"You want the truth?  You can't handle the truth."

Alternatively, if you want the truth, assume the opposite of what most government officials are telling us.

WT, no joke. I feel as though the government is pencil-whipping all of us. Serious question-how much crude has been replaced with ethanol? Is this why we are not suffering more from the decline in total production? And, if this is the case how much more will ethanol and bio-fuels continue to mask the real situation?
   Right now our collective response seems like an ostrich responding to Chicken Little with its head in the sand:
"Ain't no sky falling down here!"
The truth is that the GDP deflator was much higher than the 3.3% used in the latest BLS release. If the correct deflator was used, the release would have shown more inflation and less real growth. John William's Shadow Government Statistics reports that it should be -.5% growth and 6% inflation. Now you know that the adage "garbage in equals garbage out" has legs. Of course the FED has been deflating the indices for years to cheat the retiree's and cola based wage earners. It works out great for debtors and big government spenders, no wonder on a GAAP basis the Federal Government has a negative net worth of at least $177,000 for every man, woman and child in this country according to the US Treasury.
Speaking of governmental fudged numbers.....
Have you seen the cover story from todays "USA Today"?:

What's the real federal deficit?
Rob Portman, director of the Office of Management and Budget, presents "The Mid-Year Budget Review" at the National Press Club on July 11. Due to increased tax receipts, the Bush administration says it's goal of cutting the federal deficit in half by 2009 is a year ahead of schedule. But deficit numbers vary depending on who's counting.   

By Dennis Cauchon, USA TODAY
The federal government keeps two sets of books.
The set the government promotes to the public has a healthier bottom line: a $318 billion deficit in 2005.
The set the government doesn't talk about is the audited financial statement produced by the government's accountants following standard accounting rules. It reports a more ominous financial picture: a $760 billion deficit for 2005. If Social Security and Medicare were included -- as the board that sets accounting rules is considering -- the federal deficit would have been $3.5 trillion.

Congress has written its own accounting rules -- which would be illegal for a corporation to use because they ignore important costs such as the growing expense of retirement benefits for civil servants and military personnel.

Last year, the audited statement produced by the accountants said the government ran a deficit equal to $6,700 for every American household. The number given to the public put the deficit at $2,800 per household.

Read more about it here.  
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-08-02-deficit-usat_x.htm

Looks like those bogus government numbers are starting to get a bit more scrutiny.

Remember, lies have to be continually covered.  For your negative GDP growth, they have to lie about the Unemployment Rate and Mass Layoffs and Export Records and ...

Grow up.

Er, it's been in the news for years now that the way the gov't counts unemployment is ..... Soviet. They're counting a small portion of the unemployed, which is those people who are on unemployment insurance, actively looking for work. It counts a person working part-time for a low wage as "a job", supposedly equivalent to that person at the job they had a few years ago, well-paying and full time.

People who look at unemployment generally double the gov't figures.

The same kind of tricks are used for exports, and all kinds of things. It's a HUGE shell game and this is fairly mainstream knowledge. You have to pretend it's all legit to get a job in the US media, and you have to sound like you accept it all at face value to get various "selling" jobs where you're convincing people to give you your life savings to throw away in the stock market, but most people know much about our economy is hallucinated.

Take "Productivity" for instance. Amazing things are called "productivity" including, or should I say especially, exporting US jobs.

And here's where Kunstler is dead right, the current "booming" economy is based on the real estate bubble. Building sprawl. Building statues! More statues! Bigger statues! Jobs for all! Making the stone tools and the people who get that red rock for the top of the head, and the people who keep the grass trimmed around the statues, etc. You get the idea. A huge proportion of US jobs depend on those McMansions, and even more jobs, like nail salons and the Olive Garden, depend on people feeling "spendy" because their McMansion appreciated this year. And car sales are very much driven by "home" sales, look at all the ads on TV for trucks, showing someone loading lumber because they're gonna get some work done on the house, yep.

The gov't's job, almost, is to keep the people from freaking out, and try to make the coming Depression more of a slide than a crash. Like in The Matrix, can't break the illusion too abrubtly (sp?), it could be fatal.

It's been said here before that the Labour Dept has seven measures for UR, just as it does for inflation and other measures.  Your allegations are just plain crap and your by your rheotoric it is plain that u are in the nihilist camp and nothing said will satisfy you.  You are just waiting for the apocalypse like many others here.

The problem is clinical not factual.

You mean that people that observe the dynamics of Ponzi schemes from afar are nihilists?

I always considered them smart.

It wasn't us who started the planet down the apocalyptic path.  While watching is not my cup of tea it sure beats blindly rushing into oblivion.
I don't tend to follow the herd at blasting peopel since many times we are misunderstood.  However Freddy I can plainly see what people here routinely blast you for your complete lack of indepedent thought.

Try "shadow government statistics" in google and see what pops us.  You need to quit drinking the kool aid mate.

Have you ever seriously researched this Freddy? It is beyond reasonable dispute that the calculations and consequent results for the 'preferred' US government statistics for unemployment, inflation, GDP are materially different from those of 20 years ago. The change is always in the 'preferable' direction.

The monthly NFP stats are hugely skewed by the CES Net Birth/Death Model:
http://www.bls.gov/web/cesbd.htm
While I think that such a model is probably reasonable and necessary it is based on GDP estimates...

Which are probably overstated by about 3% since these are based on the 'GDP deflator' - a measure of inflation - which seriously understates 'real' inflation and inflation as measured 20 years ago.

Had you noticed that the US GDP estimates for the last few years have been revised downwards by a pretty uniform 0.5% because some basic assumptions have been somewhat incorrect? The news was about a week ago, I don't have a link but might be able to find some.

Have you properly read John Williams 'shadow government statistics' stuff? the arguments are quite compelling, here are links:
http://www.shadowstats.com/cgi-bin/sgs
http://www.financialsense.com/editorials/williams_j/main.html

If there are any aspects in the above you find questionable and want substantiating data and links ask and I will see what I can do.

(I have an extant response to you on climate change in the works but incomplete, might manage to finish tonight but Sunday is more likely)

Sorry Agric but i no longer take the time to defend the stat sector from ridiculous paranoia and conspiracy theorists.  I collaborate with statisticians often and hold them in high regard.  The assertion that big brother is manipulating data is for the most part bunk.  Most dept's allow drilling into their figures and many subsets.  The usa has no more revisions or higer magnitude thereof or in any certain direction than any other country.  Look at how the 2001 recession figures (real gdp) have changed biannually as an empirical example.

I sincerely regret not continuing this debate with you but after 20 yrs of listening to too many nuts i just have run out of patience.  Absolutely no reflection on yourself.  Take care.

I don't mind. Life is sometimes too short for trivial debate: the reality IS, the somewhat arbitrary picture of official statistics is just a distorted reflection.

I'm no novice at statistics, though no expert at the esoteric mathematical nuances of statistical theory. That the BLS and other govt / official stats producers have changed the basis of calculating several important economic measures over the last 20 years is very evident - and they admit it.

There are some valid logical arguments for the changes made but they seem to be more dictated by govt 'self interest' to me. The currently 'preferred' US measures of unemployment, inflation, GDP are significantly different from the way they were calculated 20 years ago and the way European countries calculate them. On the 'old US' or 'European' basis the numbers would probably be about: 8% unemployment, +1% GDP for Q1+Q2 2006 together annualised (+0.0% Q2 alone), +5.5% CPI.

Replied on rapid climate change:
http://www.theoildrum.com/comments/2006/7/28/19350/1306/169#169