Secolobo said:

---

Here are some numbers…

https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/2025/08/bls-has-lengthy-history-of-inaccuracies-incompetence/

---

"We've investigated ourselves and found nothing wrong" energy.

That's dictator propaganda **** right there. Wow

Quote:

---

I think it's funny how either side can justify actions that are inconsistent with our founding principles

---

I'm pretty sure if you told our founding fathers that we fired one of the 17,000 employees in the department of labor their reaction would be "what the F is the Department of Labor????"

Dan Carlin said:

---

With the firing of a career economist heading the department of labor statistics, the precedent is now set to dismiss government officials for simply reporting data that runs contrary to the President's agenda. Anyone else not okay with this happening?

---

Well, some people that did not stay in line with what the Clinton's agenda was, and they ended up dead.

I would assume getting "fired" would be preferential to that.

ETFan said:

---

Secolobo said:

---

Here are some numbers…

https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/2025/08/bls-has-lengthy-history-of-inaccuracies-incompetence/

---

"We've investigated ourselves and found nothing wrong" energy.

That's dictator propaganda **** right there. Wow

---

Uh, the numbers are from the last administration.

Previous 4 years of Biden with these numbers not a peep now is OrANGE mAN BaD in regards to the economic date.

Secolobo said:

---

ETFan said:

---

Secolobo said:

---

Here are some numbers…

https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/2025/08/bls-has-lengthy-history-of-inaccuracies-incompetence/

---

"We've investigated ourselves and found nothing wrong" energy.

That's dictator propaganda **** right there. Wow

---

Uh, the numbers are from the last administration.

---

oooops

You give Dan Carlin a bad name. Please change your handle to someone else, such as a career beaurocrat...like Joe Biden or something.

Dan Carlin said:

---

Yes, I do think it is different, but if a precedent has indeed already been set, are you still okay with it happening? Would you be okay with your CFO being dismissed for reporting truthful numbers to the Street?
The move has drawn condemnation from the president's party.

---

Yes I am okay with Fed employees getting canned, we have way too many.

Dan Carlin said:

---

With the firing of a career economist heading the department of labor statistics, the precedent is now set to dismiss government officials for simply reporting data that runs contrary to the President's agenda. Anyone else not okay with this happening?

---

Boo Frickin Hoo!

I am very ok with this. There is a strong chance she was manipulating numbers and deserved to be fired. I work in the government here in DC and there are plenty of folks who think they can buck the President without consequence.

That lady practiced FAFO until she FO.

Dan Carlin said:

---

powerbelly said:

---

Generally? No, but I always suspect the government of cooking the books on employment and hiring

---

While I agree that politicians of all backgrounds make a living on contorting reality to their accomplishments, this dismissal is only going to further undermine integrity in what are pretty cut and dried SQL queries. After firing a non-partisan official for simply doing their job, do you think a replacement is going to be anything but a stooge for the current administration?

---

Replacing her with a stooge for the Administration was the point. Trump has a narrative he wants believed and anything contrary has to be either quashed or its credibility destroyed. Remember his press secretary's insistence on 'alternate facts' early in his first term? He made claims that were easily shown to be false and were reported as such. That's when he started calling main stream media fake news, because they wouldn't go along with his 'alternate facts'. And his felony convictions were basically about him cooking the books of his business.

Dan Carlin said:

---

With the firing of a career economist heading the department of labor statistics, the precedent is now set to dismiss government officials for simply reporting data that runs contrary to the President's agenda. Anyone else not okay with this happening?

---

You're dishonesty (and probable hypocrisy) here is compelling: she was NOT a "CAREER ECONOMIST heading the department...," at least not as the term usually means. She was a political appointment by Biden.

https://www.congress.gov/nomination/118th-congress/837

Prior to 2024, she had been with the US Census since 2010 and served on Biden's Council of Econ "Advisors" (another political hack). While at Census, she (according to her own CV):

Quote:

---

Leads a group of economists conducting research on topics in labor, macro, urban, and education. This group also supports the Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) data infrastructure and develops new experimental economic indicators from the LEHD data.

---

https://web.archive.org/web/20241005183811/https://erikamcentarfer.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cv-mcentarfer.pdf

Now, that may or may not have qualified her to do the BLS job, but there's nothing there that mentions:

1. A career BLS employee
2. Who is competent, at least in terms of LEADING the BLS
3. Working with BLS related data
4. Someone who will be missed if they are replaced

She was HIRED to implement, or at least stay in tune with, Biden's agenda. Who did she or her predecessor, appointed by Biden replace and did you ***** about that? If so, please provide the link.

WAKE UP. There is an absolute reason that people have been referring to this department as the DEPARTMENT OF LYING STATISTICS for the last 20 plus years. We finally have a President with a brain that is seeing thru all of this government corruption and spewing of false information.

Always ****ing hilarious when a leftist starts clutching pearls over precedents being set.

Buddy, the precedent you guys set over the last four years is that anyone who doesn't agree with your political agenda can be fired in a heartbeat and ostracized from society. Lay in the bed you made

She's an idealogue who fudged numbers. She gots to go!

Not like he weaponized the intelligence community working directly with his parties candidate to abuse FISA warrants to spy on opposition in a grand conspiracy…

Yeah this is the line.

