SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Politics : The Obama - Clinton Disaster -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (65488)2/4/2012 8:52:03 PM
From: John5 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 103300
 
That's an excellent point, GZ. The Obama administration has obviously cooked the books on many of these reports during his presidency. Then, many months later, revisions are released painting a much bleaker picture of near-reality. That's been the pattern all along. Sometimes, we've even witnessed multiple downward revisions of the same report.

It would not surprise me in the slightest if the Obama administration manages to lop off a couple of percentage points from unemployment figures just to help the illegal alien African Muslim's reelection bid.

They don't seem to use fuzzy math to do this. They seem to simply lie about the facts and falsify official reports. I think this because it is difficult to believe that the original data could have been so wrong, over and over and over again, when the downward revisions finally come to light weeks or months later. It happens month after month after month, as we've seen. It's like a clever ruse designed to keep equities and bonds afloat, no matter what. -ng-

Bottom line: U.S. and European economic conditions are exceptionally bleak and S&P is reportedly considering another U.S. downgrade. [1]

1. finance.yahoo.com



To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (65488)2/4/2012 9:04:05 PM
From: grusum3 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 103300
 
I think the government is using an airbrush to touch up the numbers for political reasons

i think that's correct.