BBMarkets蓝莓市场：美国就业数据虚高？真实情况或远比想象疲软

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) employment data has faced increasing scrutiny for systematic overestimation, leading to significant downward revisions that impact market perceptions and monetary policy decisions [1][3][4]. Group 1: Employment Data Issues - The BLS employment data often appears strong upon initial release but is frequently revised downward in subsequent months, raising concerns about the accuracy of the reported figures [1][3]. - Statistical biases, such as the "birth-death adjustment" model, contribute to the overestimation of employment figures, as it assumes a consistent influx of new businesses that may not reflect reality [1][3]. - Alternative data sources like the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) and Business Employment Dynamics (BED) provide more reliable employment figures, indicating that BLS has overestimated job growth by approximately 800,000 positions in 2023 [1][3]. Group 2: Market and Monetary Policy Implications - A significant downward revision of 818,000 jobs in August 2024 marked the largest adjustment in nearly a decade, influencing Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell's decision to cut interest rates by 50 basis points [3][4]. - The anticipated further downward revision of 550,000 jobs in September 2025 could lead to a more aggressive monetary policy response, potentially increasing the expected rate cut from 25 to 50 basis points [4][6]. - The ongoing adjustments to employment data highlight the need for the Federal Reserve to acknowledge economic slowdown, which may accelerate the pace of monetary easing [4][6]. Group 3: Political and Economic Context - The political implications of interest rate cuts are significant, especially in an election year, as they can temporarily boost stock markets and consumer confidence, benefiting the ruling party [6]. - The perception of the Federal Reserve's independence is challenged by the timing of monetary policy decisions in relation to employment data revisions, raising concerns about potential political influences [6]. - The persistent overestimation of employment data is not an isolated incident but reflects a structural bias in statistical methods, necessitating a more cautious approach from investors who should consider administrative data and market signals for economic assessments [6].