A GOOD president, as a GOOD Army Officer/NCO or a GOOD Policeman, or GOOD Fireman, or GOOD......(name that profession) has to embrace information, despite what it may be & (all of the above GOOD types, above) must embrace the the people who call it the way they see based on the work that they do.
I've personally observed a Brigade Commander who shoved out the hard working, surrounding him with suck ups. Unit moral plummeted & within about 18 months the Brigade had to be restaffed as the unit failed all readiness measurements: Pretty bad when you are posted at the Fulda Gap looking at the Warsaw Pact Forces in Germany.
I could go on and on about Trump, but he does not serve himself (& our country) even short term if all the folks up & down the line doing the "Ash & Trash" details are on edge to provide only good news to the ultimate decision maker.
In today's world, apolitical is not an option. One can not sit on the fence when democracy is at stake. Hiding behind " I am not political " no longer works. Ryan, whose side are you on? Be honest about Trump, who he is and what he is doing, or be gone.... don't let your content become meaningless because you've put up blinders to what is really going on in Trump's take down of America.
“Political” means you opinions or beliefs about policy or a politicians behavior.
Apolitical is a duty to the PEOPLE. Institutions, people with positions in government roles and technical advisors have a duty to be as honest and accurate as possible.
Judges, FBI agents, the Fed, librarians, the White House House Chef, the Joint Chiefs.
Of course they will make mistakes. But if the lie to advance their own, or a politician’s political agenda, they are putting turds in the meat loaf. It is, in one language, a mortal sin for technical staff to lie.
Framing politics as “you’re either with us or against us” is the same tribal thinking that fuels division. Democracy isn’t preserved by forcing loyalty oaths — that’s how authoritarianism works. People can reject both sides, speak on their own terms, or choose silence without being complicit. Demanding others bend to your political framing doesn’t protect democracy — it poisons it.
If your version of ‘saving democracy’ requires silencing anyone who won’t parrot your politics, you’re not defending democracy — you’re auditioning to end it.
Choosing silence is NOT an asymptote. There is a moral zero (even for atheists) and the silence line will eventually cross it. A "functioning democracy" has the guard rails to protect itself. Our democracy has the check engine light flashing.
During WW2 Japanese pilots returning from missions would report rosy results; i.e.,sinking many American carriers and other ships, partly to save face, but also to please their commanders. Those commanders then made plans based on that false reporting, and we know how that turned out.
I work in the markets every day and have been for over a decade. The data from the BLS is flawed. That doesn’t mean what the president did was right—I fully disagree with firing someone simply because you don’t like the data. That said, the number of businesses responding to BLS surveys has been declining for years. Only about two‑thirds of surveyed businesses respond in time for the initial report. It also doesn’t help that the numbers most widely reported by the news are often cherry‑picked and fail to give a complete picture of the labor market. Too many people are excluded from being counted as “in the workforce,” and many underemployed individuals are classified as fully employed. There are serious flaws in this data that can and should be addressed. Again, I don’t think what the president did was right or fair, but it does draw attention to the shortcomings of the BLS reports.
Edit for a good data point. The latest survey covered 631k worksites. The entire economy is ~11.75M worksites. This survey covers only 5% of all worksites in the US. Only 2/3rds of respondents are in time to be included in the first numbers released. This means we are looking at maybe 3% of all worksites when talking about jobs data. If you don't respond your "data" is filled in by modeling and assumptions.
Good post. I have doubted the BLS numbers for about 20 years. Not just the jobs, the inflation rates and Consumer Price Index have always seemed flawed. There needs to be a new leader at BLS to question the methods. Maybe some carrots and sticks or ease of methods to encourage the ~11.75M worksites to report timely. It has opened opportunities for private resources of this information which may or may not be as good.
It's almost like we have an idiot for a President. Well, maybe not almost. I look forward to the 5 million new jobs that will be reported in August, which will be touted by the President as the best jobs numbers ever, and totally not made up.
As a longtime, retired government employee, my feeling is that all government employees are partisan, even the so-called non-partisan workers. To pretend otherwise is to be willfully ignorant. The woman that Trump fired was a Democrat, so of course she’s going to work for her party first, and work for the country, second. This may shock some of the people in your comments section, but there are lots of government employees who are working for the Democratic party and not for the American people.
