An Unresponsive Public Is Undermining Government Economic Data (msn.com) 159
An anonymous reader shares a report: Anyone who surveys the public, from marketers to pollsters, struggles nowadays to get people to answer their questions. That phenomenon afflicts crucial government data, making it harder for policymakers and investors to know the true state of the economy. Falling survey participation is an important reason the flagship jobs report released every month by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, part of the Labor Department, has undergone such big revisions recently.
This has rippled into the political sphere. On Aug. 1, President Trump fired BLS Commissioner Erika McEntarfer after a particularly large downward revision to jobs for May and June that owed partly to late responses from survey participants. The White House and top administration officials increased their attacks on the BLS last week after the agency published an annual revision suggesting the U.S. added 911,000 fewer jobs over the 12 months through March. The BLS blamed the initial overestimate partly on response rates.
[...] One hypothesis is known as survey fatigue: People are being asked to answer too many questionnaires. Jonathan Eggleston, a senior economist at the U.S. Census Bureau, found in a 2024 study that recent participants in that agency's monthly and annual surveys, which are voluntary, were less likely to answer the 2020 census by mail, phone or online, without a knock on the door. Another is the rise of cellphones with caller ID. In the days of landlines, people had to pick up the phone to know who was calling. These days, many decline to answer callers they don't recognize.
This has rippled into the political sphere. On Aug. 1, President Trump fired BLS Commissioner Erika McEntarfer after a particularly large downward revision to jobs for May and June that owed partly to late responses from survey participants. The White House and top administration officials increased their attacks on the BLS last week after the agency published an annual revision suggesting the U.S. added 911,000 fewer jobs over the 12 months through March. The BLS blamed the initial overestimate partly on response rates.
[...] One hypothesis is known as survey fatigue: People are being asked to answer too many questionnaires. Jonathan Eggleston, a senior economist at the U.S. Census Bureau, found in a 2024 study that recent participants in that agency's monthly and annual surveys, which are voluntary, were less likely to answer the 2020 census by mail, phone or online, without a knock on the door. Another is the rise of cellphones with caller ID. In the days of landlines, people had to pick up the phone to know who was calling. These days, many decline to answer callers they don't recognize.
Or... (Score:2, Informative)
...maybe an informed public is now realizing that government economic data has always been unreliable?
Re:Or... (Score:5, Insightful)
...maybe an informed public is now realizing that government economic data has always been unreliable?
...what US public are you referring to as "an informed public"? As someone with a general public facing job in the US, I can assure you that the general population is not well informed.
Re:Or... (Score:4, Insightful)
You see they mean "The President called it into question for his own personal reasons and without evidence but the evidence thing is not important so we have to take his marching orders and post-facto try to justify it".
It's a reality distortion field going into effect, the numbers *have* to be corrupt because the numbers reflect poorly on decisions.
That's what Biden should have just done when inflation was hitting like 7% MoM in 2021-22. Just say the numbers are wrong! Political enemies! Fire the stats people, nothing weirdly authoritarian about messing with the numbers!
Re: (Score:2)
Trump is now taking credit for infrastructure initiatives that were approved and funded under Sleepy Joe Autopen Biden
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
And it's absolutely not a process ripe for abuse by a malcontent handing the President of the United States something for executive signature, that the President of the United States doesn't even look at or read - he just accepts at face value that his aide would never lie and signs it.
TL;DR: what's the difference between an "autopen" and an old asshole so far into cognitive decline that he just signs anything put in front of him?
Re:Or... (Score:5, Insightful)
I just watched the movie "Idiocracy".
I highly recommend it. For a 20 year old film, it's remarkably prescient. The society of the future it depicts is very similar to our society today.
- reality show President
- total corporate takeover
- bread and circuses to "rehabilitate" anybody who has wrong thoughts
- incredibly stupid people everywhere
Re:Or... (Score:4, Informative)
Someone pointed out some differences in Idiocracy: a primary plot point was that the President actively recruited a cabinet member for intelligence, without knowing what that cabinet member would recommend, and willingly followed the possibly unexpected advice provided by that cabinet member, and actively and accurately observed and judged results both when the cabinet member made a correct and when they made an incorrect decision.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes.
