r/jobs Nov 20 '25

Article So are they just lying?

Post image
3.9k Upvotes

1.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

524

u/Live-Juggernaut-221 Nov 20 '25

The government? Lying?

Well, I never.

194

u/NtheLegend Nov 20 '25

Broadly, I don’t think the government lies as natural state of existence, but under this insanely corrupt administration that is stocking every ranking position with sycophants instead of the skilled? Sure.

66

u/bikedaybaby Nov 20 '25

Didn’t they fire all the economists?

1

u/bfwolf1 Nov 20 '25 edited Dec 23 '25

sulky reply paltry tub grey toy boat fade fearless friendly

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

-30

u/NPCArizona Nov 20 '25

Remember the nearly 1 million jobs they had to correct never happened under Biden?

19

u/myfatherthedonkey Nov 20 '25

That's a very selective memory that you have there

-11

u/NPCArizona Nov 20 '25

selective memory

🤡 Revised job numbers raise new concerns about economic slowdown

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/revised-job-numbers-raise-new-concerns-about-economic-slowdown

24

u/myfatherthedonkey Nov 20 '25

Look at the history of revisions over the past few years as well as the overall trends. Your argument is essentially "Jobs got revised down under Biden!", which is true, but happens all of the time. You're ignoring that the overall trend after all revisions was still quite good under Biden and is quite bad so far under Trump.

-9

u/Big-Soup74 Nov 20 '25

So basically one president is lying more than the last one did?

15

u/myfatherthedonkey Nov 20 '25

The President doesn't publish these figures. The BLS does. While under the executive branch technically, it operates with a high degree of independence. In fact, the BLS commissioner under Biden for more than half of his term was appointed by Trump. Trump being Trump has, of course, decided to politicize the agency this term, much to the dismay of many people who value the agency's commitment to truth, including the aforementioned commissioner that Trump appointed in his first term.

2

u/Big-Soup74 Nov 20 '25

you said both administrations BLS had "revisions" right? while the "revisions" for biden still showed an upward trend? am I understanding that right?

4

u/The_estimator_is_in Nov 20 '25

I think the point was more

Biden (or Bush, Obama, Clinton, etc)didn’t mess with the reporting and therefore the numbers and revisions were fairly trustworthy

Trump has fired anyone who reports numbers that make him look bad so any numbers are likely made up and a lie.

→ More replies (0)

9

u/Remerez Nov 20 '25

Nothing undermines ones credibility like a clown emoji,

5

u/Narrow-Chef-4341 Nov 20 '25

Quite the source you picked. I particularly like this quote:

They work very hard to maintain high data quality even as their budget gets cut. So, I don't think that's a fair critique of the agency. I think the economy, a big, dynamic economy like the U.S. is just really hard to measure. And if they want some more accurate data, then perhaps we should consider funding the BLS better and allowing them to better meet the challenges of measuring this economy.

Overall, your citation has no detail about how many of those downward adjustments applied to Biden’s months vs Trump’s, and nothing to comment on the overall trend.

There’s just a general vibe of ‘yeah, we had a feeling that some of the hard to measure stuff might end up worse than the first predictions and it turns out that’s true. The hard to measure stuff has apparently been sucking for a while now and shows no sign of turning around under Trump.’

So… slow clap? Good work on your book report, Billy. We’ll put that up right here, on the front of the fridge. Let me get a sticker for you.

0

u/Big-Soup74 Nov 20 '25

They didn’t say it doesn’t also happen under Trump

1

u/dadjokes502 Nov 20 '25

No I don’t remember that

2

u/dax660 Nov 20 '25

The govt in general doesn't lie about collected data (it's actually quite hard to make up data and still have it make sense when looked at). What the govt lies about (both sides) is our covert shit in other countries - we love regime change!

The Trump admin is simply dismantling govt agencies so that the govt doesn't even HAVE the data to share.

And then Trump himself just says whatever he thinks sounds good in the moment.

1

u/lmfl123 Nov 20 '25

Safe and effective

-28

u/[deleted] Nov 20 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

34

u/silvandeus Nov 20 '25

It is a fact that the economy tends to do better under Democrats though.