As a former scientist that was a state worker (for multiple red and blue states) paid in part by the federal government, I strongly disagree. The people I worked with focussed on the science and public mission first and foremost. Partisan politics were NEVER entertained.
Jeffrey G And yet it was scientists who suggested we take the Covid vaccination, even though it was untested and unproven. Thus, scientists are no more objected than anyone else.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, COVID-19 vaccines underwent the most intensive safety analysis in U.S. history.
COVID-19 vaccines continue to be monitored for safety, even after FDA approval, to make sure they continue to meet FDA's standards for safety and effectiveness.
To date, the systems in place to monitor the safety of COVID-19 vaccines currently used in the United States have identified anaphylaxis and myocarditis or pericarditis as serious types of adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination. Other rare events, such as Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), are also monitored for and studied.
References are included on the website linked. Start reading and learning.
For the want of a nail, a shoe was lost. … All for the want of a nail. How can you tell if you’re winning or losing if nobody is telling you the real score?
Instead of assuming Trump just didn't like the numbers (as Ryan does here), perhaps the numbers provided an opportunity for someone to explain to the President how they are derived and his reaction was the same as mine--what?!? You've got to be kidding me. There must be a much more accurate way to get this information in 2025 than to "survey participants via phone, fax (yes really), email, or using a secure online form." [Lavish]
Bryan himself points to a solution--use payroll data from firms that send out paychecks.
Trump wants a better system. So he fired the currend director and will hire someone who makes the system better, modern, and less subject to 'revisions.'
Have a look at the people around Trump. It is pretty clear in comparison to his first term that he chooses people who will agree with him. This is not a good way to lead, when you just have yes people around you.
I have been "visiting" DC for years, conducting business for various employers with various offices spread across the Federal government. Once past the clerks there is always an appointed level. Under Clinton that was Ivy Leaguers, Bush had Texans, Obama Ivys and minorities, but under Trump 1 there was no massive turnover. Obama had solidified this class. Some change under Trump but certainly not systemic. Biden brought in all old school political hacks and tried to root them even deeper than Obama. Trump finally learned his lesson about the deep state and is removing all the hacks including McEntarfer. Simple as uprooting what had been a Swamp creature.
Hi Ryan, I would like to push a bit on the title "Firing the Messenger" of your article and video. From a lazy query to Perplexity on the role of the Bureau of Labor Statistics Director I got the following, and I quote:
"The Director (formally, the Commissioner) of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) is indeed the person in charge of the agency and holds significant responsibility for ensuring the quality and integrity of its statistical outputs, including jobs data. The BLS operates as an independent national statistical agency within the U.S. Department of Labor, collecting, analyzing, and disseminating key labor market statistics such as employment, unemployment, wage levels, and job growth.
Responsibilities of the BLS Director (Commissioner)
Oversight of Statistical Methods: The Commissioner oversees the methodologies used to collect and process employment and other labor market data. This includes ensuring that the statistical techniques are current, reliable, and in accordance with professional standards. The BLS publishes its statistical methods and makes periodic improvements as economic and statistical tools evolve.
Responsibility for Data Integrity: The Commissioner must ensure the data disseminated is impartial, accurate, and free from political or other external influence. Major data releases are scheduled well in advance to preserve impartiality, and the BLS operates with a high degree of autonomy from the broader Labor Department for this reason.
Accountability for Errors and Corrections: If there are methodological errors or issues with data input, it falls within the BLS’s remit—under the Commissioner’s leadership—to review, correct, and update the statistical methodologies or source data as needed. The process for revising jobs numbers or addressing deficiencies is a regular and transparent part of the agency's functioning; revisions are not unusual and reflect efforts to improve accuracy.
Direct Leadership in Methodological Change: The Commissioner may direct research and consult with BLS survey programs to develop and implement improved statistical methods, often drawing on expertise from the internal Office of Survey Methods Research and the Mathematical Statistics Research Center.