Looks like things are worse now when only rabid syncophants are approved for government.
Re: Or... (Score:2)
Really getting sick and tired (Score:4, Insightful)
The data is consistent. That's what matters. You use data to make predictions. If the data is off but off at a consistent and predictable amount then you can predict that and take action accordingly.
This thing where everybody thinks they can just will their preferred universe into existence and ignore reality is something dictators and fascists have been pushing for pretty much forever.
It doesn't work. Sooner or later reality always wins in the end and reality has a well-known liberal bias.
Re: (Score:3)
50% revision from a survey is not consistent or predictable.
But we do know the answers- just use the information reported to the IRS from every employer doing business in the United States instead.
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately, the data isn't consistent. That's why they need to make corrections. The question is "Do the corrections make it more nearly accurate?", and that's really hard to demonstrate. When there's too much noise in the signal, it's really difficult to filter it out without losing the signal.
Re:Really getting sick and tired (Score:5, Informative)
I don't know if government polling would have the same kind of questioning designed to reach some predetermined outcome but I'd not be surprised if someone in government used the polling to reach some political end than get an honest indication on how people felt and how the economy was performing.
See the thing with BLS is they actually publish all that Survey Questionnaires and Materials [bls.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe we shouldn't need to report the same data to multiple agencies? Estimated taxes, 1099s, and W2 information is already available from the IRS. You don't need to "survey" anybody, you can get down to the penny reads on the entire economy.
Re: Or... (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
How the fuck this gets modified as insightful is completely beyond me. Every developed nation everywhere publishes key economic statistics in two forms: an early version that is directionally useful to decision-makers whose priorities are speed over accuracy, and a later revised version that is useful to decision-makers whose priorities are accuracy over speed.
For example: central banks, market participants such as traders and analysts, hiring managers in cyclical industries — all of these prefer to g
Re: (Score:2)
It's outrageous how many people even on Slashdot take revisions in data to be indicative of problems and unreliability when revisions are just part of the process for stuff like this.
Re: (Score:2)
I get concerned when the revisions exceed certain margins. Especially when they restate by 25-50%.
Actually, does anyone who needs accurate data believe the initial reporting for any month? Doubt it.
Re: (Score:2)
All of it published though, the initial data, how they got it, informing people that it will be revised with other data and how they did the revisions. We don't have to make up some arbitrary vibes check about how much.
There are no secrets here so we don't have to allude to any. If we feel the BLS can perform more accurately maybe we should fund them more and with different legislative directives and not slash their budget and sow doubt on their already well established methods because you don't like the
Re: (Score:2)
But you need to know enough to know whether to be concerned by a 25 to 50% revision. For example, you’d need to have detailed expert insight into the CES birth-death model and how it responds to fast economic contractions to come to an informed view of whether the downward revisions of May and June this year were implausible or not. And you’d have to be able to understand the cause, and rule out the more likely cause, which experts have said is that the early estimates have been consistently too
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, fair enough.
"early estimates have been consistently too *optimistic* for many months."
Maybe for many years, in total.
Re: (Score:2)
Possibly, but unlikely. The discrepancy would have shown up sooner. The most obvious explanation for the discrepancy is that the economy is weakening faster than the CES birth-death model can respond.
Re: (Score:2)
I meant to write that the discrepancies between monthly, early reporting, and later, quarterly reporting, have been a feature for years. Maybe decades. Much of this is structural, survey reporting v statistical reporting, but it's there. An astute observer would generally discount monthly reports knowing thewy are regularly revised in the negative.
I suspect those who have a serious, fiduciary interest in using these reports do indeed rely on the later, quarterly, 'revised' reports, and spend a fair amount o
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn’t quite work like that. Some users need to prioritise timeliness over accuracy (eg traders and investors) and others need vice versa (eg academics). The former would rather act fast and live with the risk of acting on somewhat inaccurate data. The Fed, for example, cannot afford to wait two months for revisions before making interest rate decisions. Their choice is decide on the basis of incomplete data or decide on the basis of no data.
