7 ms·

I sincerely hope Tufte can successfully counteract the Washington tradition of applying the methods from How to Lie with Statistics. A good visualization can j

I sincerely hope Tufte can successfully counteract the Washington tradition of applying the methods from How to Lie with Statistics. A good visualization can just as well expose the fraud from a contrived one.

ewjordan 17y ago
From what I've read of his work, Tufte has almost a compulsion to force data to tell the truth, and do so in an effective manner. Which makes me fear that his career in Washington will be politically disastrous and end rather quickly... I sincerely hope I'm wrong about that. We could use more people like him keeping the government honest from the inside.
- tokenadult 17y ago
  Yes. What if the data plainly presented show that the stimulus plan was plainly a waste of money? P.S. How many of you, when you hear announcements of how many jobs have been saved by the stimulus plan, immediately do the mental arithmetic to figure out how many dollars of taxpayer funds were spent to save each job? I think I could do better in my family in keeping us all actively employed in work helpful to society with the same number of dollars per employable person.
  - byrneseyeview 17y ago
    Before you do that math, make sure you're not counting raises, theoretical jobs from as-yet-un-funded projects, etc. Here's a nice map of where all the fake saved-jobs are: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/maps/Bogus-jobs-created-or-saved-by-the-Stimulus.html http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/maps/Bogus-jobs-created-or... Although you have to adjust upward: faking the existence of tens of thousands of jobs is obviously difficult work, and I bet more than one person is working full-time on the faking.
  - tdoggette 17y ago
    Ezra Klein of the Washington Post deals with this claim (that the stimulus was ineffective because of how much money it spent per job created). http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/02/bad_stimulus_math.html http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/02/bad_stim... Tax credits, Pell grants, unemployment support: it's not all jobs. But you have to blame the administration for this [perception], at least in part: They sold the stimulus in terms of job creation, rather than simple economic growth.
  - anigbrowl 17y ago
    Well, you can see where the money goes here: http://www.wallstats.com/deathandtaxes/ http://www.wallstats.com/deathandtaxes/
  - mos1 17y ago
    How many of you, when you hear announcements of how many jobs have been saved by the stimulus plan, immediately do the mental arithmetic to figure out how many dollars of taxpayer funds were spent to save each job? I do not, because that is a fool's calculation. The value created is not one year's salary, it's the difference in the present value of an individual without a job and the present value of an individual with a job, including all estimable secondary effects (both positive and negative.) If you simply divide it and compare it to a year's salary, you'll sit there and go 'HURRR THAT IS DUMB', but in reality, you're proving only that you don't really understand policy analysis. ---- I'm reminded of a situation that occurred many years ago in my career, when I was still working in a corporate setting. My team hit a seemingly intractable combinatorial explosion problem while trying to create a tool for the sales force. It was incredibly difficult, and quickly blew through the allocated budget (which we'd told them right from the gate, was inadequate). The management just assumed we were lying... that we weren't up to this task, or we were just lobbying for more money and man-power for our group (I was trying to make a very specific high-end hire to help, and I had already purchased some serious iron). In fact, they were so convinced that this couldn't be this difficult to accurately analyze that they started shopping consultancies, and most agreed with us, that this would be difficult and expensive... but one did not. One said "yes, we can build it, no problem." A year later, the consultancy had burned through a pile of money, and had nothing to show for it. Only then did management recognize that maybe this seemingly simple configuration problem was not, in fact, as simple as they imagined. And perhaps we weren't just lying or waving our hands when we said "this shit is not