Transparency and Public Communication: The Commissioner and the agency communicate changes in methodology, errors, or major data revisions publicly, ensuring users are aware of any adjustments to labor market statistics.
Summary
To directly answer your question: Yes, the BLS Director (Commissioner) is responsible for ensuring that the statistical methods and inputs used to calculate jobs are appropriate, and has a duty to correct these methodologies and inputs when necessary. "
My push back to the title and partially the description in your video:
If the official numbers are being revised every time and with a trend that shows larger and larger percentage corrections, this is an indication that either the input, the methods, or both are flawed. As you correctly point out, this is a US national security risk, and the director of the Bureau is responsible to find ways to correct the situation, which was not done by the leadership, which may foster a complacency mindset within the Bureau.
I do not condone Trump's actions nor the message that he is conveying. However, I hope that the current events will invite to a deeper scrutiny of the way the numbers are calculated and the data is acquired. In a digital world, it is not a matter of resources it is a matter of resourcefulness. How do you think it would be possible to improve the statistic numbers to make them more reliable and make such huge revisions a thing of the past?
Firing anyone who gives you bad news or news that makes you look bad is RIGHT out of the dictator playbook.
But this is what happens when you elect someone who is willfully ignorant of history.
this is how Putin is winning for the past 3 years
Try for the last decade.
I can only hope that the implosion of his regime in the coming months will help return some sanity to the US.
A GOOD president, as a GOOD Army Officer/NCO or a GOOD Policeman, or GOOD Fireman, or GOOD......(name that profession) has to embrace information, despite what it may be & (all of the above GOOD types, above) must embrace the the people who call it the way they see based on the work that they do.
I've personally observed a Brigade Commander who shoved out the hard working, surrounding him with suck ups. Unit moral plummeted & within about 18 months the Brigade had to be restaffed as the unit failed all readiness measurements: Pretty bad when you are posted at the Fulda Gap looking at the Warsaw Pact Forces in Germany.
I could go on and on about Trump, but he does not serve himself (& our country) even short term if all the folks up & down the line doing the "Ash & Trash" details are on edge to provide only good news to the ultimate decision maker.
In today's world, apolitical is not an option. One can not sit on the fence when democracy is at stake. Hiding behind " I am not political " no longer works. Ryan, whose side are you on? Be honest about Trump, who he is and what he is doing, or be gone.... don't let your content become meaningless because you've put up blinders to what is really going on in Trump's take down of America.
Apolitical is a duty.
“Political” means you opinions or beliefs about policy or a politicians behavior.
Apolitical is a duty to the PEOPLE. Institutions, people with positions in government roles and technical advisors have a duty to be as honest and accurate as possible.
Judges, FBI agents, the Fed, librarians, the White House House Chef, the Joint Chiefs.
Of course they will make mistakes. But if the lie to advance their own, or a politician’s political agenda, they are putting turds in the meat loaf. It is, in one language, a mortal sin for technical staff to lie.
Framing politics as “you’re either with us or against us” is the same tribal thinking that fuels division. Democracy isn’t preserved by forcing loyalty oaths — that’s how authoritarianism works. People can reject both sides, speak on their own terms, or choose silence without being complicit. Demanding others bend to your political framing doesn’t protect democracy — it poisons it.
If your version of ‘saving democracy’ requires silencing anyone who won’t parrot your politics, you’re not defending democracy — you’re auditioning to end it.
Choosing silence is NOT an asymptote. There is a moral zero (even for atheists) and the silence line will eventually cross it. A "functioning democracy" has the guard rails to protect itself. Our democracy has the check engine light flashing.
Here's an unimportant opinion just to boost engagement: I also like the Hitchhiker's Guide the to Galaxy.
Sounds like Putin’s problem with the SMO information he’s provided.
Aloha Ryan.
Yes. And.
Wasn’t Trump trying to fire the messengers, us, on Jan 6th?
You are an intelligence guy. And an intelligent guy. What would be a foreign national intelligence assessment of President Trump?
Right now Putin is looking at his Epstein files and pondering on when to make the data drop.
During WW2 Japanese pilots returning from missions would report rosy results; i.e.,sinking many American carriers and other ships, partly to save face, but also to please their commanders. Those commanders then made plans based on that false reporting, and we know how that turned out.
