- The hooker is suddenly concerned about her virtue…
- Proof that government statisticians are liars…
- April 15 is getting close. Before you file, you need to learn about one key loophole in the tax code that can LEGALLY save you thousands in taxes this year.
Dear Reader,
Aghast and alarmed, Bloomberg wonders:
“What Happens When US Economic Data Can’t Be Trusted?”
Continues Bloomberg — its brow furrowed deeply with fear:
- With Donald Trump firing independent regulators and killing off advisory committees, data on the world’s largest economy may be next.
And so the harlot is suddenly jealous of her virtue.
For years and years and years — I believe — government statisticians have betrayed their virtue.
Or if you please, their chastity.
The Pimp/Prostitution Relationship
Imagine the pimp/prostitute relationship. Have you yet? Then I believe you have arrived at a very close approximation of the government/statistician relationship.
I concede it is a controversial approximation. It is not a literal approximation. And I do not intend to impugn the reputations of honest women and men within the government employ.
Yet let us take consideration of the facts.
Last August we learned the Bureau of Labor Statistics had previously reported 818,000 phantom 2023-2024 payroll additions.
These jobs simply did not exist.
818,000 is a highly handsome number. It cannot be ascribed to mere botchwork.
It suggests, strongly, the abandonment of chastity — and in the service of politics.
How Could They Be so Wrong?
Thus the Heritage Foundation reported last August that:
- The latest data show that initial estimates of job growth for the year ending in March 2024 were grossly overestimated by 1.2 million — a third of all supposed job growth…
- What makes this year’s benchmark so abnormal is the size of the downward revision: At 818,000, it’s the largest since 2009, when the labor market was bottoming out in the depths of the Great Recession…
- The problem here is not simply that economic data are being revised; that’s routine.
- Rather, the alarm bells should be ringing because the jobs numbers are being so consistently revised down by such large amounts…
- The problem has become so persistent that members of Congress are wondering if something nefarious is going on behind the scenes…
- The Labor Department owes Congress, and the American people, a full explanation of what’s wrong with its models and methodologies — as well as why nothing has been done to fix their obvious problems.
What you witnessed — I believe — was the betrayal of virtue for political consideration.
“Almost Zero”
Now scroll back to the year 2023.
Statistical “revisions” revealed that each monthly payrolls print that year endured a revision — a downward revision.
What is the probability that each month of the 12 would endure not merely revision… but downward revision?
As Zero Hedge reported at that time, a 12-sigma probability.
“Sigma,” in the statistical symbology, represents standard deviation from the mean.
Thus a 12-sigma event equals 12 standard deviations from the mean.
How likely is a 12-sigma event? I have it on reliable authority — ChatGPT, no less — that:
- The probability of an occurrence at 12 standard deviations above the mean in a normal distribution is extremely low. In fact, it is almost zero.
“Almost zero.”
Affirms Six Figure Investing:
- The probability of a sigma event higher than seven or eight is unlikely in a lifetime. Common probability distributions predict that events with sigma levels above seven are very unlikely…
Yet here we had a 12-sigma occurrence on our hands.
Virtually Impossible
It is likelier that lambs will lay down with lions… that cats and dogs will declare peace… that a politician will speak sense.
What does it speak for the government “statisticians” who endlessly botch the data… to the point of 12 standard deviations?
I leave the conclusion at your knees, dear reader.
Yet of the statistical near-impossibility, concluded Zero Hedge:
- [This is] virtually impossible unless there was political pressure to massage the data higher initially and then revise it lower when nobody is looking.
That is: It was virtually impossible unless government statisticians abandoned their virtue under political pressure.
Yet only now do Bloomberg’s statistical prudes, wring their hands, clutch their pearl necklaces, and take to the fainting couch.
Where were their moral concerns when the government statisticians they presently praise rolled upon their backs, erred to 12 standard deviations from the mean — a near-impossibility — and abandoned their virtue?
These concerns were nowhere to be discovered. That is because they were nowhere expressed.
Why? I believe the answer is clear as gin.
Let’s Get Real
The statistical harlotry advanced a political agenda to which the prudes — ironically — clung.
And so they diverted their eyes from the goings-on of the cathouse.
Now that Mr. Trump is in position to pressure government statistics in his direction, they have discovered their statistical chastity.
Formerly statistical harlots, they are presently statistical prudes.
I concede at once that the president is a very vainful fellow.
And I do not question — not for one instant — that he would manipulate the economic statistics in his favor if given half the opportunity.
Yet those who denounce him upon grounds of chastity?
I suggest they stare into a very clear mirror.
They have already declared themselves for the cathouse.
He merely threatens to reclaim ownership.
Brian Maher
for Freedom Financial News
