And then continued, wrongly and maliciously, to accuse Ricardo as saying the government is falsifying data. “Our government is doing a serious disservice by falsifying the employment condition in our country.” I point out to you that the key word you missed/or and badly misinterpreted is “condition.” You chose to define “condition” as data. Another suggestion, take a step back and a deep breath when you feel a strong personal emotion envelop you. One suggestion, read closer what people write. You need to just stop the personalized attacks. What’s important? The absolute value? The rate of change? Historical comparisons? Who is governor? Who is president? As the saying goes, “all things being equal…”, but they never are.
#Lunacy fringe the used full#
Change the mix of full versus part time employment and good news becomes depressing news. You know, change the divisor in the calculation and the rate changes. You’ve got surveys that never have perfect samples and then there are those “caveats” that, like factors of seasonality, can just make the apparent seem obtuse.
Unemployment rates are slippery little fellows. Most of the time it’s just “sh*t happens.” Is the forecaster lying? Only if he knowingly used erroneous assumptions. One can project the number of new jobs based on assumptions that don’t pan out. You need a lot of assumptions to be correct to be close to achieving “near miss” status for economics forecasts. Sometimes the basis for seasonal patterns gets disrupted or fundamentally altered and it takes awhile for seasonal adjustments to more appropriately adjust. Seasonal data is a good example of statistics changing as new actual data is added. When actual/newer data become available the statistics can change and forecasts can look foolish. That’s the funny thing about statistics and forecasts. Does that mean the forecasters were mistaken? Some would rather think it shows the statistics are being faked.” Norris’ article: “All those forecasts turned out to be wrong. If that is not an allegation of falsifying data, I do not know what is.ġ55 thoughts on “ Lunatic Fringe Alert: Government Statistics Edition”įrom Mr. The whole reason the numbers are manipulated is to the will be “more normal” but who decides what is normal? In the government political bureaucrats who know their jobs depend on pleasing the politically connected. Here is a snippet of DickF‘s comment:Īlso any time numbers are manipulated by government there is a political element involved. Update, 11/9, 8AM Pacific: I am reminded that 5 years ago, Ricardo in his DickF incarnation showed up in a similar context, in this post.
#Lunacy fringe the used series#
What series would Ricardo want reported before he didn’t accuse the government of suppressing the truth? I downloaded on FRED just a few, before I got tired, and here are the unemployment rates. Update, 11/8 11:40AM Pacific: Ricardo states the government is falsifying the data. If the secret government was really serious about falsifying the data to make it look better, they could for sure do a better job…īut seriously, how can economic discourse proceed if all the inconvenient data are disbelieved? Fortunately, Floyd Norris is on the case, as is Paul Krugman. Policy changes that could actually help are being delayed with false information. …Our government is doing a serious disservice by falsifying the employment condition in our country. Longtime reader Ricardo (aka Dick/DickF/RicardoZ) writes:
0 kommentar(er)