I work in the markets every day and have been for over a decade. The data from the BLS is flawed. That doesn’t mean what the president did was right—I fully disagree with firing someone simply because you don’t like the data. That said, the number of businesses responding to BLS surveys has been declining for years. Only about two‑thirds of surveyed businesses respond in time for the initial report. It also doesn’t help that the numbers most widely reported by the news are often cherry‑picked and fail to give a complete picture of the labor market. Too many people are excluded from being counted as “in the workforce,” and many underemployed individuals are classified as fully employed. There are serious flaws in this data that can and should be addressed. Again, I don’t think what the president did was right or fair, but it does draw attention to the shortcomings of the BLS reports.
Edit for a good data point. The latest survey covered 631k worksites. The entire economy is ~11.75M worksites. This survey covers only 5% of all worksites in the US. Only 2/3rds of respondents are in time to be included in the first numbers released. This means we are looking at maybe 3% of all worksites when talking about jobs data. If you don't respond your "data" is filled in by modeling and assumptions.
Good post. I have doubted the BLS numbers for about 20 years. Not just the jobs, the inflation rates and Consumer Price Index have always seemed flawed. There needs to be a new leader at BLS to question the methods. Maybe some carrots and sticks or ease of methods to encourage the ~11.75M worksites to report timely. It has opened opportunities for private resources of this information which may or may not be as good.
It's almost like we have an idiot for a President. Well, maybe not almost. I look forward to the 5 million new jobs that will be reported in August, which will be touted by the President as the best jobs numbers ever, and totally not made up.
Well done Ryan. I hadn’t considered the effect on military readiness that phony numbers create. Nice tie-in to your novel too.
As a longtime, retired government employee, my feeling is that all government employees are partisan, even the so-called non-partisan workers. To pretend otherwise is to be willfully ignorant. The woman that Trump fired was a Democrat, so of course she’s going to work for her party first, and work for the country, second. This may shock some of the people in your comments section, but there are lots of government employees who are working for the Democratic party and not for the American people.
As a former scientist that was a state worker (for multiple red and blue states) paid in part by the federal government, I strongly disagree. The people I worked with focussed on the science and public mission first and foremost. Partisan politics were NEVER entertained.
Jeffrey G And yet it was scientists who suggested we take the Covid vaccination, even though it was untested and unproven. Thus, scientists are no more objected than anyone else.
From the CDC website today at this address:
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccine-safety/vaccines/covid-19.html#cdc_generic_section_6-a-closer-look-at-the-safety-data
A closer look at the safety data
During the COVID-19 pandemic, COVID-19 vaccines underwent the most intensive safety analysis in U.S. history.
COVID-19 vaccines continue to be monitored for safety, even after FDA approval, to make sure they continue to meet FDA's standards for safety and effectiveness.
To date, the systems in place to monitor the safety of COVID-19 vaccines currently used in the United States have identified anaphylaxis and myocarditis or pericarditis as serious types of adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination. Other rare events, such as Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), are also monitored for and studied.
References are included on the website linked. Start reading and learning.
Ya but if you have integrity then it is possible that others also have integrity and are very good at what they do regardless of political leaning.
For the want of a nail, a shoe was lost. … All for the want of a nail. How can you tell if you’re winning or losing if nobody is telling you the real score?
"...and replaced her with musician and businessman Gene Simmons. When asked why, the President replied, "Simon Cowell had prior commitments.""
The BLS has been creating bad estimates long before Trump. Perhaps someone should have been fired before now but that doesn't happen in government.
https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2Fhistorical-revision-to-blss-preliminary-employment-report-v0-o61gzm4b9mgf1.png%3Fwidth%3D2490%26format%3Dpng%26auto%3Dwebp%26s%3De0790cb42a00f7e32c01e475d3fd26fccaf21e7f
Credit to Sahil231090 on reddit for the chart - data from ALFRED: https://alfred.stlouisfed.org/series/downloaddata?seid=PAYEMS
Here's another good article that describes HOW the survey is done and analyses the possible causes for the downward revisions:
https://www.jameslavish.com/p/is-the-bls-corrupt-or-just-incompetent
Instead of assuming Trump just didn't like the numbers (as Ryan does here), perhaps the numbers provided an opportunity for someone to explain to the President how they are derived and his reaction was the same as mine--what?!? You've got to be kidding me. There must be a much more accurate way to get this information in 2025 than to "survey participants via phone, fax (yes really), email, or using a secure online form." [Lavish]
Bryan himself points to a solution--use payroll data from firms that send out paychecks.