Here’s a good program about this
https://www.bbc.co [bbc.co.uk]
Re: (Score:2)
It’s also not true that these reports are more often revised down than up. Instead, they are revised down a bit more often in periods of contraction, up a bit more often in periods of growth, and revised less and in no particular direction in periods of stability
Re: (Score:2)
For that to be even remotely true, all of the following would also have to be true, which immediately disproves your hypothesis by observing easily seen reality:
1. somehow the public at-large became "informed" in the recent past with ever-diminishing quality of signal coming from reputable news sources, because "reputable" news sources are too busy chasing outrage for dollars
2. somehow the public at-large has completely disconnected from the propaganda networks such as Fox News, NewsMax, OAN, etc. that acti
I never answer them... (Score:5, Insightful)
I figure if it is important enough, they'll leave me a voicemail.
And even if they get through, with phone or email, I don't answer questions to unsolicited contacts from people, as that I have NO idea who they really are or what they want.
I assume most every call or email is a scam unless they prove otherwise.
I kinda figured anyone today with much common sense or even slight sense of privacy and personal security pretty much did the same.
I've instructed my aging parents to do the same thing....too many old people getting swindled.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm with you here.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Fully agree.
Pollsters generally are finding people are growing unresponsive to polling generally. Their task relies on the largesse of people's voluntary participation and that's been badly damaged by:
- fatigue: ain't nobody got time for that shit anyway.
- robocalls: nobody, I mean nobody, is going to wait to hear if it's a "real" survey or some marketing bullshit
- political everything: elections now never seem to end
- deliberate skew to polls: I don't know about you, but the last handful of times I bothe
Re: (Score:2)
Yep if I bother to give any response it's the poison the data of whatever MBA shitbrain thinks I'm gonna work for free or snitch on some overworked phone jocky.
The interesting thing is that according to the responses in this thread, it's somewhat normal.
It'll be interesting to see how long it takes for the business community to adapt to, or even accept, this reality. I'll betcha a lot of best practice humping giants go dick-first into the dirt before anyone dare murmur that their ambitious NPS rollout was
Re: (Score:3)
Thanks, fully agree.
Somehow, my post was downranked to -1 Troll, I guess?
AI Voice Scraper (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
additional reason NOBODY should answer them (Score:3)
The vast majority of "pollsters" calling are working for companies or politicians who are NOT trying to accurately obtain public opinions in order to change THEIR behavior and better serve the public, but instead are trying to generate data to help them figure out how to better mislead and manipulate the public. There's a HUGE difference between these things. We would all like a politician to poll us and find out what we want and then do his/her best to achieve what we want... but the politicians want their
Re: (Score:2)
It's also an easy way for them to try to obtain data on you that they may not otherwise have been able to get. And it's a way to impose performance metrics on their workers, so managers like them because it makes th
Re: (Score:3)
Sometimes they're so aggressive that I couldn't reply if I wanted to. "Are you satisfied with the product?" when the delivery tracking shows that it's not even in-country yet.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah also I ignore surveys out of spite or fill them out with garbage.
I know how most of them are used and am automatically biased against any NPS product and dislike the class of people who use the data.
It's very common for me to punish any manager who believes in such crap with zeros all around except for the service of whatever stressed out minimum wage goober who was forced to deal with me. 5/5 or 10/10 always even if the service was in fact shit.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah but we're savvy and only middle aged.
For our whole adult lives there were people who would answer these surveys but now many of them have died or eventually changed their old habits.
Unreliable data (Score:5, Insightful)
Anything that relies on voluntary responses to surveys is going to be unreliable, as it's going to skew towards the kind of people who respond to such surveys.
Most people don't want to waste their time with such things, especially if there's no reward for doing so. A lot of people will also be suspicious and suspect phishing or some other kind of malicious behaviour. They need to find a more reliable way to get information.
Re: (Score:3)
as it's going to skew towards the kind of people who respond to such surveys.
As we can see even in the summary, the kind of people who respond depend heavily on their current situation. In this case, it was late responses that were mentioned but we can be sure that many more were no response at all.
People can't spare the time because they're struggling and response rates are a metric that is hard to interpret.
Re:Unreliable data (Score:5, Informative)
There are different kinds of surveys. Established government survey programs in general, and the US Current Employment Statistics survey specifically, aren't usually just a random phone call. The CES is something a business agrees to do once a month for a period of time. For small businesses that seems to be about 3 years, and for large ones it's more indefinite.
