It’s unclear how such an action would help lower U.S. borrowing costs.

  • crusa187@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    2 days ago

    It’s so beyond the pale too. I mean yeah, numbers have been fake for years now, dating back to before covid even.

    But this gigantic estimate, then getting blown out by 3x?! Bruh.

    • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      20 hours ago

      They were fake before? How? I’d argue that they need to use U-6 vs. U-3, but people have been saying that for years. Usually that data is something people could find for themselves, but most of the “liberal media” reports on U-3.

      This administration has shown that no amount of corruption and scheming is beyond them, though, and tiny-d donnie values only loyalty to him, so now the numbers are suspicious.

    • RestrictedAccount@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      That is so much Russian talking point crap

      Provide evidence or STFU

      Saying the Fed has always been lying is just trolling to sow distrust.

      We have enough already.

      • jj4211@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Well not lying, but not what everyone thinks it is.

        One person picks up a side job after getting hours cut at his work? That’s a new job created, even if that person makes less than they used to.

        A guy gets laid off but registers with a gig app to try to pick up some driving or delivery tasks with spotty income prospects? That person is not “unemployed”.

        You aren’t recognized as looking for work despite having no job? You don’t count as unemployed either.

        The “underemployed” is probably better to get an idea.

          • jj4211@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            Sure, but situations evolve that change the meaning.

            15 years ago, being an independent contractor was relatively rare and pretty deliberate. Now that’s just being registered with Uber, Lyft, Doordash. So lots of people stop becoming “unemployed” and become “independent contractors” due to what is essentially a cultural shift. Being an “employed” independent contractor is trivial now, but says nothing about income prospects.

            The side job scenario certainly isn’t new, so your point is taken there, that number of jobs “created” always could have been either good or bad without context.

            • RestrictedAccount@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              22 hours ago

              All true

              The reason that economists use GDP (probably switching back to GNP in the post Trump world) is because it is easily available and easily sniff tested.

              A better measurement would be appreciated if made available