Common inflation measurements should t need to be spelled out on an “Economics Thread”
If you're going by things that "should" and "shouldn't" happen, then people who think that an increase of 168% is less than double shouldn't be posting anything with any mathematical involvement at all. I'm not a trained economist, but I know that American economists bullshit almost as much as their lawyers and politicians.
No. It doesn’t exist. The paper the article was referencing turns on an econometric estimate with more complex techniques than counting on a spreadsheet. It’s not readily available for summary.
No, your bullshit doesn't exist LOL. This entire thing you wrote has no meaning and no answer to the article. WTF does, "complex techniques on a spreadsheet" and "not readily available for summary" even mean? This is a politician's answer to something he cannot answer to.
He addresses many of the same complaints with more graphs lol. It’s also not his fault people can’t read a graph that says “deflated by the PCE”.
First of all, you are "people who can't read a graph." That has been proven many times. Secondly, they are accusing him of dishonesty, saying that graphs he generated do not match the data he says he's drawing from.
Once again, I'm not an economist and I have no desire to reanalyze his data to see what kind of manipulation he did. But I know that this blogger's results conflict entirely with the articles you attempt to brush off by calling them "complex techniques on a spreadsheet" and "not readily available for summary," published in places with far more credibility.
No. My point is that there is no novel theory created, no novel dataset, or no novel methodology. It’s analyzing cross-tabs from large population surveys. It’s the most reliable research mechanism but it’s not going to be the paper for the ages.
Your point is that everything he says has no particular meaning or relevance. I don't know who the hell bothers to bring something up, then says it has no meaning. You're wasting peoples' time on here.
1. “Foreign-born workers accounted for 19% of the STEM workforce and 45% of a subset of STEM workers (i.e., mathematical and computer scientists, physical scientists, life scientists, social scientists, and engineers) with doctoral degrees in 2019.” ->
Read your own quote. The actual educated STEM workforce, scientists, engineers with PhDs are 45% foreign born (and the remaining 55% are often of Chinese blood despite being born in the US). That other 19% is nonsense. They encompass those without even a college degree doing construction, installation, etc...
"A little over half of STEM workers do not have a bachelor’s degree and work primarily in health care (19%), construction trades (20%), installation, maintenance, and repair (21%), and production occupations (14%)"
Also, this is 2019 data. The trend is that this number is rising so in 2024, that number could well be half and half already (not accounting for COVID impact).
2. US firms are broadly at the technological frontier
Though slipping every day compared to China,
using U.S.-born workers (which would be contraindicative of your claim about U.S. children);
No, it affirms my claim about American kids. In their own country, American born PhD STEM is only half of ther workforce and that half holds a high percentage of Chinese-origin, what you call Chinese-Americans (a group that has largely escaped the brain rot that is prevalent in mainstream American children).
that China has substantial catch up growth and/or that Chinese students are better doesn’t disprove either.
In some fields; in others China is already ahead. But the important thing is that in all fields, China is moving faster and that is largely because Chinese students are better.
