[Music]
Bloomberg
Audio
Studios
podcasts,
radio,
news.
[Music]
>> Hello
and
welcome
to
another
episode
of
the
Odd
Thoughts
podcast.
I'm
Tracy
Aloway
>> and
I'm
Joe
Wisenthal.
>> Joe,
I
kind
of
missed
this
on
Friday
because
I
was
not
feeling
very
well.
So
I
I
was
out
sick.
But
uh
what
was
Friday
morning
like
when
you
were
sat
in
front
of
your
Bloomberg
terminal?
>> Well,
the
jobs
report
was
pretty
uh
shocking.
Obvious
Friday
was
just
a
crazy
day.
I
mean
so
the
jobs
report
obviously
was
it
was
it
was
bad.
I
mean
the
last
two
months
massively
revised
down.
All
of
this
evidence
of
labor
market
momentum
perhaps
seems
to
be
stalling.
The
tariff
effect
maybe
we
really
are
and
it's
sort
of
some
sort
of
tariff
induced
slowdown.
The
only
job
creation
is
in
healthcare
and
social
service.
Not
great,
>> right?
Okay.
So,
I
saw
the
initial
jobs
report
headlines.
So,
we
had
non-farm
payrolls
coming
in
at
plus
73,000,
which
I
think
was
like
30%
lower
than
the
average
expectation.
We
had
the
unemployment
rate
ticking
up
to
like
4.3%
>> 4.2
>> 4
almost
4.3%.
>> Oh.
Oh,
let
me
let
me
Sorry.
>> I'm
rounding
up
here.
>> Okay.
Okay.
Okay.
Although
maybe
I
shouldn't
do
that
on
a
podcast
all
about
labor
market
statistics.
But
the
big
thing
that
seemed
to
catch
everyone's
attention
was
we
also
had
these
massive
revisions
to
the
report
for
May
and
June.
So
we
had
a
combined
258,000
jobs
basically
lowered
from
the
initial
reports.
And
this
was
like
the
biggest
revision
since
the
depths
of
the
pandemic.
And
then
the
headline
that
really
caught
my
eye
while
I
was,
you
know,
laying
in
my
sick
bed
on
Friday
afternoon
was
Trump
firing
the
head
of
the
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics.
So
the
agency
responsible
for
putting
out
the
non-farm
payroll
report
every
month.
>> Yeah,
this
is
um
I
would
say
the
key
thing
is
that
a
we've
been
used
to
these
uh
you
know
seeing
significant
revisions.
We've
been
talking,
you
in
particular
have
been
writing
a
lot
in
the
newsletter
about
deteriorating
quality
of
labor
statistics.
Response
rates
to
a
lot
of
surveys
have
gone
down
over
time.
Kind
of
like
we're
seeing
in
political
opinion
surveys
and
so
forth.
So
there's
already
been
this
sort
of
anxiety.
You
have
a
lot
of
people
online,
including
President
Trump
himself,
you
know,
been
like
stoking
sort
of
these
conspiracy
theories
about
these
revisions,
these
attempts
to
actually
be
transparent.
And
then
you
get
the
first
sort
of
like
genuinely
negative
report
under
this
administration.
It's
the
first
one
that
was
like,
"Okay,
this
was
bad."
And
boom,
Trump
fires
uh
the
person
responsible
for
it.
Now,
again,
this
is
one
of
those
things
where
sort
of
like
Doge
itself
where
it's
like,
I
like
the
idea
of
government
efficiency,
right?
Yeah,
sure.
Doge,
I
like
the
idea
of
the
BLS
sort
of
doing
a
better
job
in
some
way
or
addressing
these
responses,
but
like
Doge,
which
you
know,
we
all
have
seen
how
that's
turned
out.
I
think
there
are
a
lot
of
more
than
a
lot
of
questions
more
than
a
lot
of
questions
about
whether
firing
the
BLS
and
replacing
the
head
with
someone
who's
uh
you
know
a
Trump
appointee
will
uh
you
know
add
a
more
credible
transparent
data
quality.
>> Right.