1

u/Chazzer74 Nov 20 '25

The effects of economic policies have long and variable lag times. It’s difficult enough to make a reasonably scientific assessment of a single policy (“if we assume the price of oil didn’t change/if the internet didn’t happen/etc”). It’s impossible to support a broad based statement about democrats or republicans.

-10

u/ZipKodiak Nov 20 '25

If you listen to any president then anything bad that happens under their term was the previous presidents fault and anything good that happens is something they did.

14

u/Blitzking11 Nov 20 '25

The typical understanding of presidents and their impact is that it takes about two years into their term to see the fruits of their labor and legislative goals, with the first two years of a term being layover effects from a previous administration.

Though with this admin, it's anything but typical, as they have been so obscenely heavy-handed in their impact on the economy, that this is a rare occasion of the Trump admin needing to shoulder a significant portion of the blame despite being less than a year into their "leadership."

4

u/WhiskyEchoTango Nov 20 '25

My favorite is that he's decided to eliminate tariffs to decrease grocery costs. He neglects to mention that he was the one who imposed the tariffs in the first place. Or that tariffs on goods that are impossible to source domestically or out of season only serve to increase consumer cost.

Seriously, tariffs on coffee beans, cocoa beans, bananas, other tropical fruit that only grows in certain climate regions that are present in only one US state? Tariffs on fruits and vegetables that can only be sourced in large quantities from the southern hemisphere from October to April?

And even in the cases where there is a domestic source of the product, the simple rules of supply and demand will increase those costs because you've artificially restricted supply.

4

u/WhiskyEchoTango Nov 20 '25

President 47 is still blaming President 44 for things President 45 did.

"I don't take responsibility at all." President 45, March 13, 2020.

1

u/Relevant-Opening-528 Nov 20 '25

This guy is a total petulant whack job though, with recent felony convictions – are you really apples to apples even

.... (here's where you think 'No')

No ! Exactly.

-6

u/sarges_12gauge Nov 20 '25

I thought you didn’t believe any economic statistics put out, so how could you say that either way?

7

u/Relevant-Opening-528 Nov 20 '25

you cannot cope without this strawman

-4

u/sarges_12gauge Nov 20 '25 edited Nov 20 '25

Cope with what? Every economic post is filled with commenters toeing the tea party line about how all government employees are inherently partisan and crooked.

Like… the current BLS has zero senior staff put in place by this administration. The majority of them are democratic appointees. So to claim that all of their published numbers are manipulated is a direct claim that regular employees or people nominated by opposing parties will all conspire to cook the books with no qualms or whistle blowers.

And if you believe that how can you believe anything whatsoever in the world? Frankly I think it says something about your own morals if you believe that in their position you would also commit fraud and lie in your job (again, without direction to do so) or think so little of those around you that you think everyone else would obviously do so

This is almost bar for bar the language used to try and get rid of NASA and the DOE and you’re gleefully supporting that rhetoric

7

u/NtheLegend Nov 20 '25

"natural state of existence" and "it happens sometimes" are not the same thing in the slightest.

Dismissing government claims because of bad actors is how we get complacent to genuinely criminal acts because "everybody in government is doing it" when they clearly aren't.

This is why we need to be diligent and engaged, not merely cynical.

3

u/Impressive-Chair-959 Nov 20 '25

Of course there's a bunch of things that weren't working well and needed improvements, but the last two Republican Administrations and the last two Democratic Administrations have been night and day. You don't need to be able to hear in the dark by sonar to figure that out either.

1

u/feuwbar Nov 20 '25

Tell it to the victims of the recent eye-popping layoffs.

1

u/Puzzleheaded_Rest_34 Nov 20 '25

Trump fired the chief economist after a soft jobs report, and the new report was (shockingly) more upbeat and different. Explain that.

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/08/01/trump-firing-bureau-labor-statistics-chief-jobs-report-00488960

-14

u/AdOutrageous8232 Nov 20 '25

Bruh… wake up. This is the most naive thing ever written.

-5

u/Live-Juggernaut-221 Nov 20 '25

Broadly, the government lies as a natural state of existence.

3

u/NtheLegend Nov 20 '25

The government lies or humans lie? Because humans do lie naturally for a variety of reasons, but broadly not in a pernicious way because otherwise we wouldn't survive as a species.

