Last week, the Trump administration nominated E. J. Antoni, chief economist of the Heritage Foundation, to be the new commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. If confirmed, he would replace Erika McEntarfer, who was fired by Trump on the ridiculous assertion that she and the BLS had purposefully distorted the jobs report to harm the administration politically.
Several friends of mine have been laid off this year, so I've been paying special attention to economic / labor market news. Like media coverage elsewhere, it really is shocking how much language we're exposed to that is extremely negative. Even "good things" will be framed in a dramatic or threatening way.
I empathize with jobseekers who are assaulted by this negativity (they should all read The Edgy Optimist) and the endless carousel of forces apparently coming to disrupt our livelihoods (China, outsouring, AI, etc.) With all this, one would scarcely know that the number of people who feel positive about their lives is potentially reaching new highs...
Some excellent points about the need to update our statistics gathering, estimation and presentation, thanks for this article that I will share with others.
However, when you write, "But the BLS, though staffed by thousands of diligent individuals who are dedicated public servants driven only by a passion for data and getting the statistical story right, has not had a major analytical overhaul in decades." You are either joking or hopelessly naive.
I find it to be a continual source of amazement how Americans continue to trust a government bureaucracy that is one of the worst in the western world.
"But we shouldn’t fool ourselves into thinking that the status quo has been working when it comes to how we measure our economic world." We also shouldn't fool ourselves into thinking that the right-wing trump administration will do anything except what makes him look good.
Well, I continue to be skeptical that *anything* that comes out of the Trump administration is done first and foremost with the interests of the country and its people as a first priority. But that does not mean that some positive effects might not occasionally come as a secondary result. As Karabell points out, many of our institutions were formed long ago under different social, economic, and political conditions — and may be overdue for review and update.
In particular, it’s long been clear that major economic indicators like GDP, Dow, and rate of job growth are woefully out-of-step with current realities. These worked well enough in the early stages of our country’s development — when resources and planetary carrying capacity seemed unlimited. But at this stage, continuing to be guided by these while the climate and greater ecosystem are degrading, wars over control of resources are looming, and the gap between haves and have-nots is ever widening … well, it’s just not sustainable.
The central question is how far do things have to collapse before a critical mass of citizens and their leaders are willing to acknowledge reality, change course, and start planning for a new future?
"Well, I continue to be skeptical that *anything* that comes out of the Trump administration is done first and foremost with the interests of the country and its people as a first priority. "
So first and foremost for the people?
Explain away stopping illegal immigration, arresting criminal illegals, stopping tranny surgery on minors, stopping men in women's sports, moving to stop DC lawlessness, and on and on.
And really - Trump running for and being president if very far from his own self-interest. It has made him a pariah among the nutcase Lefties and Dems, the lawfare was grossly abusive to him, bankers debanked him, prior admins abused their power in trying to frame him with ridiculous accusations, and people want to and have tried to kill him.
Thanks - yes it does clarify. But I tend to go by the biblical principle: "By their fruits ye shall know them." I tend to look more at what Trump & crew are *actually* doing rather than what they say they are doing.
Armed, masked men with no identification, in unmarked vans, snatching people off the street and, with no due process, shipping them to concentration camps? Taking health care away from millions of the poor? Giving millionaires and billionaires unneeded tax breaks? Accepting bribes from corporations and foreign powers? Ignoring laws and court orders? I have trouble seeing anything “great” in that.
Good point, "edgy optimist", "we shouldn’t fool ourselves into thinking that the status quo has been working when it comes to how we measure our economic world."
Certainly Trump and his partisans sometimes say true things. But they essentially never say them in good faith or with any intention of working toward positive reform, and that is also very likely to be the case here (especially coming from someone with pretty clear crypto-Nazi sympathies like Antoni-- check out the Bismarck background on his Zoom calls). Giving them the benefit of the doubt, the ordinary assumption of good faith that we should in fact give to non-Trumpist critics, is not productive; it just helps legitimize their scheme to destroy liberal institutions and turn this country into a personalist dictatorship.
Well said!