One
thing
that
we
have
learned
from
all
our
episodes
on
data
collection
in
the
US
is
that
it
is
actually
a
really
really
insanely
laborintensive
thing
to
do.
you
have
to
actually
call
up
a
bunch
of
people,
um,
homeowners
for
instance,
or
you
have
to
call
up
a
bunch
of
businesses
and
ask
questions.
You
have
to
go
out
into
the
field
and
gather
individual
prices.
And
we
can
have
a
debate
over
whether
or
not
you
could
maybe
use
new
technology,
price
scanning
data
to
make
all
of
that
more
efficient.
But
for
the
time
being,
that's
how
it's
done.
And
so,
you
need
people
to
do
it.
And
if
Doge
comes
in
and
eliminates,
you
know,
a
big
chunk
of
the
budget,
then
it
becomes
harder
to
do.
or
if
it
just
gets
more
costly
and
the
budget's
gone
up.
And
then
the
one
thing
I
would
say
is
that
in
our
conversations
and
again
you
have
talked
to
the
BLS
many
times
they
are
really
good.
They
are
professionals
and
they
take
it
very
seriously.
>> They
are
very
responsive.
However,
>> very
transparent.
>> We
could
talk
about
this
a
little
bit
but
perhaps
less
responsive
than
they
used
to
be
in
recent
weeks.
So
anyway,
we
should
talk
about
all
of
this.
I
think
it's
really
important
and
as
you
said
there
are
big
questions
like
what
happens
if
a
president
ousts
a
BLS
chief
and
then
introduces
a
new
one.
We
have
the
perfect
guest
someone
we've
spoken
to
before
about
the
decline
of
America's
data
infrastructure.
We're
going
to
be
speaking
with
Bill
Beachch.
He
is
of
course
the
former
commissioner
of
labor
statistics,
former
head
of
the
BLS.
So
Bill,
thank
you
so
much
for
coming
back
on
All
Thoughts.
>> Yeah,
it's
just
just
really
a
pleasure
to
be
back
with
you.
I
wish
we
uh
were
talking
about
some
other
subject
besides
this
termination.
I
mean,
it's
just
really
>> shock.
Well,
on
that
note,
Friday
uh
Trump
tweets
or
posts
that
he
wants
to
fire
Erica
McNurfer,
the
commissioner
of
labor
statistics.
What
was
going
through
your
mind
when
you
saw
that
news?
>> I
was
dumbass.
I
just
finished
a
lunchon
meeting
at
a
very
nice
restaurant
and
I
was
sitting
in
my
pickup
truck
and
I
just
couldn't
believe
and
then
I
sat
there
for
probably
30
40
minutes
car
running
and
answering
emails
people
just
sorting
it
out.
It
isn't
that
he
didn't
have
the
authority
to
do
so.
He
does
have
the
authority
and
we
all,
you
know,
everyone
in
the
executive
branch
serves
at
the
pleasure
of
the
president
except
those
that
have
been
specifically
exempted
by
statute
and
and
where
that
statute's
been
signed
by
the
president.
I
think
what
was
shocking
about
this
is
not
that
she
was
dismissed.
That's
shocking
enough.
It
was
the
possibility
that
we
could
have
now
a
sustained
attack
on
official
economic
statistics
and
that
would
undermine
confidence
in
those
statistics
and
put
us
in
a
path
that
other
countries
have
followed.
I
mean
instantly
people
went
to
worst
case.
After
a
while
that
sort
of
settled
down
and
we
began
to
look
at
the
reasons
for
for
the
dismissal
which
I
then
subsequently
said
on
Twitter
or
X
that
were
they
were
they
were
unfounded
and
I
haven't
dropped
that
that
position
since.
So
happy
to
talk
about
it.
>> Well,
why
don't
we
just
back
up
for
a
second?
We
talked
to
you
before
cuz
you've
been
sounding
the
alarm
about
the
capacity
constraints
to
collect
good
data.
But
just
for
people
who
haven't
listened
to
or
haven't
followed
you,
you
were
a
Trump
appointee.
I
mean,
you
served
at
the
head
of
the
BLS
in
2017.