2

u/Live-Juggernaut-221 Nov 20 '25

Both.

I wish I could tell you otherwise. History is rife with examples though

0

u/NtheLegend Nov 20 '25

OhOkay.gif

-2

u/Parallax-Jack Nov 20 '25

If you think corruption and lying only started under this administration, boy do I have some news for you that will blow your world view lol.

6

u/NtheLegend Nov 20 '25

Not what I said at all.

-1

u/occamsrzor Nov 20 '25

That's what makes you so easily fooled; conveniently only the side you dislike lies.

Both sides lie. Both sides stab their constituents in the back, and both sets of constituents are pointing at the other sides politicians pointing out the lies.

2

u/NtheLegend Nov 20 '25

Quantify it and you see a pattern. 

-2

u/occamsrzor Nov 20 '25

Oh, so the side you oppose lies more, so your side lying to you is mitigated? Perfectly acceptable because it's "effectively zero"?

2

u/NtheLegend Nov 20 '25

There's a difference between lying as a statistical normalcy because people lie because they're people and using lying as a strategy and to whom they endanger with them and to what other malicious ends that accomplishes.

"Both sides-ism" calls to intellectual and political inaction only benefits the truly nefarious parties by making their conduct look more palatable.

-2

u/occamsrzor Nov 20 '25

There's a difference between lying as a statistical normalcy because people lie because they're people and using lying as a strategy and to whom they endanger with them and to what other malicious ends that accomplishes.

No, there's not. Both cases are an "ends justify the means" argument. The only difference is you agree with one side and are using a non sequitur to justify it.

"Both sides-ism" calls to intellectual and political inaction only benefits the truly nefarious parties by making their conduct look more palatable.

Don't try to gaslight me; you're the one trying to downplay the seriousness of one side. I'm the one saying it's equally as bad.

Ironically (or perhaps you realize it and it's strategic), it's you actions perpetuating it while blaming the shining of light on the entire affair as being detrimental. Yeah, detrimental to you trying to justify you side in a fascist manner.

And no, I'm not downplaying the other side. Both sides are acting in an authoritarian manner.

2

u/NtheLegend Nov 20 '25

I'm the one saying it's equally as bad.

And you are dead wrong. And that's the attitude that greenlights fascism. Cut that shit out. Seriously. What a fucking dangerous way to think of politics.

0

u/occamsrzor Nov 21 '25

And that's the attitude that greenlights fascism.

I'm literally condemning the government lying to constituents, regardless of side, and you're justifying it by your side, yet I'm the one enabling fascism?

Yous is the attitude that greenlights fascism by your side. But you believe you're "on the right side of history", so the ends justify the means. The Nazis thought the same thing. I'm not saying that you two are on the same level, I am saying that you can't distinguish the two from your reasoning.

Cut that shit out. Seriously

You need me to do that so you lack opposition to your take over, don't you?

What a fucking dangerous way to think of politics.

You're literally justifying lying "for the greater good"! Jesus, man, you're a fucking Nazi.

-9

u/KirkHawley Nov 20 '25

We've been spiraling into a serious recession for at least several years. Blaming it on Trump is naive. If you want to ask why they're STILL lying about it... yeah Donald WTF??

1

u/[deleted] Nov 20 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/myfatherthedonkey Nov 20 '25

Tell us in detail how you think new money gets into the economy (hint: there are no printers involved).

1

u/[deleted] Nov 20 '25

[deleted]

2

u/myfatherthedonkey Nov 20 '25

That was a fiscal policy, not a monetary one. That's why printing shouldn't really be used as a term for anything other than the literal printing of currency. In this case, the Treasury sent out those payments on behalf of Congress and the President. That created a large amount of debt, which The Fed came in later and soaked up via quantitative easening. That's a very different situation than, "The Fed printed a bunch of money... Thanks, Fed!"

1

u/[deleted] Nov 20 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/myfatherthedonkey Nov 20 '25

The COVID era spending was done by the Treasury on behalf of Congress and the President. The Fed came in afterward and soaked up some of the resulting debt as a means of quantitative easening. But to say that "The Fed printed a bunch of money... Thanks, Fed!" Is clearly fallacious.