|
Written by Steven Burden
|
|
Saturday, 09 January 2010 22:16 |
|
It seems that nearly every day we are bombarded by the media with government statistics which all point to the recovery of the economy. The weekly unemployment numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) are one such example, and they often cause dramatic changes in the Stock Market. It is taken at face value that the statistics they use are accurate. Most Americans at one time or another have heard Benjamin Disraeli’s quote which Mark Twain popularized: “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.” Yet still we accept them from the government.
It is even more inexplicable to me, that we automatically view a study sponsored by an industry representative with suspicion that concludes something favorable to that same industry. But we blindly accept the numbers presented by a government agency regarding a government action. When a study comes out that disputes anthropogenic global warming (or ‘climate change’ as the progressives now call it in response to record cold weather) it is quickly reported if that study was sponsored by an oil company, or the lead scientist has ‘ties’ to the oil industry in order to discredit it. However, when the BLS massively underreports unemployment we blindly accept it without critical evaluation.
In a logical world, shouldn’t we view government statistics with at least the same skepticism we view same-industry statistics?
One way to validate suspect statistics is to look for similar statistics provided by other sources. The following graph—provided by the fine folks at chartoftheday.com—provides just such a perspective.
Eye opening, isn’t it?
|
|
Last Updated on Sunday, 10 January 2010 01:57 |
