before they are finalized. The process is intentionally designed to keep the commissioner, who is a political appointee, at arm's length from the data collection and estimation process to protect the integrity of the statistics.

Key details about the process:

Final numbers are locked in The commissioner is typically briefed on the final numbers on the Wednesday afternoon before the public release on Friday. By this point, the data is prepared, finalized, and locked into the system.

No role in estimation The commissioner plays no role in estimating or manipulating the figures. Their involvement is limited to reviewing the accompanying narrative for the public release, not altering the underlying data.

Internal safeguards The BLS maintains a strong culture of independence and has systems in place to prevent any single person, including the commissioner, from interfering with the data. Former commissioners have stated it would be impossible to manipulate the data without being detected, which would likely trigger whistleblowers and resignations.

Career staff handles data The numbers are collected and processed by nonpartisan career civil servants who have no connection to the political administration.

These safeguards came under scrutiny in August 2025 when then-President Donald Trump fired Commissioner Erika McEntarfer after a weak jobs report and baselessly alleged the numbers were "rigged". However, multiple former BLS officials, including those appointed by Trump, rejected the idea that the commissioner could manipulate the data.

Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Sure it did. LudwigPastorius Thursday #1
First thing I thought: U.S. Commerce Department is putting out these numbers, Lutnick doesn't want to be fired. sop Thursday #2
If those numbers are accurate, maybe they represent spending before tariffs spooky3 Thursday #3
It includes Libation Day (sp) in April, with front running & all kinds of unusual adjustments by corps to TACO. Bernardo de La Paz Thursday #16
Sure, Jan. Scrivener7 Thursday #4
Awful that we have to wonder if official reports and stats are trustworthy. But there's good reason. And awful that wiggs Thursday #5
no need to decrease interest rates then, Mr Powell chicoescuela Thursday #6
So no more interest rate cuts? Raven123 Thursday #7
Has this been independently verified? greatauntoftriplets Thursday #8
The data for the next ten quarters is available and waiting to be released. twodogsbarking Thursday #9
Impossible Nigrum Cattus Thursday #10
Go to the web site or talk to an economist. . . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Thursday #17
Wait a while johnnyfins Thursday #11
Yes, the economy is artificially boosted by AI capex (data centres, energy) Bernardo de La Paz Thursday #19
The real data will be Tax receipts IbogaProject Thursday #29
AI Capex, while strong, is not driving GDP growth lapfog_1 Friday #53
They are moving to throw up data centres as fast as they can. There is construction, purchase of gas turbines, etc. Bernardo de La Paz Friday #57
and there's swamp land in Yuma mdbl Thursday #12
Reporting anything less than 3x reality gets you fired ThoughtCriminal Thursday #13
You just shat on all the career professionals there. Bernardo de La Paz Thursday #18
Sure, blame our own ThreeNoSeep Thursday #24
How Dare You. Insulting people you don't know over facts you don't understand. Wiz Imp Thursday #31
Thank you. As if not getting fired automatically makes a worker corrupt. Bernardo de La Paz Thursday #34
That's all true OrwellwasRight Friday #42
Everything he said would prevent a political appointee from juicing numbers. Bernardo de La Paz Friday #43
Thank you! You are right about everything. Wiz Imp Friday #46
The process makes it virtually impossible. Wiz Imp Friday #47
Nobody cares. Igel Friday #66
And when the reports are especially bad, like the last 2 payroll jobs reports, and the May retail sales progree Friday #67
Agreed - although I myself learned long ago that going through the mental contortions required to willfully Midwestern Democrat Saturday #68
Reporting it accurately in Trump's maladministration and you are fired. travelingthrulife Friday #49
Elevated spending because costs are increased by tariffs? nilram Thursday #14
LOL. "revised higher largely due to new additional data" PSPS Thursday #15
For some reason, I'm sure you had no problems believing the 1st quarter GDP Wiz Imp Thursday #32
In Fairness RobinA Friday #65
Does anyone trust any numbers from a Trump admin? ananda Thursday #20
I no longer trust numbers from trump LetMyPeopleVote Thursday #21
Hmmm lonely bird Thursday #22
The reported GDP numbers are inflation-adjusted, that's why it's called "real GDP". The nominal dollar increase was a progree Thursday #36
Okaaaay lonely bird Friday #45
Cool story, bro🙄nt Javaman Thursday #23
I hate to sound like a conspiracy theorist, Hayabusa Thursday #25
... UpInArms Thursday #26
Bullshit. AltairIV Thursday #27
As the members of Delta Tau Chi would say it. CentralMass Thursday #28
Um! ProfessorGAC Thursday #30
The reported GDP numbers are inflation-adjusted, that's why it's called "real GDP". The nominal dollar increase was 6.0% progree Thursday #37
Thanks, I Missed That ProfessorGAC Friday #44
But does "inflation-adjusted," adjust for tariff increases? Doodley Friday #55
This message was self-deleted by its author progree Friday #61
New answer: Apparently not, if AI is to be believed progree Friday #62
Thank you for the info. So, tariffs could, at least partly, be distorting the numbers. Doodley Friday #64
A major reason for the increase is actually a quirk in how the GDP is calculated. Wiz Imp Thursday #33
They're messing with the numbers. n/t aggiesal Thursday #35
Yah right Lemon Lyman Thursday #38
I don't believe it at all. CaptainTruth Thursday #39
I was expecting 38%, 3800%, or 38,000,000%. So disappointing. hay rick Thursday #40
I don't Rebl2 Thursday #41
Just like voting, Spending boycotts only work if people participate. Hotler Friday #48
Instead of trafficking in conspiracy theories about how everything is "fake" (it's not) Wiz Imp Friday #50
Sure it did. Ocelot II Friday #51
I trust no numbers coming from this gang. Ritabert Friday #52
nice, cnn! way to spin "inflation was even higher than previously thought" as a positive thing. unblock Friday #54
The "personal consumption expenditures price index" is reportedly the Fed's favorite inflation gauge progree Friday #63
Do we believe this? No. WhiteTara Friday #56
I'm surprised they didn't report 38 percent Bristlecone Friday #58
Yeah sure kimbutgar Friday #59
I don't believe it. Paper profits, at best, outright lying and statistics manipulation at worst. /nt artemisia1 Friday #60
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»The US economy grew at a ...»Reply #47