And
so
I
do,
you
know,
and
so
like,
okay,
your
credibility,
why
don't
you
just
give
us
a
little
bit
of
background
about
who
you
are,
your
position,
and
the
concerns
that
you've
been
raising
for
some
time
about
the
constraints
at
the
BLS?
So,
I
was
uh
I
was
really
honored
to
be
the
commissioner
of
labor
statistics
from
2019
until
2023.
So,
I
served
a
little
less
than
two
years
under
President
Trump.
He
nominated
me.
It
is
a
presidential
nomination,
Senate
confirmed
positions.
It
has
a
statutory
four-year
term.
And
then
I
served
the
rest
of
my
term
under
President
Biden.
So,
I
I
was
in
both
terms.
I
I
think
that's
kind
of
important
because
the
BLS
commissioner
has
been
exempt
from
the
normal
turning
over
of
the
presidency
by
party
and
that's
because
the
view
is
well
these
data
are
so
important
they
should
not
even
be
a
part
of
the
political
appointment
process
except
when
they
come
due
sort
of
like
u
you
know
the
Federal
Reserve
chair
or
something
of
that
nature.
It's
just
seen
as
we
want
to
keep
it
out
of
politics.
So
I
I
served
over
that
period
of
time.
You
know,
that
was
the
COVID
period.
So
there
were
all
kinds
of
real
challenges
from
that.
But
I
think
the
main
thing
that
I
drew
from
that
period
is
how
important
it
is
crucial
almost
at
a
crisis
level
to
modernize
the
way
we
collect
data.
The
response
rates
on
the
surveys
are
falling
dramatically.
I've
made
that
point
on
this
program.
and
our
costs
are
rising
dramatically
which
makes
it
really
difficult
to
conduct
those
surveys
in
the
future
in
the
way
we
have
in
the
past
and
then
the
future
is
a
kind
of
a
going
in
the
direction
of
the
employment
survey
and
I
just
said
surveys
are
are
are
following
but
the
employment
survey
is
a
little
different
it's
not
an
in-person
survey
it
is
an
electronic
survey
and
we
need
to
invest
more
in
the
electronic
side
of
statistical
creation
or
production
blended
data
etc
I
could
do
a
program
on
this,
but
your
your
point
was
well
made.
BLS
has
had
some
challenges
in
front
of
it,
as
has
the
entire
statistical
system.
Unfortunately,
for
this
particular
episode,
those
challenges
were
really
not
I
don't
say
relevant.
They
they're
relevant,
of
course,
but
they're
really
not
the
reason
why
we
should
have
had
a
a
change
at
the
top.
H
well
speaking
of
the
employment
report
talk
to
us
about
what
exactly
happens
when
the
BLS
is
publishing
the
initial
non-farm
payrolls
and
then
what
happens
you
know
in
the
couple
months
or
so
before
it
publishes
the
revision
and
why
does
it
seem
we
are
getting
these
large
gaps
at
least
in
recent
months
and
years
>> right
so
the
employment
survey
the
jobs
numbers
come
from
a
survey
of
businesses
uh
the
unemployment
rate
comes
from
a
survey
of
households.
So
there's
two
surveys
involved
in
every
first
Friday
report.
What
we're
talking
about
now
is
the
survey
that
goes
out
to
businesses
and
it
goes
out
to
hundreds
of
thousands
of
businesses.
Well,
of
course
there
still
a
probability
sample
since
there's
well
in
excess
of
12
million
businesses
in
our
census
of
business,
our
business
register.
Well,
those
businesses
are
supposed
to
turn
their
surveys
in
at
the
end
of
the
month
basically,
but
only
about
68%
usually
that's
the
average
do
so.
And
so
BLS
keeps
the
window
open
for
two
more
months.
So
68%
or
so
at
the
end
of
the
first
month
they
make
the
first
estimate.
Then
at
the
end
of
the
second
month,
we've
get
about
83%
completion
and
they
revise
that
number
of
the
first
month.
And
then
by
the
third
month
we're
into
the
90s.
Usually
end
up
around
93
94%
of
all
the
sent
out
returns
come
back
to
us
with
information.
So
it's
a
wonderful
survey.
