3 ms·
Lies, damn lies, and statistics. You can usually prove whatever outcome you desire by choosing your starting and ending dates carefully. While I don't doubt th
by hn_throwaway_99 2y ago
Lies, damn lies, and statistics. You can usually prove whatever outcome you desire by choosing your starting and ending dates carefully.
While I don't doubt that CA has major economic problems, they chose their time range as Jan 2022 - June 2024. The huge tech layoffs began in ~mid 2022, largely as a result of huge over-hiring during the previous 2 years. So while CA indeed had abysmal job growth numbers over that period, I'd be very interested to know what, say, the past 5 or 6 years looked like in total, including both the pandemic boom and subsequent bust.
- coding123 2y agoIt really is correct though and 2 years is a pretty extensive time for the state to basically do nothing to stop it.
- dgfitz 2y agoI think most general search engines can answer your question. Given the question, you won’t like the answer.
- chomp 2y agoUsed a search engine. First result: https://www.gov.ca.gov/2024/08/16/california-created-nearly-one-in-five-of-the-nations-new-jobs/ https://www.gov.ca.gov/2024/08/16/california-created-nearly-... Please explain.
- lolinder 2y agoThat doesn't answer the question at all. That says that CA is adding jobs rapidly now, which does not contradict the claim that over the 2022–2024 window CA barely moved the needle, nor does it help to show that given a longer range the effect in TFA disappears. Edit: here's some data that does answer the question: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LAUST060000000000005A https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LAUST060000000000005A Approximately as many people were employed in CA in 2023 as were employed in CA in 2017.