It is voluntary, but the alternative is to make it compulsory. The montly CES is voluntary but quarterly reporting is not. Censuses and some census related surveys are usually compulsory but more frequent surveys are usually voluntary.
Re: (Score:3)
But what certainly is a concern and why people stop responding is the rise of data theft.. the rise of scams, the rise of people using legititamte concerns for nefarious reasons that has turned people off from responding to such inquiries.. As people become aware that ALL data CAN be used for harm, they are growing increasingly cautious with unsolicit
Re: (Score:2)
Statisticians have ways of compensating for stuff like this. It's not perfect but in the hands of properly educated professionals this problem doesnt make survey's as unreliable as you're making out.
Re: (Score:2)
especially if there's no reward for doing so.
Even with a reward for doing so your response rates may be skewed towards people who care about the reward enough. A $1 survey recompense means nothing for some people who earn thousands an hour and just don't want the hassle of another random solicitor bothering them, etc. It's tough to make a reward that is enticing to everyone, unless it waives some kind of annoying requirement everyone has.
Meh (Score:2, Insightful)
Everyone who makes actual economic decisions based on this kind of data have long-ago abandoned confidence in government reporting. It's politicized and it's been systematically sweetened to preserve the illusion of low inflation and higher employment for decades. The fact that people don't want to answer questions may have as much to do with distrust of government as anything else. Why waste your time?
Consider the counterfactual. If it was the Swedish government from the 1990s asking you to answer ques
Re: (Score:2)
Everyone who makes actual economic decisions based on this kind of data have long-ago abandoned confidence in government reporting. It's politicized and it's been systematically sweetened to preserve the illusion of low inflation and higher employment for decades.
Extraordinary claims... Seemingly the data influences the financial markets?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Free: look to ADP, Indeed, LinkedIn and similar sources. Wall Street gets data out of the largest employers regularly because they have special relationships.
Re: (Score:2)
But they also want to cut that data reporting down by 1/2, much of it is not special relationships but legally mandated reporting
Also is the ADP, Linkedin (lol, what?) and Indeed survey data measured in a published methodological format like BLS? Is the data fully and freely available to the public as well as the methodology and response data? Those places also all rely on BLS data themselves.
There's not a universe that exists where this blatantly partisan politicization of the BLS and the Fed is good. Thi
Re: (Score:2)
Where do they get their "non-politicized" economic data from then?
Re: (Score:2)
Where do they get that data? How do they collect it? Do they publish their methodology and raw results?
Or are you conflating economic predictions with economic data collection?
Re: (Score:2)
1: Voluntary information.. (this prevents #2).. now of course voluntary information has its own flaws and can be used to skew things.. but statistically speaking its why you use a large data set.. not just "Jim".. because you want enough data to essentially week out the outlayers..
2: Government direct scrutinary, this is where the government is ACTIVELY overseeing the impact on some things.. but this has 2 problems.. 1: Unless they ar
Re: (Score:2)
#2 is already happening, that's what the Internal Revenue Service *does*.
Re: (Score:3)
This is such a classic example of someone spouting confidently on a topic they know nothing about. I am a lay person, and even I knew immediately that you’d written a pile of crap about government reporting.
BLS stats have long been considered the global gold standard for employment data due to their technical quality, transparency, consistency over many years, and detail, among many other things. You mention Sweden in your “counter-factual”. SCB (Statistics Sweden) is well regarded, especi
Re: (Score:2)
BLS stats are mostly just headline generators for the propaganda machine.
You seem to be confusing the quality of the data (which is excellent) with the tendency for the media and politicians to fixate on the U-3 rate. The U-3 rate accurately measures what it says it measures, but the titling of that specific figure as the "unemployment rate" and ignoring all the rest of the figures, is done by those presenting the statistic to you. Not those calculating it.
When people have previously spoken about "the numbers are manipulated" they were not quite accurate. The numbers are right,
Why aren't they using ML on consumer data . . . (Score:5, Interesting)
like everyone else?
I'm being serious here. It's one place machine learning can really make a difference: digesting large swaths of data to find important patterns. I assume JSOC and Mossad are doing this already, they're just providing the results to private enterprise and other para-state operational agencies instead of any of the agencies whose mission is to make life better for most people.
