I watch a lot of business TV because every other form of news makes me want to throw my shoe at the screen like an irate jihardi at a Bush family gathering. So I have been perplexed by the past few months of jobs data coming from the Bureau of Labor and Statistics. The clue to their mission is in their name but they have been spectacularly terrible this year. So much so I have been wondering what gives?
Here’s the deal. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) has revised down the number of jobs created in each month of 2023 in the next month’s report. As a result, the current month’s job growth appears better in comparison. In its latest report, the BLS stated that 253,000 nonfarm payroll jobs were created in the previous month. However, April’s job growth would have been only 182,000 if the BLS had not revised March’s total down by 71,000, from 236,000 to 165,000.
The BLS also revised February’s job growth downward by 78,000 jobs, from 326,000 to 248,000. Furthermore, March’s report revised January’s job growth down by 32,000, from 504,000 to 472,000, after the previous month’s revision had already subtracted 13,000 jobs from January’s growth.
Overestimating the current month’s growth can make it appear larger in comparison to the previous month’s total, particularly if the previous month’s count is revised downward.
The revisionist elimination of jobs has increased the number of jobs created in January through March of this year by 181,000. An analysis published by Zero Hedge (best financial news on Twitter imho and this article is very good) suggests that the BLS is intentionally manipulating the employment numbers to make the Biden Administration look better.
The BLS attributes the changes to additional reports received from businesses and government agencies since the last published estimates and from the recalculation of seasonal factors. And if you believe that I’ve got a ranch in Crawford, TX to sell you.
BLS Revises Job Growth Down for Every Prior Month This Year, Making April Look Better in Comparison https://t.co/ClfV62LOLk— Media Research Center (@theMRC) May 8, 2023