There's no reason not to release it. I think the shutdown is to provide cover for what's in it. They didn't get their lacky confirmed to head the BLS, so the data is still legit, so not releasing the report is all they could do.

report released that Friday. It will be released after the shutdown ends. On The BLS website, you can still access the delayed schedule from 2013.

https://www.bls.gov/bls/updated_release_schedule.htm

Unless you think Obama was hiding something in 2013? Note: this delayed release was announced a week and a half ago - long before the jobs estimation process even started so they had no idea what the numbers would look like.

Actually, they would make sure that "the numbers would look right."

The BLS has obviously been corrupted. They already stopped releasing timely reports as soon as trump installed a toady as its head, and this was before the shutdown.

Trump has NOT installed a "toady" as head of BLS. He nominated a terrible nominee who they never even began the confirmation process on. Yesterday, Trump withdrew his nomination. (https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/30/politics/ej-antoni-nomination-withdrawn-bls) BLS HAS NOT been corrupted. I already responded to you about this before which you either didn't read or ignored but it is 100% truth. One final time:

BLS, despite being an agency of about 2300 employees, has exactly 1 political appointee - the BLS Commissioner. That position is currently vacant while Trump's nominee awaits Senate confirmation (at this point, there isn't even a nominee). In the meantime, there is an acting BLS Commissioner (Bill Wiatrowski) who is a lifelong civil servant for BLS who is not now nor has he ever been a political appointee . He has served as acting Commissioner multiple times under both Republicans and Democrats. I know Bill. He is a good honest man. As long as he is the Acting Commissioner, I can guarantee you that the BLS data remain honest. The rest of BLS 2300 employees are career civil servants who care deeply about the accuracy and honesty of the data they produce. I know many of these people personally. It's absolutely disgusting that you smear them as corrupt when not only do you not know them, you don't even have a clue what they actually do. Your comments are beyond offensive.

BLS has NOT stopped releasing timely reports. PLEASE STOP! You are only succeeding in displaying your complete ignorance about BLS. I'll say again. PLEASE STOP! I worked directly with BLS for over 30 years. I know what I am talking about. You don't. You're way out of your league.

"'Tis better to be silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt." (Paraphrased from Proverbs 17:28: "Even a fool, if he stays silent, is thought wise; he who keeps his mouth shut can pass for smart) [often wrongly attributed to Abraham Lincoln or Mark Twain]

From 8/4, three days after trump fired Erika McEntarfer: https://www.axios.com/2025/09/19/bls-cpi-report-inflation
(or https://web.archive.org/web/20250919225118/https://www.axios.com/2025/09/19/bls-cpi-report-inflation)

Look, I can certainly understand your devotion to the bureau you used to work for. I have no doubt that it was rock solid when you were there and that the people who used to be your workmates are fine and wonderful people. But things change. The bureau has changed. The entire government has changed. I'm glad your memories of working there are nice ones. But that was then. I'm sorry. Heck, we're all sorry!

You continue to insist on displaying your lack of knowledge and seem to be proud of it. That report you linked to is NOT from August 4, it's from September 19, and you completely ignored how the same report was delayed a year ago. There is not a single political appointee currently at BLS. They are not manipulating data. And the civil servants will immediately call out any manipulated data they try to release. Quit arguing the point . You are wrong. Funny how not a single major economist in the world has made the claims you are making - I guess they are all just stupid and you know better than every single economist in the world.

You are wrong about everything. BLS HAS NOT CHANGED (or are you arrogant enough to believe you know better than the people actually still working there? They will tell you that you are wrong. And how dare you display a patronizing attitude. It's beyond insulting and offensive. You, a person who knows nothing about BLS, is trying to lecture me about the agency. JUST STOP!!!!! Go ahead and believe what you want to believe. But I'm not going to let you get away with posting misinformation and disinformation without calling it out.

https://www.science.org/content/article/why-top-economist-discounts-trump-s-claim-u-s-jobs-data-are-rigged

Maybe you can insult a fellow DUer with your all caps epithets, but it sure appears Cornell University economist Erica Groshen, who led BLS for 4 years under Obama, knows what she is talking about.

that contradicts a single word that Erica Goshen said.

Not a single person here has ever claimed that the data quality would go down because of falling response rate (that I've seen. If someone did, I certainly never disagreed with them). Every single person posting here who doesn't want to believe that data released under a Trump administration could ever be honest, have insisted Trump (his administration) is intentionally manipulating the data. I've been trying to show people for months that they were wrong - the data from BLS to this point has been completely honest. Erica Goshen in fact effectively echoes my words about Acting Commissioner Bill Wiatrowski.