Re: (Score:3)
digesting large swaths of data
They have to collect the data first.
I assume JSOC and Mossad are doing this already
As well as the MSS. [wikipedia.org]
But cold-calling, posing as a survey? JSOC can get all the info they want, nearly live, through all of the NSA hooks into our coms and banking systems. Mossad prefers HUMINT* with high value targets. That's probably China on the phone..
*No. That's not a "hot-blooded" Italian lady chasing me. I can spot Ashkenzim when I see them. Even if they get Early History deleted.
Re: (Score:2)
I think part of the point is, they already have the data.
Every person, and every business, has to file tax returns. That provides the government with a huge trove of data about what they are doing to earn money.
Re: (Score:2)
You trust 'them' to operate ML systems better and more objectively than any other system?
Software isn't true, ethical, honest, or trustworthy. Those qualities are what programmers and their employees exhibit. Or don't.
Re: (Score:2)
Survey Fatigue (Score:5, Insightful)
One hypothesis is known as survey fatigue
I'd put my money on this hypothesis. It's become too easy to add a "how are we doing" follow-up to even the tiniest transaction. It costs next to nothing. All I want is an ice cream cone, I don't really care to take the time to evaluate it. My immediate reaction to surveys is to skip them. My local co-op grocery store recently got me to answer a survey by offering a $5 store credit. Maybe offering some sort of compensation for responding is part of the answer?
Re: (Score:3)
This cannot be new. (Score:3)
Re:This cannot be new. (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Spoiling the barrel. (Score:2)
So basically all the others that have poisoned the well are making legitimate purposes harder? But anyway the BLS is suppose to be surveying businesses. Not the joe on the street. Procrastination is hurting there.
Well yeah (Score:2)
It used to be impolite to not answer the phone, but since around 2005 or so the majority of phone calls have been scam, so it's no longer impolite. Say, did you know iPhone has a feature that makes it not ring if the number isn't in your contacts? System, "silence unknown callers". Email even more so.
Actual surveys are the same way. As a software developer I get asked to fill out surveys multiple times a day, so I generally don't. Every now and then I try but most of them are disguised marketing campaigns
Parallels with a thread from May on the UK (Score:2)
Survey fatigue is one, but I think people are also more wary about having their opinions attached to data these days. At least for formal, official data anyway, obviously social media is still going strong. I think a factor is that people aren't sure how it's going to be used and if it could come back to them in some way.
NPS over-fishing (Score:2)
That's why you can't ask to use a restroom without getting a survey about your experience.
I used to sometimes fill them out - they are actually useful to companies, and if I didn't hate them, that's OK with me.
But they're over-fishing. It is constant now. So fuck it, I refuse.
As far as the state, well, you don't tell the truth to fascists unless you're a suicidal moron. '
Re: (Score:2)
NPS is big because it was the brainchild of well connected owner class society and MBAs and other ascendent-hopefuls hang on their every fucking word. It got pushed out at every business conference, trade-rag, and business administration podcast.
I quickly associated it with mismanagement and pretty much only ever answer it to poison the data and get revenge on some faceless MBA that i know i would hate working for.
History (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Probably the biggest difference between 1995 and 2025 is that most calls weren't scams in the 90s. There were certainly scams, I had family members get scammed over fax machine.
But it's not like now where any unknown text or call is more likely than not a scam. We are definitely in a golden age of scamming. Look up the scam call centers in Myanmar if you haven't heard of them. Thousands of slaves locked in offices and beat with cattle prods if they don't hit their quota on the phones.
Trump fired a BS Commissioner ? (Score:4, Funny)
He has to commission BS? I thought he had an infinite personal supply.
I'd a thought brown was the colour of concentrated BS not orange. Even the colour of BS is BS.
Kind of? (Score:5, Informative)
The BLS monthly numbers are always off when the underlying economy is changing rapidly, because of the "birth death problem", meaning that when large numbers of companies are being created or closed (born or died), the surveys that provide the quick data are guaranteed to be quite far off because the surveys go to companies that are already establish, i.e. those that weren't just born and didn't just die. So when there's a lot of market change, they're sampling the part of the market that is changing less. This means the estimates are off, and the faster the economy is changing the further off they are.