as simple as you think it is." (and even then, they didn't admit it outright. I had an all-day meeting which consisted solely of them asking me stupid question after stupid question, as to why various simple approaches wouldn't work... and me having to draw out specific examples on a whiteboard, indicating the business and technical problems with these simple approaches.) It's sad, but common, for people to assume that other people's jobs are easier than they really are. Even very smart people fall into that trap... but generally speaking if intelligent, hard-working people are advocating something that seems stupid to you, it's probably because you don't understand the problem or the solution.
    - anamax 17y ago
      > The value created is not one year's salary, it's the difference in the present value of an individual without a job and the present value of an individual with a job, including all estimable secondary effects (both positive and negative.) If you simply divide it and compare it to a year's salary, you'll sit there and go 'HURRR THAT IS DUMB', but in reality, you're proving only that you don't really understand policy analysis. You're assuming that the job will last beyond the year and that we couldn't simply send that person $X dollars and produce most of the same benefits.
- amalcon 17y ago
  On the plus side, the Obama administration certainly knows this too. This suggests that they do actually think it wasn't a waste of money (otherwise, they'd get someone they could bribe to say it wasn't). Now, they could easily be wrong, but we might manage to get some idea.
- tjic 17y ago
  > From what I've read of his work, Tufte has almost a compulsion to force data to tell the truth I think it's naive to think that there's just "one truth". What's the truth about NASA spending during the Apollo program? It was so-many billion that added up to a glorious step into the cosmos? It was so-many billion that added up to a race with the Soviets to prove that freedom is better than communism? It was so-many billion that was a big whose-dick-is-bigger game? It was so-many billion spent to bid up the wages of well payed first world engineers while third world peasants continued to live in poverty? These are all true, and there's no way that graphic design can pick the one true truth out of the other truths. Tufte can do some great work on displaying the multi-trillion dollar buget, but it's not going to get at "the" truth. Here's the visualization I'd like to see: FDR's Depression budgets weren't concentrated in areas with the highest poverty, but in areas where his political support was wavering. Obama's "stimulus" is similarly spent in areas of the country, and areas of the economy where buying political support is needed. I'd like to see Tufte do THAT visualization. I'm sorry to hear that he's going to be on the government payroll - I'd love to have his skills deployed as a non-partisan, non-aligned outsider, as opposed to someone inside the tent looking out.
  - westbywest 17y ago
    By a similar token, it can also be naive to expect the truth to be plain at the outset, or even for a sizable period of time afterwards. This is doubly (trebly) so for political matters (c.f. Gulf of Tonkin). What's sought is honesty. To quote an old Murakami novel: "Speaking frankly and speaking the truth are two different things entirely. Honesty is to truth as prow is to stern. Honesty appears first and truth appears last. The interval between varies in direct proportion to the size of the ship. With anything of size, truth takes a long time in coming. Sometimes it only manifests itself posthumously."
  - tome 17y ago
    Obama's "stimulus" is similarly spent in areas of the country, and areas of the economy where buying political support is needed. I'd like to see Tufte do THAT visualization. Interesting. I think this is exactly the kind of claim that when it is posted on any forum on the internet should always be backed up by a reference to clear evidence. I'm not saying I disbelieve you, but simply that if it's as clear cut as you make out it should be straighforward to provide the evidence.
- sausagefeet 17y ago
  Elizabeth Warren has been fairly vocal and, from what I can tell, honest in what has been going on with stimulus money. She also seems to have been fairly successful (or was last time I checked). I don't know anything about this guy but if he is like her I feel like we are in good hands.