Several friends of mine have been laid off this year, so I've been paying special attention to economic / labor market news. Like media coverage elsewhere, it really is shocking how much language we're exposed to that is extremely negative. Even "good things" will be framed in a dramatic or threatening way.
I empathize with jobseekers who are assaulted by this negativity (they should all read The Edgy Optimist) and the endless carousel of forces apparently coming to disrupt our livelihoods (China, outsouring, AI, etc.) With all this, one would scarcely know that the number of people who feel positive about their lives is potentially reaching new highs...
Never stop Zachary!
Some excellent points about the need to update our statistics gathering, estimation and presentation, thanks for this article that I will share with others.
However, when you write, "But the BLS, though staffed by thousands of diligent individuals who are dedicated public servants driven only by a passion for data and getting the statistical story right, has not had a major analytical overhaul in decades." You are either joking or hopelessly naive.
I find it to be a continual source of amazement how Americans continue to trust a government bureaucracy that is one of the worst in the western world.
I learned a lot from this article - thanks.
"But we shouldn’t fool ourselves into thinking that the status quo has been working when it comes to how we measure our economic world." We also shouldn't fool ourselves into thinking that the right-wing trump administration will do anything except what makes him look good.
That's a really dumb comment. Stopping illegal immigration was only to make trump look good? and many other examples.
Well, I continue to be skeptical that *anything* that comes out of the Trump administration is done first and foremost with the interests of the country and its people as a first priority. But that does not mean that some positive effects might not occasionally come as a secondary result. As Karabell points out, many of our institutions were formed long ago under different social, economic, and political conditions — and may be overdue for review and update.
In particular, it’s long been clear that major economic indicators like GDP, Dow, and rate of job growth are woefully out-of-step with current realities. These worked well enough in the early stages of our country’s development — when resources and planetary carrying capacity seemed unlimited. But at this stage, continuing to be guided by these while the climate and greater ecosystem are degrading, wars over control of resources are looming, and the gap between haves and have-nots is ever widening … well, it’s just not sustainable.
The central question is how far do things have to collapse before a critical mass of citizens and their leaders are willing to acknowledge reality, change course, and start planning for a new future?
another one like Roslyn (above). Are you people able to think rationally and objectively. Your comments suggest not.
Well, I hear your insult, but I'm not hearing any rational, objective counterpoint to my post
Thought it was obvious from my reference.
"Well, I continue to be skeptical that *anything* that comes out of the Trump administration is done first and foremost with the interests of the country and its people as a first priority. "
So first and foremost for the people?
Explain away stopping illegal immigration, arresting criminal illegals, stopping tranny surgery on minors, stopping men in women's sports, moving to stop DC lawlessness, and on and on.
And really - Trump running for and being president if very far from his own self-interest. It has made him a pariah among the nutcase Lefties and Dems, the lawfare was grossly abusive to him, bankers debanked him, prior admins abused their power in trying to frame him with ridiculous accusations, and people want to and have tried to kill him.
Does that help claarify?
Thanks - yes it does clarify. But I tend to go by the biblical principle: "By their fruits ye shall know them." I tend to look more at what Trump & crew are *actually* doing rather than what they say they are doing.
They are actually doing a great number of things, some of which I mentioned. This is what is called "reality."
Armed, masked men with no identification, in unmarked vans, snatching people off the street and, with no due process, shipping them to concentration camps? Taking health care away from millions of the poor? Giving millionaires and billionaires unneeded tax breaks? Accepting bribes from corporations and foreign powers? Ignoring laws and court orders? I have trouble seeing anything “great” in that.
Good point, "edgy optimist", "we shouldn’t fool ourselves into thinking that the status quo has been working when it comes to how we measure our economic world."
What’s a good way of measuring optimism?
Certainly Trump and his partisans sometimes say true things. But they essentially never say them in good faith or with any intention of working toward positive reform, and that is also very likely to be the case here (especially coming from someone with pretty clear crypto-Nazi sympathies like Antoni-- check out the Bismarck background on his Zoom calls). Giving them the benefit of the doubt, the ordinary assumption of good faith that we should in fact give to non-Trumpist critics, is not productive; it just helps legitimize their scheme to destroy liberal institutions and turn this country into a personalist dictatorship.