This has probably been covered at least a dozen times in these forums, but I couldn't find it. Sorry. Or perhaps this is more along the lines of the CT forum. Not sure.
I have a good friend that is otherwise quite sane and intelligent. He keeps claiming that the unemployment rate (now at 5.7%!) is actually cooked up by the Obama administration. He claims it is actually 22%! :eek: (I know where he gets that from, and why he thinks that. He wants to count everyone of working age who is not looking for a job, who is not disabled, and who is not retired. He wants to include students, heirs of millionaires, the self-employed, and lottery winners. When I try to explain that the self-employed would actually IMPROVE the unemployment rate, he disagrees. He thinks the self-employed should be counted as "unemployment." BS. They are not counted at all, and they never have been. But if they were, they would be "employed.")
When pointing out to him that the unemployment rate is actually a very precise term, with a very precise definition, and formula:
http://ift.tt/1ymLkZw
That the unemployment rate may be less accurate over the course of the last decade or so due to people not responding to surveys like they once did (from a NYT article I just found.)
http://ift.tt/1uHPSys
He doesn't believe I word I tell him, and he says it is a useless statistic anyway. I try switching gears and explain about baseball statistics. That batting average, when taken by itself, is largely useless. But when combined with other data from other statistical analyses and formulas (OBP, Slugging Percentage, HR, 2B, 3B, VORP, etc,) it becomes more valuable and has its place.
He only responds with: "It's not baseball."
Are there any other ideas people may have in this ongoing argument?
I have a good friend that is otherwise quite sane and intelligent. He keeps claiming that the unemployment rate (now at 5.7%!) is actually cooked up by the Obama administration. He claims it is actually 22%! :eek: (I know where he gets that from, and why he thinks that. He wants to count everyone of working age who is not looking for a job, who is not disabled, and who is not retired. He wants to include students, heirs of millionaires, the self-employed, and lottery winners. When I try to explain that the self-employed would actually IMPROVE the unemployment rate, he disagrees. He thinks the self-employed should be counted as "unemployment." BS. They are not counted at all, and they never have been. But if they were, they would be "employed.")
When pointing out to him that the unemployment rate is actually a very precise term, with a very precise definition, and formula:
http://ift.tt/1ymLkZw
That the unemployment rate may be less accurate over the course of the last decade or so due to people not responding to surveys like they once did (from a NYT article I just found.)
http://ift.tt/1uHPSys
He doesn't believe I word I tell him, and he says it is a useless statistic anyway. I try switching gears and explain about baseball statistics. That batting average, when taken by itself, is largely useless. But when combined with other data from other statistical analyses and formulas (OBP, Slugging Percentage, HR, 2B, 3B, VORP, etc,) it becomes more valuable and has its place.
He only responds with: "It's not baseball."
Are there any other ideas people may have in this ongoing argument?
via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/1KOITpw
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire