Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ken98 who wrote (30606)	10/24/2000 7:52:59 AM
From: Oblomov	Respond to of 436258

>> It seems that most academics have a blind spot in their analysis... Absolutely. As an example, I have personally spoken with several academic economists on the issue. They were actually offended by my suggestion that many of the methodology changes made by the BLS in the past few years were politically motivated. They are so intent on keeping politics out of economics, and yet they do not seem to understand that "politics" is just a set of rules designed to conserve the status quo. If the BLS didn't serve Republican interests as well, then wouldn't they make an issue of BLS methodology? Another example: I worked with a woman who was an analyst at the BLS for 2 years in the mid 90s. Although she left out of sheer boredom, she was frustrated by the fact that she was constantly being asked to "massage" data in one way or another. She felt like she wasn't able to actually do analysis. Also, being a Republican, she realized that she did not have a career path at the BLS under Clinton. I suppose that these anecdotes prove nothing, but it occurs to me that maybe the issue is too abtruse for J6P to grasp. But if the bond boys ever stop reacting as planned to the BLS numbers, then J6P will pay.