The
revisions
are
done
because
we
get
more
information
from
businesses.
Often
times
big
businesses
answer
first.
They
have
the
capacity
to
do
so
and
then
we
get
smaller
entities,
state
and
local
governments.
Smaller
businesses
answer
in
those
next
two
months.
We
always
have
revisions.
There's
there's
I
can't
I
can't
imag
even
when
it
when
we
say
the
number
did
not
change
it
doesn't
mean
we
we
didn't
have
revisions
they
just
canceled
each
other
out.
There's
just
all
these
revisions
are
coming
in.
The
revisions
have
been
uh
high
recently
but
this
is
not
atypical
of
a
period
when
the
economy
is
either
going
back
to
growth
or
going
down
to
subsidance.
So
often
times
turning
points
in
the
economy
are
accompanied
by
changes
larger
changes
in
the
revisions
particularly
in
this
case
where
we
suspect
smaller
businesses
are
feeling
the
effects
of
the
supply
shock
coming
from
the
tariff
policy
and
from
immigration
and
that
these
supply
shocks
are
affecting
smaller
businesses
more
than
they
are
larger
businesses
and
state
and
local
governments
are
being
affected
by
yet
another
factor
and
that
is
the
expiration
of
the
co
era
money.
I
think
that's
was
actually
the
root
of
a
lot
of
the
changes
that
you
saw
on
Friday.
State
and
local
governments
are
not
able
to
to
hire
at
the
levels
they
were
going
to
hire
at
in
previous
years
or
did
hire
at
in
previous
years
because
they
did
not
have
the
subsidies
that
they
had
in
previous
years.
So,
these
are
important
revisions.
Actually,
the
research
shows,
and
this
may
shock
you,
that
BLS
is
getting
much
better
at
its
first
estimate
than
it
was
30
years
ago.
In
fact,
it's
really
kind
of
almost
a
a
steady
progress
towards
greater
accuracy.
So,
the
big
revisions
are
indicative
of
not
air,
they're
indicative
of
more
information.
And
the
bigger
the
revisions,
the
more
likely
we
are
in
a
turning
point.
There's
so
much
that
was
in
that
answer
that
I
found
to
be
very
helpful
and
clarifying.
So,
thank
you.
I
mean,
just
this
idea,
you
know,
a
that
actually
over
time,
contrary
to
what
people
on
Twitter
might
think,
that
the
quality
of
that
first
pass
has
actually
gone
up
is
uh
um
is
very
striking.
You
know,
let's
stipulate
that.
Okay,
the
BLS
could
use
some
upgrading
as
you
mentioned
that
there
are
these
capacity
constraints,
non-response,
the
cost
of
going
out,
maybe
it
needs
to
adopt
more
technology
in
some
way
to
solve
for
this.
Does
the
BLS
currently
have
that
capacity
either
budgetarywise
or
statutory
authority
such
that
a
commissioner
could
just
do
that
whatever
it
is
that
ideal
state
or
would
it
need
either
some
sort
of
budgetary
allocation
or
an
act
of
Congress
to
get
to
the
point
where
it's
you
know
getting
to
the
level
that
we
are
happy
with
again
>> it
has
the
authority
to
make
the
changes
it
doesn't
have
the
budget
to
do
so
and
it
isn't
that
BLS
just
needs
more
money
I
matter
of
fact
I
think
Congress
if
it
paid
more
attention
would
say
well
what
are
you
spending
your
money
on
now
and
let's
make
sure
that
the
low
priority
is
cancelled
so
that
we
can
support
the
high
priority
I
think
BLS
would
be
very
happy
with
that
but
we
do
need
more
money
and
why
well
if
you're
going
to
change
an
official
statistic
the
unemployment
rate
let's
just
take
that
you
want
to
be
really
careful
right
you
want
to
run
tests
you
want
to
test
out
your
new
idea
you
don't
want
to
have
a
you
count
the
number
of
geese
in
the
air
and
that's
the
unemployment
rate.
You
want
to
make
sure
that
that
is
a
particularly
good
indicator
of
the
employment
market
and
you
want
to
test
it
in
real
time
as
well
as
experimental
time
in
real
time.
