Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site uwvax.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!harpo!seismo!uwvax!myers
From: myers@uwvax.ARPA
Newsgroups: net.flame,net.politics
Subject: Re: Reagan and the economy, again.
Message-ID: <188@uwvax.ARPA>
Date: Fri, 6-Apr-84 23:03:36 EST
Article-I.D.: uwvax.188
Posted: Fri Apr  6 23:03:36 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 8-Apr-84 01:11:29 EST
References: <2654@rabbit.UUCP> <1398@sunybcs.UUCP>, <411@dual.UUCP> <683@pyuxa.UUCP>
Organization: U of Wisconsin CS Dept
Lines: 16

>Your economics prof needs to start reading the paper more often.
>The announcement that the Armed Forces were to be added to the
>employment roles was made months before it happened.  The drop
>was .6% not 1%.  It only makes sense to me to include the military
>in the number of employed, the rest of the Federal Employees are
>included, and, after all, they are working(?) aren't they?  You
>prof must have an axe to grind.

Ah, but how many people knew that?  Subtle manipulation of government figures
is SOP for administrations trying to make things look better than it was
before.  Remember Johnson's revamping of the way the federal budget is broken
down in order to decrease the percentage devoted to the military?

Such statistics should be calculated in a *consistent* manner, given that no
large structural changes have occurred in the economy warranting the change.