A related issue is that the survey results are only a sample, but BLS needs to extrapolate to the entire population of businesses -- but they don't actually know how many businesses there are in the country, much less how many fit into each of the size / revenue / industry buckets. So their extrapolation necessarily involves some systematic guesswork [bls.gov]. In normal, stable economic times good guesses are easy because it's not going to be that much different from the prior year and will likely have followed a consistent trend. But when the economy is changing rapidly, that's not true, so the guesses end up being further off the mark.
Second, it's worse when things are turning for the worse, because of something kind of like "survey fatigue", but not. The problem is that when lots of the surveyed companies are struggling, they're focused on fighting for their existence and don't have time to bother filling out voluntary government reporting forms. It's not that they're tired of surveys, but that they just don't have the time and energy to spare. And, of course, the companies that are going out of business are also the ones w
The phone thing is a red herring, because these BLS surveys are not conducted over the phone.
A new issue compounding the above is that the BLS was hit hard by DOGE cuts and early retirements. They've lost over 20% of their staff, and the loss in experience and institutional knowledge is far larger than that, because the people who were fired and the people who took the buyouts tended to be very senior. So a lot of the experience that would be used to improve the estimates has walked out the door.
Anyway, the core problem is that the economy is going into the toilet, really fast. The BLS didn't break out how much of the 911,000 fewer new jobs were added 2024 vs 2025, but I'll bet a big percentage were after Trump started bludgeoning American businesses with tariffs. Most of that pain won't really be known until the 12-month report next year, because the monthly reports are going to continue underestimating the rate of change. Well, assuming the BLS staff isn't forced to cook the books, in which case we'll just never know.
Re: (Score:2)
Hmm. Lost the end of my sentence there somehow:
Re: (Score:2)
It’s really great to see an informed comment on here. There was an interesting discussion of this on More or Less on the BBC, a few weeks ago.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/p... [bbc.co.uk]
Re Trump, I will add: there is no “if” about whether he’ll attempt to cook the books. The MO is to cook and to lie at every conceivable opportunity, and to do it all without worrying about shame or hypocrisy or anything like that, because all that matters is ego (the numbers looking good) and power (holding on t
survey response numbers (Score:2)
Plus, nowadays, why would people even bother? The Trump admin is busy deleting every scrap of public data from the web. I don't really get it, but somehow, scrubbing all data off government websites must play well on Fox. Maybe it's a small-government thing. Or maybe it's just to trigger-the-libs. To me, it just screams "ignorance is bliss".
Whatever the reason is, the top of the government has made it clear t
[ ] Great Boomer [ ] OK Boomer [ ] Poor Boomer (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Today you'd need to do TikTok to get the younger generation.
Re: (Score:2)
unknown texter = auto-block and report as spam. Even faster than voice.
Boomers and older GenX (Score:2)
Leadership of our society hasn't been this old since most of them were young. Our processes aren't evolving and now, much like an old man punching zero and screaming at an IVR that they want to talk to a person, these processes no longer do what they want.
Usually they're not receptive to any young person who doesn't do things "right"
Maybe related (Score:5, Insightful)
I start to answer an online survey
The first few questions are applicable and I answer them
Then, in following pages, questions are presented that are irrelevant or not applicable
There is no option to pick N/A
I leave it blank
The site demands that all questions be answered
I quit the survey
egov (Score:2)
I expect egovernment stuff will make this easier - i.e. the government app that ends up on everyone's phone (digital ID, healthcare etc) could prompt you to answer 1 question from time to time for a chance to win an Amazon voucher or something.
Re: (Score:2)
I expect egovernment stuff will make this easier
No, it won't. The numbers ultimately published are massaged by agencies run by political appointees. Formulae are tailored to fit narratives and ultimately what we get is propaganda.
Your scheme, for instance: Who will be participating, and who will be eligible for a reward? These calls will be made by political forces.
Erosion of Public Trust (Score:5, Insightful)
The increasingly heated bickering between "Team Red" and "Team Blue", along with the vitriol coming from various social media "pundits", has led to a deep distrust of anyone or anything outside of our trusted circles.