So
run
it
parallel.
Well,
the
these
these
tests
expand
the
costs
of
your
unemployment
statistics
program
because
you're
running
essentially
two
systems
simultaneously.
We
think
that
to
modify
the
current
population
survey,
which
is
the
survey
of
households,
would
cost
around
15
million
to
20
million
in
experimental
costs
over
a
2-year
period.
It's
not
great.
The
program
itself
costs
about
45
million
a
year,
>> but
it
does
add
to
the
cost
for
those
two
years
or
so.
Congress
could
could
easily
do
that.
I
mean,
oh
my
gosh,
Congress
is
spending
a
lot
more
money
than
that
on
things
that
we
might
disagree
with,
but
they
need
to
allocate
a
little
bit
of
money
to
CPS
for
that.
Does
it
have
the
authority?
Here's
a
really
interesting
story.
During
COVID,
we
canled
all
travel,
all
conferences,
you
know,
was
and
I
was
surprised
at
how
many
millions
of
dollars
went
into
travel
and
conferences
and
meetings.
So,
this
became
for
me
couch
money
during
the
co
years.
And
I
was
able
to
spend
that
money
um
you
know
on
on
important
things
I
thought.
So
I
did
a
lot
of
things
like
I
built
a
new
data
center
to
get
us
out
of
the
basement
of
a
104
year
old
building
>> and
out
to
a
wonderful
above
ground
local
location
but
I
also
started
a
number
of
research
programs
and
I
made
31
big
modifications
to
the
to
the
CPI.
We
started
a
whole
new
approach
on
on
looking
at
consumer
expenditures
and
I
subsidized
some
experimentation
on
the
jobs
report.
Well,
as
soon
as
CO
was
over,
we
started
to
get
congressionally
mandated
programs
that
then
sucked
up
all
that
couch
money.
If
we
had
a
little
bit
of
extra,
we
I
mean
BLS,
a
little
bit
of
extra
to
do
these
these
things,
just
just
think
of
the
innovation
that
that
would
happen.
I
think
we
would
quickly
be
out
of
the
problems
that
we
are
facing
from
a
methodological
standpoint.
And
that
might
then
reduce
the
political
pressure
that
we
saw
that
was
so
evident
on
Friday.
>> So,
we
are
recording
this
August
4th,
9:25
a.m.
in
the
morning
and
33
seconds.
I
feel
like
I
need
to
be
that
specific
nowadays
with
the
news
flow.
Uh,
so
who
knows
what
happens
between
now
and
when
this
episode
actually
comes
out,
but
we
are
expecting
the
administration
to
announce
a
new
BLS
head
in
the
coming
days.
What
happens
now?
You
know,
if
there's
a
Trump
appointee
for
a
new
statistics
commissioner
after
the
president
has
specifically
stated
that
he
thinks
the
previous
commissioner
was
politically
motivated
in
some
way,
are
people
still
going
to
believe
the
numbers
that
are
coming
out?
And
how
do
you
think
that's
actually
going
to
play
internally
at
the
BLS
at
an
organization
whose
whole,
you
know,
raise
on
Dutch
is
to
find,
you
know,
factual
numbers
and
statistics
to
portray
the
American
economy?
>> Well,
I
think
there
has
been
damage
and
it
will
take
time
to
recover
from
that
damage.
The
last
time
there
was
a
serious
political
effort
on
BLS
was
during
the
Nixon
administration
and
um
it
took
some
time
for
BLS
to
recover
from
that
though
the
action
taken
by
the
president
at
that
time
visav
BLS
was
not
I
think
as
as
significant
as
this
one.
So
you
just
imagine
that
the
president
decides
to
no
appointment
St.
Peter
you
know
as
the
new
BLS
commissioner
and
of
course
St.
Peter
has
a
reputation
for
honesty
and
for
clarity
of
thought.
Still,
it'll
be
the
case
because
St.
Peter
won't
have
any
control
over
the
way
that
the
data
are
collected
or
the
data
are
assembled
or
the
estimates
that
are
done.
That's
all
done
outside
of
the
of
the
knowledge
of
the
commissioner.
