[quote=HLS]
Statistics are manipulated which create the data needed to determine the ‘trends’ that you refer to.
I’m just as concerned with the precise numbers because people believe them as they are released.
I disagree that future economic risk has been diminished. I think that the risk is greater than ever.
1.The foreclosure COMPARISONS that are reported are a complete joke yet are used and analyzed by virtually everyone EXCEPT the people who really understand what is going on. It’s easy to fool everyone when fools are in charge.
The entire process of selectively manipulating the process creates completely useless comparisons.
COMPLETELY MEANINGLESS. When’experts’ repeat this blather, it becomes even clearer to me how clueless these ‘experts’ are.
2.Unemployment reports are another joke. the current U-6 is 14.3% far worse than the sub 8%
that the govt & media repeat like it was gospel.
Maybe black swan events aren’t really black swan.
The govt interference & manipulation to keep a ‘black swan’ from becoming a recurring event is VERY real.
The ‘potential crisis’ is not just being called out now, it’s been talked about for the last 8+ years by a tiny minority who just may realize the risks that 99.9% of others refuse to acknowledge, even if it is a remote risk.
For many, many people, their personal situation is far worse than it was at the end of 2008; yet according to the ‘trends’ that you are accepting one would believe that the horizon is rosy and ‘we’ have turned a corner.
I’m extremely skeptical of the reports and trends that are released when I know of many individual situations that are diametrical. I disagree that risks have clearly fallen over the last 4 years. For many people, it has never been worse, and about 10 million people have died in this period so their situations are no longer considered.
With any reports that get released using manipulated statistics, it’s garbage in and garbage out.
It’s always possible to view stats and trends with an alternate perspective if one wants to, rather than just blindly accept what ever gets released, reported and repeated without really understanding the content and how data was compiled.[/quote]
Precisely how and why are the statistics selectively manipulated?
Why is the risk today greater than it was 5 years ago?
Why are the unemployment trends, whether the base number or the U-6 a joke? Both are on a downward trend (June U-6 being an exception).
It seems your whole premise is that you don’t believe the data because you have nothing more than anecdotal evidence that is contrary to the data. I strongly suspect that the data sample used as the basis of these monthly numbers is substantially larger than your anecdotes. Larger the data sample, the more accurate the results. Do you think that is not true?
