A very strong labor market where you, checks notes, take a 30% base pay cut, 15.5% expected cut (if target hit), title demotion from Level 2 to Level 1, AND return to the office.
This is simply a mechanism to avoid paying severance as many quit.
1/n While I'm actually in agreement with Dave that there is not an "intentional" fixing of data, I'm with my "smarter Econ" friends who are asserting "something is wrotten" in the published data.
2/n The state level data is subject to interpretation due to the framing of the question, "Last week, did you do any unpaid work in for (either) pay (or profit)?"
3/n Unsurprisingly, the emergence of the gig economy seems to have played a role in reducing the unemployment rate. Prior to 2009, if you lost your job you'd likely file for unemployment AND likely try to find a cash job (bartender, babysitter, etc) to supplement your reduced income WHILE you searched for a job. The introduction of 1099K in 2012 made that more difficult. Revisions in 2021 to reporting levels made it impossible. Now you're either employed OR unemployed. The gray area in between is increasingly rare.
1/n Agree this is not CRAZY. But it’s also not “fundamental”… US CDS trading wide of France (47 vs 28) a good example of issue. France Debt/GDP not meaningfully different and deteriorating at same pace.
3/n The selloff in bonds is not a “US issue”… it’s a global phenomenon. France interest costs rising more rapidly than US. And while US unfunded liabilities, eg Soxial Security/Medicare coming on is an issue, these have automatic stabilizers. Reminder, benefits get cut automatically in US
1/nAlways flattered when @radigancarter takes the time to write on my thoughts. With that said, this is a very important “error”: “wise enough to understand that smart financial decisions, like most good long-term decisions, means I need to do the opposite of my initial emotional reaction to events that surround me.”
2/n Emotional events, like the GFC, represent opportunity in HINDSIGHT. If you define events by their ex-post success, they always appear “smart.” In the heat of the moment, the “smart” move may not be the “after the fact” smart move
3/n @radigancarter, imagine you’re in an enemy ambush and fighting for your life. Out of the corner of your eye, you see a pile of gold bricks. Do you stop and collect them? They hinder your chance of survival. A gravestone that reads, “Grasped for the gold” is still a gravestone
1/n It's always a bit sad to see posts like this proclaiming the low-end household is "in great shape." One, talk to them. They're not. Two, the analysis is just wrong. Let's dig in.
2/n The Fed data is misleading when aggregated. Several will proclaim, "it's real estate" or "of course, stock markets are higher." But neither is really the driver here. Remember in the bottom 50% of households by WEALTH, home ownership is low and few own stocks.
3/n And so while it turns out that the Bottom 50%ile has indeed seen the value of its real estate rise, and this does account for the majority of the gain, this is small comfort to the 2/3rds of this cohort, mostly young, who do not own homes. In fact, as shown above "Liquid"
1/n As the parent of multiple college athletes at top schools, I feel compelled to share that ONCE ADMITTED the bias turns against the student-athlete at elite schools. They work 25 hour/wk jobs representing the university and yet classmates presume they are less intelligent
2/ and many professors are overtly hostile. My daughter has had to drop classes with professors that require 100% attendance with no excuses accepted despite the obvious impossibility of being in two locations at once.
It's made worse as coaches are often unaware of
3/ the rigorous academic requirements at a top school and the pressures of preparing for a post-college career that does not involve the sport. There are schools where college recruiting materially lowers the bar for student-athletes (think state and top conference schools), and
2/n I can’t speak for Joey, but I can certainly note that we are actually saying the same thing. First, inflation is “complicated” — despite what you’ve read, MEASURED inflation is nowhere and never a strictly ANYTHING phenomenon
3/n Note that I emphasize MEASURED, because that’s really the key. We have a very hard time distinguishing shifts in RELATIVE prices within a purchasing basket from a rise in the general price level. By definition, measurement errors will pollute any sample.