Commissioner
has
no
control
over
that.
In
fact,
you're
locked
out
of
that
whole
process.
So,
it
will
be
the
case
that
St.
Peter
will
have
a
month
come
when
the
unemployment
rate
will
be
disappointingly
low,
could
even
be
negative.
But
I
think
given
what
has
just
happened,
people
will
say,
well,
St.
Peter
probably
influenced
that
number
and
it
s
not
as
bad
as
it
really
is.
So
for
a
while,
that
suspicion
that
the
estimate
that's
announced
is
really
not
the
real
estimate
will
be
in
the
minds
of
some
people.
Not
in
my
mind
because
I
know
that
these
people
who
work
there,
the
professionals,
the
full-time
staff,
the
patriots
that
that
work
there,
the
the
the
loyal
Americans
who
are
just
extremely
diligent
in
doing
an
absolutely
objective
job,
those
people
are
still
in
place.
But
if
you
don't
have
my
level
of
knowledge
or
a
reasonable
level
of
knowledge
of
how
internally
BLS
works,
you're
going
to
be
subject
to
these
falsehoods
and
accusations
and
that
will
be
damaging.
that
will
reduce
investment
that
will
reduce
economic
activity
that
will
make
at
at
least
that
will
create
greater
uncertainty
about
what's
happening
inside
the
US
economy
policy
makers
will
be
less
less
clear
in
the
direction
that
they
take
so
that
there
will
be
a
time
when
we
need
to
recover
no matter
who's
appointed
I
hope
that
it
will
be
a
short-lived
time
and
my
guess
is
given
the
reputation
of
BLS
if
someone
you
know
really
reputable
is
appointed
then
yeah
I
don't
I
think
the
period
of
transition
will
be
that
long.
>> All
right.
Well,
Bill
Beach,
really
appreciate
you
coming
back
on
the
show.
Uh,
thank
you
so
much
for
for
being
on.
>> Thanks,
Bill.
That
was
great.
>> Oh,
thank
you
very
much
for
asking
me.
[Music]
>> Joe,
so
good
to
get
Bill
back
on
to
talk
about
this.
Really
the
perfect
guest.
There
are
so
many
I
guess
ironies
involved
in
this
whole
conversation.
The
big
one
of
course
is
this
idea
that
like
well
if
Trump
wants
to
convince
everyone
that
the
US
economy
is
doing
fantastic
and
job
growth
is
great
then
firing
the
head
of
statistics
and
having
everyone
distrust
you
know
the
subsequent
numbers
because
the
subsequent
head
might
be
a
political
appointee
who's
you
know
a
loyalist
to
Trump.
It
seems
like
you're
sort
of
shooting
yourself
in
the
foot.
The
other
huge
contradiction
is
that
he
says
Powell
is
too
late.
Right?
This
is
the
other
huge
contradiction
which
is
every
day
he
slams
Powell.
He's
like,
"Oh,
you're
too
late.
You
need
to
cut
rates."
>> Well,
if
the
job
numbers
were
weak,
then
I
could
understand
this
argument
to
some
extent.
Oh,
the
job.
But
he's
also
casting
aspersions
on
the
negative
jobs
numbers.
So,
how
is
Powell
too
late?
There's
I
mean,
this
is
it's
an
irretrievable
contradiction
in
the
two
criticisms,
both
of
the
Fed
and
the
BLS.
It's
definitely
a
contradiction.
I
don't
think
however
that
Trump
necessarily
draws
a
direct
connection
between
the
unemployment
rate
and
uh
interest
rates
as
well.
You
know,
he
seems
to
just
like
low
interest
rates
>> and
he
seems
to
perceive
that
low
interest
rates
are
basically
a
reward
for
an
improving
economy.
But
yes,
>> but
I
mean
lots
of
other
contradictions.
You're
absolutely
right.
So
another
one
is
this
idea
that
okay,
a
lot
of
the
weakness
came
through
on
the
revision
side.
the
revisions
are
mostly
coming
from
small
businesses
who
reply
late.
