4 ms·
You can just click the "about" tab: > Paul Romer, economist and policy entrepreneur, is a co-recipient of the 2018 Nobel Prize in Economics Sciences and Univer
by PheonixPharts 4y ago
You can just click the "about" tab:
> Paul Romer, economist and policy entrepreneur, is a co-recipient of the 2018 Nobel Prize in Economics Sciences and University Professor in Economics at NYU. He has spent his career at the intersection of economics, innovation, technology, and urbanization, working to speed up human progress.
I personally do find it surprising how over seasonal effects are often the primary number reported, and there isn't much effort to really understand them.
This was especially problematic for reporting unemployment numbers during the pandemic. All of the published unemployment numbers during the pandemic included seasonal effects, which is absurd to anyone giving the situation even a moments thought. Clearly the impact of the pandemic disrupted whatever seasonal pattern there may have been during stable period.
For unemployment during the pandemic including these seasonal effects would often invert conclusions about the data (e.g. "unemployment is higher this month" when the non-adjusted values were lower and vice versa).
Often times when we really care about an economic indicator it's during times where something strange is happening meaning we should be cautious about unquestioningly using seasonal effects in models.
- fauxpause_ 4y agoIdk. Seasonal effects may be tricky, but that graph showing just two years is certainly not strong evidence of that as the author claims. He makes reference to a prediction of a 100 bps decline, I think by the end of the year which seems kind of silly to me given the numbers appear to swing by more then 1000 bps over individual months. I’d be curious what he’s actually basing the claim on. He has some sort of model. I’d hope it’s not just based on what is shown in the article