Vox Rationalis

Weekly Unemployment: Lying with Numbers

On Jul 09 03:54 PM Mad Hedge Fund Trader wrote:

> ...we have fallen back to 2000 levels of total employment.

Complete and total nonsense. Look at ANY data on the subject.

> Only one out of 2.4 Americans now has a job.

Hogwash. With 300M people in America, this would mean 125M employed; the latest number is 140M. Which, by the way, means that a higher percentage of the population is now employed than at almost any time between 1970 and 1983. [ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub...

> Stocks, real estate, and many other asset classes have also given
> up the decade’s gains.

Yes, the S&P 500's return in the last 10 years is -20%. Of course, this arbitrary sample starts pretty close to the peak of the dot-com bubble, doesn't it? Consider the returns for the four years prior to that ending 6/99: 30.2%, 34.7% 26%, 26.1%.

As for real estate, no way real estate's back at 2000 levels. The Case Shiller 20-city composite was 40% higher in April than January 2000.

Weekly Unemployment: Lying with Numbers

"Lying With Numbers" - Was this talking about the headlines, or this article?

"The critical fact is that that the number of non-adjusted new claims for unemployment insurance benefits rose by 175,834 claims year over year."

This is THE critical fact? Really? You think that the important analysis of unemployment claims is year-to-year? Why? Isn't a year an arbitrary number? Why not two years? Why not three? Your analysis is stunning - you're able to glean from your calculations that the economy is worse now than it was a year ago. Quick - somebody call the Nobel committee!

Let's just be clear about this - when December comes, and the unemployment rate is still rising, but year-to-year first time claims are lower, you'll be saying that things are getting better?

"...we have a catastrophic rise in the number of new claims for unemployment on our hands."

"Catastrophic"? Hyperbole much?