Dan Carlin said:

---

While I agree that politicians of all backgrounds make a living on contorting reality to their accomplishments, this dismissal is only going to further undermine integrity in what are pretty cut and dried SQL queries. After firing a non-partisan official for simply doing their job, do you think a replacement is going to be anything but a stooge for the current administration?

---

Dan Carlin said:

---

With the firing of a career economist heading the department of labor statistics, the precedent is now set to dismiss government officials for simply reporting data that runs contrary to the President's agenda. Anyone else not okay with this happening?

---

Is it ok to fire a career economist because they are incompetent?

The BLS is broken. Let's get someone that can fix it.

ETFan said:

---

Secolobo said:

---

Here are some numbers…

https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/2025/08/bls-has-lengthy-history-of-inaccuracies-incompetence/

---

"We've investigated ourselves and found nothing wrong" energy.

That's dictator propaganda **** right there. Wow

---

what's really embarrassing is holding onto the "dictator/ hitler" mantra - shows both ignorance / gaslighting all in one. Throwing this out on every thread is the same as saying **** you in an argument after getting owned - just admission that you have been beat.

Dan Carlin said:

---

powerbelly said:

---

Generally? No, but I always suspect the government of cooking the books on employment and hiring

---

While I agree that politicians of all backgrounds make a living on contorting reality to their accomplishments, this dismissal is only going to further undermine integrity in what are pretty cut and dried SQL queries. After firing a non-partisan official for simply doing their job, do you think a replacement is going to be anything but a stooge for the current administration?

---

After firing a non-partisan official for simply doing their job poorly. Fixed it for you. That should tell you why she was fired. Hope it helps.

Quote:

---

Firing a career bureaucrat

---

You say that like it's a bad thing.

The hypocrisy is amazing. See it time & again. W fired attorneys and it's a national crisis. Obummer does it and it's NBD.

These appointees serve at the pleasure of the President. He was displeased.

Get over it with the fake (and highly hypocritical) outrage.

Dan Carlin said:

---

Revising of numbers when more complete data arrives will continue to be the norm and disaffected partisans who are unhappy when the data does not tell the story they want will continue to whine over baseless allegations. Firing a career bureaucrat for simply doing their job is terrible for our country on many levels.

Ok?

---

When those revisions are almost always in one direction, is it ok to loose faith in the person doing the numbers?

yet another government job that could be done cheaper, faster, better by private industry.

Dan Carlin said:

---

Yes, I do think it is different, but if a precedent has indeed already been set, are you still okay with it happening? Would you be okay with your CFO being dismissed for reporting truthful numbers to the Street?
The move has drawn condemnation from the president's party.

---

Not even close to the same. We get multiple false information reports all the time from politicians, the media, and government agencies. Everything is political.

Secolobo said:

---

Here are some numbers…

https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/2025/08/bls-has-lengthy-history-of-inaccuracies-incompetence/

---

Excellent receipts.

Reducing partisanship amongst bureaucrats is critical and will only happen under R Presidents.

This whole thing is so stupid. It's not what the number is just the fact that you release a number and then you turn around and revise the number. Don't release the numbers until you're sure you're right that way there's no revision.

It's just like Shawty reporting it's not about being first it's about being accurate

She was disloyal and paid the price. Everyone in the federal government serves at the pleasure of the President. If they're not doing what they can to support his re-election, they can find another job

powerbelly said:

---

Do you really believe this is any different than the past ~200 years? This administration is just open about it.

---

You can tell yourself that, but it doesn't make it true. Ever since a Republican president (Hoover, if I remember right) began collecting economic data to help politicians make better economic decisions, both parties have supported the collecting of accurate economic data.

Aggie_Journalist said:

---

powerbelly said:

---

Do you really believe this is any different than the past ~200 years? This administration is just open about it.

---

You can tell yourself that, but it doesn't make it true. Ever since a Republican president (Hoover, if I remember right) began collecting economic data to help politicians make better economic decisions, both parties have supported the collecting of accurate economic data.

---

And is the data partisan driven?

No. It's not. She was appointed with wide bipartisan support because both parties thought she was a straight shooter who did a good job. Marco Rubio voted for her.

Firing her is partisan. And nobody will be able to trust economic data from this administration again.

Job number adjustments are normal. If you think she's such a partisan hack, why not report bad numbers initially? Why wait until you get more data to "rig" it? If you are honest with yourself, you can see that Trump's rationale is bullcrap and he's really just trying to hide the truth from you - and the truth is he is crashing the economy.

txwxman said:

---

She was disloyal and paid the price. Everyone in the federal government serves at the pleasure of the President. If they're not doing what they can to support his re-election, they can find another job

---

Say what?

Aggie_Journalist said:

---

No. It's not. She was appointed with wide bipartisan support because both parties thought she was a straight shooter who did a good job. Marco Rubio voted for her.

Firing her is partisan. And nobody will be able to trust economic data from this administration again.

Job number adjustments are normal. If you think she's such a partisan hack, why not report bad numbers initially? Why wait until you get more data to "rig" it? If you are honest with yourself, you can see that Trump's rationale is bullcrap and he's really just trying to hide the truth from you - and the truth is he is crashing the economy.

---

Nah. Unless by that you mean every single thing Trump does is partisan.

In that case, oh well. It's still the right thing to do.

txwxman said:

---

She was disloyal and paid the price. Everyone in the federal government serves at the pleasure of the President. If they're not doing what they can to support his re-election, they can find another job

---

Dear Leader will reward your loyalty with another bag of rice.