The rest of her statement is exactly what I would have said, if anyone had ever argued about the quality of data due to falling response rate. But that never happened. Everybody constantly says the data are manipulated or cooked or whatever other word they want to use for dishonest. Every one of these people has effectively argued that the Trump administration is making up all the economic data they are releasing. They are provably wrong and Erica Goshen agrees with that.

Of course Erica Goshen knows what she is talking about. Any statistician could tell you the lower the response rate to a survey with a stratified sample, the less reliable the data is going to be. For most of my career, you would have heard me complaining about low response rates. And as much as they can impact national data, the impact on State and Metropolitan Area data which I dealt with is significantly greater due to the samples being much smaller for the smaller geographic areas.

Could Trump's comments cause the response rates to go even lower? Of course. But that is not manipulating the data. It's just a natural side effect from anti-Government rhetoric.

If people want to complain about the quality of the data due to low response rates or Trump's rhetoric possibly lowering response rates which in turn could lower data quality, you won't find me disagreeing with them (unless they make incorrect assumptions about how the surveys work). But I have no patience for people who insist the data is being intentionally manipulated. It is simply not true and I will continue to call it out when I see it.

You attacked a DUer who thinks BLS data can no longer be trusted. There are good grounds to doubt BLS data now. Goshen worries about the data herself. What part of Goshen's qualifier, "unless there is an outside attempt to interfere with its operations" do you not understand?

As I noted, Goshen went on to say:

Trump’s intentional outside interference by way of his unprecedented attacks on BLS data could, and very well may already be, affecting the data by accelerating the drop off in participation rates. You admit this.

Please stop with the childish "you fail" gamesmanship. We're all on the same side here, or at least we're supposed to be.

I haven't "attacked" anyone. I've told people who have insisted that the data is manipulated that it is not. Not a single person here has argued that the "data can't be trusted" for any reason other than they are manipulating the data. That is not happening. So you're just flat out wrong.

You're taking that Goshen quote completely out of context to twist what she really means. From back in August:

and this


What she's saying is that if they tried to manipulate the data, it would create so much chaos it would cause a rash of whistle blowing that would guarantee they wouldn't get away with it and they'd basically make BLS worthless because the users of the data will know they can't trust their data for anything anymore. She's concerned about the complete destruction of BLS.

And from former commissioner William Beach:


It's laughable that you think that Trump making the data potentially less reliable in any way helps him. He wants data that shows a great economy. Lowering response rates is never going to achieve that.

Once again you are wrong about everything.

And no, I'm not on the same side as people like you who deny reality and believe data is being manipulated when it is not. I believe in reality. I'm done with this. Welcome to my ignore list.

Last edited Thu Oct 2, 2025, 01:51 AM - Edit history (1)

You may think that is a big yawn, but it is terribly damaging to BLS's ability to collect data responses, and Groshen is worried about it.

Trump slandering BLS staffers, saying they're either making stuff up or being incompetent, does indeed help him. It allows his base and low info voters to ignore bad BLS numbers, which Trump is getting a lot of. And as Groshen worries, it can cause even more people to not respond to BLS surveys. That renders the BLS numbers less accurate, which again helps Trump as it supports his narrative that BLS numbers are all wrong. He is trying to hide his own incompetence and misdeeds by discrediting the BLS numbers that show he is wrecking the economy.

I don't know why it makes you so angry that I am pointing out these facts.

When the economy turns down, and the stock market goes down (when the bubble deflates), everyone will know. Corporations, investors, and we will know the numbers, but maga won't trust the numbers and won't know the severity. They will know things are sliding.

Your "facts" are not facts. Your claim is that the numbers will be wrong and that nobody will know. If the numbers are wrong, we will know. There may come a point where we can trust only the commercial compilations of statistics, but we are not there yet, and if we get there, we will know instantly.

Fact:

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/watch-i-think-their-numbers-were-wrong-trump-says-after-firing-bls-head-over-jobs-report

Groshen is not "cynically assume facts not in evidence." Neither am I. Can we stop with the insults? Acknowledging reality is not being "cynical."

You are the one insulting BLS for no good reason. Please stop shitting on the professional economists there.

We are pointing out how Trump is hurting the decent professionals and economists at BLS, we're not shitting on them.

You are discounting Goshen's statement. It certainly does not say there is "NO problem."

There is definitely a problem. Do you think the Trump administration would let us know if responses suddenly fell precipitously? I don't. Trump has hardly been transparent. They'd just let the numbers get less accurate then say they're worthless and can be disregarded. Thus, Trump can avoid numbers showing he is killing the labor market.

And you again fail to understand that if responses suddenly fall, everyone from Steve Liesman on CNBC on through commercial economists to academic economists will know.

