When I teach my ECON 101 students about GDP, I express it is a measurement, but it is flawed. The employment numbers are the same. To assume one entity can just track all the employment numbers without issues is simply unrealistic. It may not be a perfect measure, but it is something. If anyone has a better measure, please let me know. Thanks for sharing.
I think the different unemployment rates are a good example of this, too. We may think a rate like U-6 is a better measure to talk about, but what really matters is that we have a consistent definition and we talk about how those rates change.
If we suddenly switched to say U-6 is the "new unemployment rate" that we report on the news, then we'll have a bunch of people mixing up the old way we do it and the new way we do it but complaining that things are so much worse.
100%, As I have read many stories over the years the whole community is split. One seems to be looking at tracking data for policy review (econ), where the other is looking for the smoking gun to make bets on (finance). Thanks for the reply, keep the content coming! Chris
One of the causes for the downward revision as likely the firing and hiring and re-firing of all the government workers. That had to be really difficult to measure.
"Oh, and firing the umpire doesn’t change the score of the game, and firing the BLS commissioner doesn’t change the data that was collected." I think a better metaphor would be, "firing the sportscaster at ESPN doesn't change the score of the game."
Except that if I Tweet out to my 108.4 million followers that the Hokies won every football game by 40 points, people will BELIEVE they are a great, winning team.
Absurd to fire honest & professional statisticians because you do not like the numbers! 👎
I'm sure a few of my students wish they could fire me for the grades they see at the end of the semester.
When I teach my ECON 101 students about GDP, I express it is a measurement, but it is flawed. The employment numbers are the same. To assume one entity can just track all the employment numbers without issues is simply unrealistic. It may not be a perfect measure, but it is something. If anyone has a better measure, please let me know. Thanks for sharing.
I think the different unemployment rates are a good example of this, too. We may think a rate like U-6 is a better measure to talk about, but what really matters is that we have a consistent definition and we talk about how those rates change.
If we suddenly switched to say U-6 is the "new unemployment rate" that we report on the news, then we'll have a bunch of people mixing up the old way we do it and the new way we do it but complaining that things are so much worse.
100%, As I have read many stories over the years the whole community is split. One seems to be looking at tracking data for policy review (econ), where the other is looking for the smoking gun to make bets on (finance). Thanks for the reply, keep the content coming! Chris
One of the causes for the downward revision as likely the firing and hiring and re-firing of all the government workers. That had to be really difficult to measure.
So much has happened that it feels like it happened last year instead of just a few months ago.
"Oh, and firing the umpire doesn’t change the score of the game, and firing the BLS commissioner doesn’t change the data that was collected." I think a better metaphor would be, "firing the sportscaster at ESPN doesn't change the score of the game."
Except that if I Tweet out to my 108.4 million followers that the Hokies won every football game by 40 points, people will BELIEVE they are a great, winning team.
Wait, the Hokies aren't a great winning team?
Moody's chief economist also noted that the government itself often reports payrolls late, contributing to revisions(!): https://www.linkedin.com/posts/mark-zandi-667086350_the-economy-is-on-the-precipice-of-recession-activity-7357775564285378560-e5LT
I'm always really careful not to cry that a recession is on the horizon, but that gets harder and harder to do with each new thing that happens.