4 ms·

Anecdote would be saying that some individual over on 4th Street feels that things aren't that great. "Consumer sentiment" (or whatever name) is actually a sta

Anecdote would be saying that some individual over on 4th Street feels that things aren't that great. "Consumer sentiment" (or whatever name) is actually a statistic. So now you're at two statistics, one that measures economic activity in jobs and output, and the other that measures peoples' intuitive feel of the economy. I think the gap between them might be that peoples' confidence was shaken by inflation reigniting after 15 years.

gruez 2y ago
But polls show that around of population are flat out wrong on certain objective measures, like GDP, the S&P 500 index, and the unemployment rate[1]. If they can't get basic factual questions right, why should we put much stock in their "intuitive feel of the economy"? [1] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/may/22/poll-economy-recession-biden https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/may/22/poll...
- Izkata 2y ago
  That's exactly the point - there's some sort of disconnect and people just want to say "they're wrong" instead of trying to figure out why people feel that way.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - gruez 2y ago
    >people just want to say "they're wrong" instead of trying to figure out why people feel that way. Why are these two things positioned as opposing/contradictory? Why can't those people be wrong but we still try to figure out why they think that way?
    - CPLX 2y ago
      Ask yourself the reverse question now. Why can't it be true that the economics profession is wrong, or better yet "not even wrong" and not really even talking about anything that has real world applicability? Given the last few decades that should probably be the starting premise of any analysis.
      - gruez 2y ago
        >Why can't it be true that the economics profession is wrong, or better yet "not even wrong" and not really even talking about anything that has real world applicability? I'm not ruling it out, only pointing out that it's a lazy argument to handwave away the statistics while not providing evidence that's equal or better than the ones you're trying to refute. This is especially true when the discrepancy is from a group of people who can't get basic facts right. Maybe they're actually right but there's some contrived reason they're not answering straightforward factual questions correctly, or maybe they're just wrong.
        CPLX 2y ago
        I have a degree in economics and both my parents taught economics and I grew up with a couple Nobel prize winners in economics around the dinner table from time to time. Which, in fairness, I didn’t mention earlier and isn’t necessarily something that moves forward a message board discussion anyways. But like maybe consider the possibility that at this point “mainstream economics” is a lot closer to astrology than it is to science.
- CPLX 2y ago
  Guys this isn’t that complicated. Basically every commercial interaction you have these days involves someone trying to cheat you, with basically no way to find recourse to human understanding or help. It’s every day, every time you interact with a corporation as a consumer. It fucking sucks profoundly and people are completely exhausted by it. Have you really not noticed?
  - gruez 2y ago
    But the questions isn't "how do you feel about the economy", it's "do you think the s&p 500 went up or down". Even if you think the stockmarket is fake and disconnected from what actually happens on main st, you should still be able to correctly answer whether it went up or not. Failing to do so shows that either you have no grasp on how the S&P 500 is actually doing, can't hold opposing concepts it your head (ie. the "real economy" is doing shit but the S&P 500 is doing great), or can't follow basic instructions. Neither makes me confident in other things you're saying, like how how good the economy is.
    - CPLX 2y ago
      > you should still be able to correctly answer whether it went up or not Why? Who fucking cares? Some guy calls my phone during dinner with some survey about the economy. I answer every question with a variation on “fuck you and your economy” and then hang up. I grew up in a family of social scientists and yet it still shocks me how much people actually believe the words “studies say” and “experts insist” when it comes to matters of human sentiment and opinion.
      - gruez 2y ago
        >I grew up in a family of social scientists and yet it still shocks me how much people actually believe the words “studies say” and “experts insist” when it comes to matters of human sentiment and opinion. But the question we're asking isn't "how people feel about the economy", it's "how the economy is actually doing". I don't think anyone here is seriously arguing that the public is wrong about their own "sentiment and opinion". They're going to be right almost by definition. What is actually being disputed is whether public's "sentiment and opinion" actually reflects reality. To that question I don't see why we should give unlimited credence to "human sentiment and opinion".

gruez 2y ago

But polls show that around of population are flat out wrong on certain objective measures, like GDP, the S&P 500 index, and the unemployment rate[1]. If they can't get basic factual questions right, why should we put much stock in their "intuitive feel of the economy"? [1] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/may/22/poll-economy-recession-biden https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/may/22/poll...

Izkata 2y ago
That's exactly the point - there's some sort of disconnect and people just want to say "they're wrong" instead of trying to figure out why people feel that way.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- gruez 2y ago
  >people just want to say "they're wrong" instead of trying to figure out why people feel that way. Why are these two things positioned as opposing/contradictory? Why can't those people be wrong but we still try to figure out why they think that way?
  - CPLX 2y ago
    Ask yourself the reverse question now. Why can't it be true that the economics profession is wrong, or better yet "not even wrong" and not really even talking about anything that has real world applicability? Given the last few decades that should probably be the starting premise of any analysis.
    - gruez 2y ago
      >Why can't it be true that the economics profession is wrong, or better yet "not even wrong" and not really even talking about anything that has real world applicability? I'm not ruling it out, only pointing out that it's a lazy argument to handwave away the statistics while not providing evidence that's equal or better than the ones you're trying to refute. This is especially true when the discrepancy is from a group of people who can't get basic facts right. Maybe they're actually right but there's some contrived reason they're not answering straightforward factual questions correctly, or maybe they're just wrong.
      - CPLX 2y ago
        I have a degree in economics and both my parents taught economics and I grew up with a couple Nobel prize winners in economics around the dinner table from time to time. Which, in fairness, I didn’t mention earlier and isn’t necessarily something that moves forward a message board discussion anyways. But like maybe consider the possibility that at this point “mainstream economics” is a lot closer to astrology than it is to science.
CPLX 2y ago
Guys this isn’t that complicated. Basically every commercial interaction you have these days involves someone trying to cheat you, with basically no way to find recourse to human understanding or help. It’s every day, every time you interact with a corporation as a consumer. It fucking sucks profoundly and people are completely exhausted by it. Have you really not noticed?
- gruez 2y ago
  But the questions isn't "how do you feel about the economy", it's "do you think the s&p 500 went up or down". Even if you think the stockmarket is fake and disconnected from what actually happens on main st, you should still be able to correctly answer whether it went up or not. Failing to do so shows that either you have no grasp on how the S&P 500 is actually doing, can't hold opposing concepts it your head (ie. the "real economy" is doing shit but the S&P 500 is doing great), or can't follow basic instructions. Neither makes me confident in other things you're saying, like how how good the economy is.
  - CPLX 2y ago
    > you should still be able to correctly answer whether it went up or not Why? Who fucking cares? Some guy calls my phone during dinner with some survey about the economy. I answer every question with a variation on “fuck you and your economy” and then hang up. I grew up in a family of social scientists and yet it still shocks me how much people actually believe the words “studies say” and “experts insist” when it comes to matters of human sentiment and opinion.
    - gruez 2y ago
      >I grew up in a family of social scientists and yet it still shocks me how much people actually believe the words “studies say” and “experts insist” when it comes to matters of human sentiment and opinion. But the question we're asking isn't "how people feel about the economy", it's "how the economy is actually doing". I don't think anyone here is seriously arguing that the public is wrong about their own "sentiment and opinion". They're going to be right almost by definition. What is actually being disputed is whether public's "sentiment and opinion" actually reflects reality. To that question I don't see why we should give unlimited credence to "human sentiment and opinion".