And
if
you
think
about
the
Trump
administration,
you
know,
they
always
sort
of
portray
themselves
as
a
a
good
business
environment
for
smaller
businesses
and
it
might
be
that
that's
an
area
that's
seeing
some
weakness.
I
thought
your
question
about
sort
of
internal
morale
and
as
Bill
said,
you
know,
an
agency
staffed
with
patriots,
I
mean,
I
just,
you
know,
is
BLS
going
to
be
continue
to
be
a
destination
for
people
who
are
patriots,
right?
Or
take
their
jobs
seriously
in
the
future
is
a
really
interesting
question.
Also,
the
idea
that
like
maybe
we
could
like
get
high
data
quality
for
like
$20
million,
given
how
much
that's
worth,
it's
just
like
drives
you
crazy
if
that's
really
all
it
took.
But
also
I
really
like
this
idea
that
it
would
have
to
always
be
done
in
parallel
with
the
current
thing
such
that
the
new
data
is
sort
of
provably
backwards
compatible
with
the
old
data
right
so
if
you're
going
to
adopt
a
new
methodology
you
need
some
allocation
to
run
two
surveys
at
once
etc
anyway
even
in
a
very
short
conversation
learned
a
lot
from
Bill
>> absolutely
I
do
think
it's
worth
pointing
out
that
there
are
other
statistical
agencies
in
the
world
that
are
experimenting
with
new
technology
for
data
sources
the
UK's
statistics
agency
in
particular
they're
going
start
using,
you
know,
price
scanning
data
for
CPI.
>> Wait,
have
you
heard
about
the
whole
thing
though
with
how
they
moved
the
O
andS
to
Wales
and
no
one
wanted
to
go
out
there
and
have
you
heard
about
this?
>> I
have
Wales
that
distribute
the
the
large
of
the
government
across
everyone
loves
that
idea.
Let's
not
have
it
all
be
concentrated
in
London.
They're
like,
"Okay,
we're
going
to
make
everyone
move
to
Wales
and
now
it's
a
lot
harder
for
the
ONS
to
hire
anyone."
Anyway,
it's
just
a
little
interesting
story
out.
Maybe
we'll
cover
it
at
some
point.
>> Why
people
don't
want
to
move
to
Wales.
>> No,
I
just
think
it's
interesting,
right?
Like
there's
I
intuitively
I
love
this
idea
of
like
or
why
should
all
of
the
government
spending
on
public
sector
stuff
at
the
federal
level
be
in
the
richest
city
in
the
UK
or
why
should
it
all
be
in
DC
etc.
And
so
this
idea
of
diff
anyway
it's
a
separate
thing.
It's
actually
some
interesting
challenges
arise
from
it.
>> Okay.
Shall
we
leave
it
there?
>> Yeah,
let's
leave
it
there.
>> This
has
been
another
episode
of
the
Odd
Thoughts
podcast.
I'm
Tracy
Aloway.
You
can
follow
me
at
Tracy
Aloway
>> and
I'm
Joe
Wisenthal.
You
can
follow
me
at
the
stalwart.
Follow
our
guest
William
Beach.
He's
at
beachw453.
Follow
our
producers
Carmen
Rodriguez
at
Carmen
Arman
Dashelbennet
at
Dashbot
and
Kale
Brooks
at
Kaleb
Brooks.
For
more
OddLots
content,
go
to
bloomberg.com/odlots
where
we
have
a
daily
newsletter
and
all
of
our
episodes.
And
you
can
chat
about
all
of
these
topics
247
in
our
Discord,
discord.gg/odlotss.
And
if
you
enjoy
OddLots,
if
you
like
it
when
we
talk
about
the
future
of
economic
statistic
collection
in
the
US,
then
please
leave
us
a
positive
review
on
your
favorite
>> or
the
UK.
And
please
leave
us
a
positive
review
on
your
favorite
podcast
platform.
And
remember,
if
you
are
a
Bloomberg
subscriber,
you
can
listen
to
all
of
our
episodes
absolutely
adree.
All
you
need
to
do
is
find
the
Bloomberg
channel
on
Apple
Podcast
and
follow
the
instructions
there.
Thanks
for
listening.
[Music]
Yeah.
[Music]
Yeah.
[Music]