You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front
Economic forecasters: failure to meet target = slump
2004-02-06
ScrappleFace
(2004-02-06) -- Economists today lamented news of the fifth straight monthly increase in non-farm jobs because it fell short of the figure they had predicted.

Only 112,000 new jobs were created in January, not the expected 150,000, due largely to a continuing slump in the economic forecasting industry.

"Nobody’s hiring experts to predict what the economy will do anymore," said an unnamed spokesman for the Union of Economic Forecasters (UEF). "Maybe it’s because the predictions are rarely accurate and every time the news breaks that the economy fell short of predictions, the stock market slumps. But at the UEF, we still think there’s a need for professionals who make self-fulfilling economic prophesies. In fact, we predict that in February, almost 300,000 new jobs will be created for economic forecasters."
Posted by:Steve from Relto

#7  You are right RC. And dont even get me started on entitlements.......
Posted by: CrazyFool   2004-2-6 10:12:03 PM  

#6  CF -- not just that, but every damned budget item. The way Congress budgets is they START with an X% increase across the board, then haggle over what to add above that. If a budget calls for less than X%, then the Donks run to the media babbling about "cuts". The media, of course, repeat whatever the Donks want, never bothering to do things like "investigate" or "report", which are beyond the capabilities of most of the talking hairdos.

(I'm almost 100% sure that defense spending is the exception to this; it's like it is assumed to decrease by some amount, and anything above that is decried as "guns over butter".)
Posted by: Robert Crawford   2004-2-6 2:15:27 PM  

#5  RC. You must be talking about the Medicare INCREASE the Reps wanted diring Clinton. As I recall the Reps wanted a 7% increase and Dems wanted 11%. So the Dems (and their media lapdogs) terrorized the Seniors by saying it was a huge slash which will leave them all starving and dying in the street.....

The media knew, and even admitted it was a bold face lie but still repeated it as it if it was gospel. Assholes - scaring all those senior citizens for their own benefit.

That is when I lost faith with the Democrats and the American Media. That and Hillary's 'Vast Right-Wing Conspircy' bullshit.
Posted by: CrazyFool   2004-2-6 1:43:38 PM  

#4  AWW, you don't understand -- it's an election year, so that "shortfall" is going to be described as "the worst economy ever". Remember, we're talking about people who are dishonest enough to call a spending increase a "cut" if it's smaller than the increase they wanted.
Posted by: Robert Crawford   2004-2-6 12:59:02 PM  

#3  This is the same type of expectations crap that is present in the Dem presidential primary (i.e. candidate z came in 3rd but beat expectations of a 4th place finish and therefore is the real winner). +150K would have been nice but +112K, the largest monthly gain in 3 years, is nothing to dismiss.
Posted by: AWW   2004-2-6 12:55:23 PM  

#2  I'd say Half a Million.

In for a little... in for a lot I always said...
Posted by: CrazyFool   2004-2-6 12:19:15 PM  

#1  LMAO
Posted by: Damn_Proud_American   2004-2-6 11:56:38 AM  

00:00