The words of Abraham Lincoln come to mind. The United States is a nation divided and unless that is remedied I'm not sure how much longer it will stand.
As always, I hope to be proved wrong.
Survey Burnout (Score:2)
Even if I were to notice a government survey on one of my forms of communication, the response would be to delete the request, and most likely block the caller / sender. We're living in an age where everything is a reason for a survey. Order a pizza? Survey. Get gas for your car / lawnmower? Survey. Order a book from a retailer? Survey. Need customer service? "Please stay on the line for a brief survey."
People are DONE with pointless surveys. And government surveys have the added deficit of being "governmen
Pay me! (Score:2)
Why should I provide you with valuable data for free?
You want my time and energy to respond to your surveys? Then fucking pay me.
Survey length:
15 mins or less: $50
Up to 30 mins: $100
Up to 60 mins: $200
Up to 120 mins: $500
I bet you will get a response then, you spammy motherfuckers!
The BLS jobs data is not from a survey of the publ (Score:2)
The BLS jobs data is from the CES (Current Employment Survey). This is a survey of firms, not of the public. That's what Trump was complaining about. Whatever is wrong with that survey seems to be very new -- it used to be revisions were fairly evenly distributed, but since 2023 the revisions have been very biased downward. It seems unlikely this has anything to do with public survey fatigure.
The unemployment numbers come from a public survey (Current Population Survey), but those are different from the
Re: (Score:2)
The much more plausible reason for somewhat more frequent downward revisions of the CES data since 2023 is that the economy is contracting faster than the BLS’s model can adapt to in real time, especially in the small-firm sector. Consequently, downward revisions (due to the birth-death model) are entirely expected. This doesn’t indicate a flaw in the BLS process per se — just a lag in modeling adjustment during a turning point in the business cycle.
The rapid economic contraction since 202
Design more respectful surveys! (Score:3)
Have you seen the surveys? Have you seen the extended census questionnaire?
The designers have ZERO regard for the respondents' time. ZERO. They are obviously the products of govt bureaucracy. "We need to ask this, we need to ask that, we need to ask again two other ways" "Sure boss, got it in here (haha, sucks to be the person answering this survey)"
The Federal Reserve already docmented this (Score:2)
First, their sample size is too small to begin with. They should sample at least three times the number they currently do. Second, who they sample also needs expanded. Getting a response from Corning is significantly different than g
No way to distinguish a legit survey from a scam (Score:3)
If someone calls or emails me wanting information, my first assumption is that its some sort of scam, or at least a marketing survey, and I don't have the time or interest in figuring out whether its legitimate. If I had a way to quickly know that it was a legitimate research survey, I'd be happy to answer.
Maybe if the government did something about spam (Score:3)
Maybe if the government actually did something about this mess I wouldn't filter out any call not on my contacts list or that isn't hiding their calling ID?
Yes, I understand the "Do Not Call" registry exists, but it is half-assed and ineffective because the spam callers have worked around it. The spam dialers and call centers are not separate entities thus the people you end up speaking on the phone with are not the ones who made the call and thus aren't guilty of violating the do-not-call. AND they hang up immediately if you ever ask for a call-back phone number.
The phone company knows who's making all the calls. They just don't want it to to stop because they make money both ways.
So until all this background noise goes away, no one is going to response to a phonecall from a random entity.
Not just unknown callers (Score:2)
Many people these days decline all calls.
Surveys everywhere (Score:2)
They're not wrong. Due to the sheer volume of being asked for feedback everywhere these days, most people have developed a proper survey allergy.
Not looking good. (Score:2)
The good news? It doesn't matter. (Score:2)
At least in the US it doesn't matter until 2028. Whatever numbers the group arrived at through anything resembling reality will be replaced by ones more in keeping with the desires of the administration. In fact, why bother accumulating the stats at all?
A variation on the old joke about economists...
The president asks BLS, "What's 2 plus 2?"
The rep looks around, closes the shades, and whispers, "What would you like it to be?"
Re: (Score:2)
Not playing a lottery. Not giving you my time for a A CHANCE at a payment at a pissant amount of money. You want my time, you can pay me, and enough to be worth it. If you catch me in a good mood, I might even give you honest answers too.