Trump wants a better system. So he fired the currend director and will hire someone who makes the system better, modern, and less subject to 'revisions.'
Have a look at the people around Trump. It is pretty clear in comparison to his first term that he chooses people who will agree with him. This is not a good way to lead, when you just have yes people around you.
I have been "visiting" DC for years, conducting business for various employers with various offices spread across the Federal government. Once past the clerks there is always an appointed level. Under Clinton that was Ivy Leaguers, Bush had Texans, Obama Ivys and minorities, but under Trump 1 there was no massive turnover. Obama had solidified this class. Some change under Trump but certainly not systemic. Biden brought in all old school political hacks and tried to root them even deeper than Obama. Trump finally learned his lesson about the deep state and is removing all the hacks including McEntarfer. Simple as uprooting what had been a Swamp creature.
Found the cultist.
Hi Ryan, I would like to push a bit on the title "Firing the Messenger" of your article and video. From a lazy query to Perplexity on the role of the Bureau of Labor Statistics Director I got the following, and I quote:
"The Director (formally, the Commissioner) of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) is indeed the person in charge of the agency and holds significant responsibility for ensuring the quality and integrity of its statistical outputs, including jobs data. The BLS operates as an independent national statistical agency within the U.S. Department of Labor, collecting, analyzing, and disseminating key labor market statistics such as employment, unemployment, wage levels, and job growth.
Responsibilities of the BLS Director (Commissioner)
Oversight of Statistical Methods: The Commissioner oversees the methodologies used to collect and process employment and other labor market data. This includes ensuring that the statistical techniques are current, reliable, and in accordance with professional standards. The BLS publishes its statistical methods and makes periodic improvements as economic and statistical tools evolve.
Responsibility for Data Integrity: The Commissioner must ensure the data disseminated is impartial, accurate, and free from political or other external influence. Major data releases are scheduled well in advance to preserve impartiality, and the BLS operates with a high degree of autonomy from the broader Labor Department for this reason.
Accountability for Errors and Corrections: If there are methodological errors or issues with data input, it falls within the BLS’s remit—under the Commissioner’s leadership—to review, correct, and update the statistical methodologies or source data as needed. The process for revising jobs numbers or addressing deficiencies is a regular and transparent part of the agency's functioning; revisions are not unusual and reflect efforts to improve accuracy.
Direct Leadership in Methodological Change: The Commissioner may direct research and consult with BLS survey programs to develop and implement improved statistical methods, often drawing on expertise from the internal Office of Survey Methods Research and the Mathematical Statistics Research Center.
Transparency and Public Communication: The Commissioner and the agency communicate changes in methodology, errors, or major data revisions publicly, ensuring users are aware of any adjustments to labor market statistics.
Summary
To directly answer your question: Yes, the BLS Director (Commissioner) is responsible for ensuring that the statistical methods and inputs used to calculate jobs are appropriate, and has a duty to correct these methodologies and inputs when necessary. "
My push back to the title and partially the description in your video:
If the official numbers are being revised every time and with a trend that shows larger and larger percentage corrections, this is an indication that either the input, the methods, or both are flawed. As you correctly point out, this is a US national security risk, and the director of the Bureau is responsible to find ways to correct the situation, which was not done by the leadership, which may foster a complacency mindset within the Bureau.
I do not condone Trump's actions nor the message that he is conveying. However, I hope that the current events will invite to a deeper scrutiny of the way the numbers are calculated and the data is acquired. In a digital world, it is not a matter of resources it is a matter of resourcefulness. How do you think it would be possible to improve the statistic numbers to make them more reliable and make such huge revisions a thing of the past?