Dear Overpaid Economist:

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

http://www.nypost.com/business/15538.htm

"January 13, 2004 -- THIS column is for all the Wall Street economists who were so horribly wrong about the number of jobs this country produced in December.

The rest of you can read it too, but I can't be responsible for any brain damage you might suffer.

Dear Overpaid Economist:

The Labor Department last Friday announced that only 1,000 new jobs were produced in the final month of 2003, a decidedly disappointing number considering that virtually all you economists were predicting growth of 150,000 or more. You can be excused somewhat for your over-exuberance, because an economy that is supposedly growing as fast as ours should be producing double what you were predicting.

If you read this column last Thursday you already know that I'm gloating because my sources and I thought the number could be a "big disappointment."

But high-fives aside, the economists are being sabotaged by the old "garbage in, garbage out" problem - you are only as good as the raw data you are using to draw your conclusions.

Here are some of the main problems.

1. All the labor numbers are wrong, but the figures for December are horribly inaccurate. My sources and I think the reason is that the month's seasonal adjustments were thrown out of whack by the highly unusual patterns caused by the terrorism in 2001, which are still affecting the numbers today.

2. That means the January employment number will probably also be a surprise,"

[madrchsod]

1. there were no new jobs

there were plant closing that added up to more than a thousand- back to sq.one.