You fail to understand, despite repeated explanations, that the data is open and the calculations are open.

tRump and his minions can't hide ANY change in participation rates. tRump hasn't been transparent, but the BLS has been and is transparent. Any change to transparency of BLS will be instantly noticed. Your scenario is impossible. tRump can't change or hide any data.

So even if we know participation has dropped off, we still won't have accurate BLS data.

And though rates have been declining for years without tRump, further declines have not happened yet and might not happen.

So please stop shitting on BLS.

Groshen is worried that Trump slamming BLS will cause response rates to fall even faster. She did not say that to "shit" on BLS. She headed BLS and is warning us about what Trump's actions could do, and may already be doing, to BLS data.

You can ignore her worries and say everything is fine. That's up to you.

They have now reported losses in 3 of the first 8 months of Trump's term (June, August, September)

in all caps.

This shutdown feels like a smokescreen across the poor jobs reports that are piling up. Trump et al will blame the shutdown for all future negative jobs reports. They are just crazy enough to pull a 'wag the dog' diversion like this.

In 2013, The same thing happened. Shutdown on October 1, then no Jobs report released that Friday. It will be released after the shutdown ends.

On The BLS website, you can still access the delayed schedule from 2013.
https://www.bls.gov/bls/updated_release_schedule.htm

As for Trump using it as an excuse for bad numbers, who cares? I guarantee you, no economists who use this data ever listen to a thing Trump says about BLS data. Economists know Trump doesn't know what he is talking about. They are also understand the reliability of the BLS Data and will know if Trump ever tries to release manipulated data. Believe me, the primary users of this data will not fall for any "diversions" Trump tries to throw at them (They are much smarter than that - i.e., they are not MAGA Cult Members).

According to Bloomberg:

"Payrolls at US companies unexpectedly dropped in September, due at least in part to issues with data analysis.

Private-sector payrolls decreased by 32,000 after a revised 3,000 decline a month earlier, according to ADP Research data released Wednesday. The figure was below all estimates in a Bloomberg survey of economists.

........

"“Despite the strong economic growth we saw in the second quarter, this month’s release further validates what we’ve been seeing in the labor market, that US employers have been cautious with hiring,” said Nela Richardson, chief economist at ADP.

The ADP data stand to be the highest profile report on the labor market this week as the government’s September employment numbers, scheduled for Friday, will be delayed given the shutdown. Other recent sources generally point to anemic job growth, less appetite for hiring, few layoffs and modest wage gains."

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-10-01/us-firms-shed-32-000-jobs-in-adp-report-after-data-adjustment

What Is the ADP National Employment Report?

"The ADP National Employment Report is a monthly report of economic data that tracks trends in the level of nonfarm private employment in the U.S. It is published by Automatic Data Processing and provides a breakdown of data by industry, region, and establishment size.

This report is published two days before the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) employment report and is used by investors as a preview of the official BLS report."

...........

"How the ADP National Employment Report Works
If you're not self-employed or a government worker, ADP likely handles your payroll. The firm handles payroll for approximately one-fifth of U.S. private employment, placing it in a unique position to survey trends in the nation's labor market.

ADP gathers data from its payroll and benefits services for companies. It issues reports on its findings through a partnership with Stanford Digital Economy Lab."

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/adpreport.asp

The acting head is a long-time professional economist who has been acting head before under different presidents.

You have nothing and you have shit on the professional economists at the BLS. All the data is public, all the calculation procedures are public and everything is reviewed by commercial and academic economists outside the BLS. Your title is flat wrong.

the report. Who do you think he is going to replace her with?

trump tried appoint an unqualified E.J. Antoni a Heritage Foundation partisan hack, who was at the January 6 attempted insurrection. Fortunately, that name was withdrawn because of actual bipartisan criticism to the appointment.

I have no problem with William Wiatrowski or the current BLS, but it is what a problem is trump's obvious plans are for it, and it isn't good.

Can it be stopped? I don't know. With this Congress, and this Supreme Court I have serious doubt it can.

It is just fortunate that there was enough bipartisan support to push back on that nomination, and with the shutdown occurring, I wouldn't be surprised if the current folks at the BLS are being looked at to being on the chopping block by the sociopath in the white house.

It remains 100% true that all the data is public, all the calculation procedures are public and everything is reviewed by commercial and academic economists outside the BLS.

No way, it just not possible. There are safeguards upon safeguards. Sure the AG and FBI Director are political appointees but it's staffed with decades long government employees, including lawyers that would report on any corruption and walk out in protest in astonishing numbers.

Oops. We just couldn't imagine this was possible.

Example 1. John Bolton
Example 2. James Comey