ewjordan 17y ago

From what I've read of his work, Tufte has almost a compulsion to force data to tell the truth, and do so in an effective manner. Which makes me fear that his career in Washington will be politically disastrous and end rather quickly... I sincerely hope I'm wrong about that. We could use more people like him keeping the government honest from the inside.

tokenadult 17y ago
Yes. What if the data plainly presented show that the stimulus plan was plainly a waste of money? P.S. How many of you, when you hear announcements of how many jobs have been saved by the stimulus plan, immediately do the mental arithmetic to figure out how many dollars of taxpayer funds were spent to save each job? I think I could do better in my family in keeping us all actively employed in work helpful to society with the same number of dollars per employable person.
- byrneseyeview 17y ago
  Before you do that math, make sure you're not counting raises, theoretical jobs from as-yet-un-funded projects, etc. Here's a nice map of where all the fake saved-jobs are: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/maps/Bogus-jobs-created-or-saved-by-the-Stimulus.html http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/maps/Bogus-jobs-created-or... Although you have to adjust upward: faking the existence of tens of thousands of jobs is obviously difficult work, and I bet more than one person is working full-time on the faking.
- tdoggette 17y ago
  Ezra Klein of the Washington Post deals with this claim (that the stimulus was ineffective because of how much money it spent per job created). http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/02/bad_stimulus_math.html http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/02/bad_stim... Tax credits, Pell grants, unemployment support: it's not all jobs. But you have to blame the administration for this [perception], at least in part: They sold the stimulus in terms of job creation, rather than simple economic growth.
- anigbrowl 17y ago
  Well, you can see where the money goes here: http://www.wallstats.com/deathandtaxes/ http://www.wallstats.com/deathandtaxes/
- mos1 17y ago
  How many of you, when you hear announcements of how many jobs have been saved by the stimulus plan, immediately do the mental arithmetic to figure out how many dollars of taxpayer funds were spent to save each job? I do not, because that is a fool's calculation. The value created is not one year's salary, it's the difference in the present value of an individual without a job and the present value of an individual with a job, including all estimable secondary effects (both positive and negative.) If you simply divide it and compare it to a year's salary, you'll sit there and go 'HURRR THAT IS DUMB', but in reality, you're proving only that you don't really understand policy analysis. ---- I'm reminded of a situation that occurred many years ago in my career, when I was still working in a corporate setting. My team hit a seemingly intractable combinatorial explosion problem while trying to create a tool for the sales force. It was incredibly difficult, and quickly blew through the allocated budget (which we'd told them right from the gate, was inadequate). The management just assumed we were lying... that we weren't up to this task, or we were just lobbying for more money and man-power for our group (I was trying to make a very specific high-end hire to help, and I had already purchased some serious iron). In fact, they were so convinced that this couldn't be this difficult to accurately analyze that they started shopping consultancies, and most agreed with us, that this would be difficult and expensive... but one did not. One said "yes, we can build it, no problem." A year later, the consultancy had burned through a pile of money, and had nothing to show for it. Only then did management recognize that maybe this seemingly simple configuration problem was not, in fact, as simple as they imagined. And perhaps we weren't just lying or waving our hands when we said "this shit is not as simple as you think it is." (and even then, they didn't admit it outright. I had an all-day meeting which consisted solely of them asking me stupid question after stupid question, as to why various simple approaches wouldn't work... and me having to draw out specific examples on a whiteboard, indicating the business and technical problems with these simple approaches.) It's sad, but common, for people to assume that other people's jobs are easier than they really are. Even very smart people fall into that trap... but generally speaking if intelligent, hard-working people are advocating something that seems stupid to you, it's probably because you don't understand the problem or the solution.
  - anamax 17y ago
    > The value created is not one year's salary, it's the difference in the present value of an individual without a job and the present value of an individual with a job, including all estimable secondary effects (both positive and negative.) If you simply divide it and compare it to a year's salary, you'll sit there and go 'HURRR THAT IS DUMB', but in reality, you're proving only that you don't really understand policy analysis. You're assuming that the job will last beyond the year and that we couldn't simply send that person $X dollars and produce most of the same benefits.
amalcon 17y ago
On the plus side, the Obama administration certainly knows this too. This suggests that they do actually think it wasn't a waste of money (otherwise, they'd get someone they could bribe to say it wasn't). Now, they could easily be wrong, but we might manage to get some idea.
tjic 17y ago
> From what I've read of his work, Tufte has almost a compulsion to force data to tell the truth I think it's naive to think that there's just "one truth". What's the truth about NASA spending during the Apollo program? It was so-many billion that added up to a glorious step into the cosmos? It was so-many billion that added up to a race with the Soviets to prove that freedom is better than communism? It was so-many billion that was a big whose-dick-is-bigger game? It was so-many billion spent to bid up the wages of well payed first world engineers while third world peasants continued to live in poverty? These are all true, and there's no way that graphic design can pick the one true truth out of the other truths. Tufte can do some great work on displaying the multi-trillion dollar buget, but it's not going to get at "the" truth. Here's the visualization I'd like to see: FDR's Depression budgets weren't concentrated in areas with the highest poverty, but in areas where his political support was wavering. Obama's "stimulus" is similarly spent in areas of the country, and areas of the economy where buying political support is needed. I'd like to see Tufte do THAT visualization. I'm sorry to hear that he's going to be on the government payroll - I'd love to have his skills deployed as a non-partisan, non-aligned outsider, as opposed to someone inside the tent looking out.
- westbywest 17y ago
  By a similar token, it can also be naive to expect the truth to be plain at the outset, or even for a sizable period of time afterwards. This is doubly (trebly) so for political matters (c.f. Gulf of Tonkin). What's sought is honesty. To quote an old Murakami novel: "Speaking frankly and speaking the truth are two different things entirely. Honesty is to truth as prow is to stern. Honesty appears first and truth appears last. The interval between varies in direct proportion to the size of the ship. With anything of size, truth takes a long time in coming. Sometimes it only manifests itself posthumously."
- tome 17y ago
  Obama's "stimulus" is similarly spent in areas of the country, and areas of the economy where buying political support is needed. I'd like to see Tufte do THAT visualization. Interesting. I think this is exactly the kind of claim that when it is posted on any forum on the internet should always be backed up by a reference to clear evidence. I'm not saying I disbelieve you, but simply that if it's as clear cut as you make out it should be straighforward to provide the evidence.
sausagefeet 17y ago
Elizabeth Warren has been fairly vocal and, from what I can tell, honest in what has been going on with stimulus money. She also seems to have been fairly successful (or was last time I checked). I don't know anything about this guy but if he is like her I feel like we are in good hands.