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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: pezz who wrote (39171)	10/5/2003 6:13:13 AM
From: maceng2	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74559

Well, I suppose its OK to be a bull, but please do not try and feed me B/S. Let me spell it out for you as you plainly are not listening... Message 19347619 in addition, the Labor Department is employing month for month the same two practices that camouflage the horrible reality. In July, for example, it reported a decline in payrolls by 44,000, while job losses for June were revised upward from 30,000 to 72,000. For May, the retrospective upward revision was even from 17,000 to 70,000. As such upward revisions of job losses in the prior month have become a regular feature, this practice has the convenient effect of producing correspondingly lower new numbers every month. The same happens, at more moderate scale, with weekly reported claims. There is still more spinning involved. The government adds every month some 30,000-50,000 imaginary workers to the job total. It is based on the assumption that in an economic recovery a lot of people start their own business. In normal recoveries, they have done so, indeed. All it needs to activate this statistical job creation is a unilateral decision by the government that the economy is in recovery. Once a year, the statisticians reconcile their assumption with reality by a revision. When they did this in May of this year, 400,000 new jobs that had been reported earlier simply vanished. Such revisions, of course, take place outside the monthly reported job losses. Together, we presume, these statistical casuistries have reduced the reported job losses in the past two years by well over 100,000 per month. Message 19338445 None of this is relevant.None of this explains why or how the numbers were supposed to be faked. ding dong... Hello... anyone at home?? -g-

To: pezz who wrote (39171)	10/5/2003 7:58:18 AM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

Hello Pezz, <<unemployment>> ... let me try this tact on you ... 'take my word for it, the unemployment numbers as reported are less than meaningless, they are dangerous if depended on for investment decision, unless one takes a contrary stand. If I had reported my academic grades to my parents in similar fashion, I would be cheating them'. The spin about jobs, GDP and productivity are no more than bad fantasies, not even qualifying for awful science fiction. The truth will out, and when it does, we do not want to be holding much of what J6P considers equity investments. I keep reminding myself and Maurice, that the most painfully outrageous is always revealed at the bitter end, right before revolution of one form or another variation, leading to evaporation, dissipation, and redistribution. I believe the most painfully outrageous may include whatever is finally discovered about Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, JPM, GE, AIG, FED, and the Bureau of Labour Statistics. The current bubble will be the bubble that defines all bubbles. Just a reminder to myself, buy gold, for it is the natural trade, obvious exchange, apparent wager, and sure bet (NToeAwsBe for short). Whatever entry mistake one makes in buying gold, it will be corrected by a secular gold bull market. Such is the beauty of a sure bet, as in strategies such as LTBH and buy-the-dip can make all seem a genius. We all want to be genius-like :0) Chugs, Jay