November jobs numbers are out

[watisthis]

https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/what-are-leading-lagging-and-coincident-indicators/

Thanks, Obama! Thanks, Reganomics!

Sponsored

 

[watisthis]

Let me guess, Investopedia is a liberal website. Literally, anything that isn't confirmation bias to you is. Lol!

 

[watisthis]

Don't beat me up. LMAO

 

[Jimmy Dean]

https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/what-are-leading-lagging-and-coincident-indicators/

Thanks, Obama! Thanks, Reganomics!

Did you read your links? Bonds, because bond traders try to anticipate (as do all businesses, so WTF) and they said they aren't always right. they wouldn't even put a number on their accuracy, which tells me it isn't accurate enough to draw any type of conclusion off of.

and then unemployment. that section was worse than stupid.

 

[watisthis]

Did you read your links? Bonds, because bond traders try to anticipate (as do all businesses, so WTF) and they said they aren't always right. they wouldn't even put a number on their accuracy, which tells me it isn't accurate enough to draw any type of conclusion off of.

and then unemployment. that section was worse than stupid.

No indicator is always right if they were no one would lose money in the market. I'm talking only unemployment why are you brining up bonds?

'Worse than stupid,' how do you still not understand you have confirmation bias. Go back to page 1 and quote my lengthy post.

 

[Jimmy Dean]

No indicator is always right if they were no one would lose money in the market. I'm talking only unemployment why are you brining up bonds?

'Worse than stupid,' how do you still not understand you have confirmation bias. Go back to page 1 and quote my lengthy post.

because your link was talking about leading and following indicators. hence the comment on the bonds as well.

Let's rephrase what they said on unemployment lagging a recession:

"2 or more consecutive months of increasing unemployment may possibly be indicative of an ongoing recession, but it also may not be indicative of an ongoing recession. We can only really know if it was or not in hindsight after the recession has been correctly identified by other means."

in other words, they are saying that they don't know shit.

 

[watisthis]

because your link was talking about leading and following indicators. hence the comment on the bonds as well.

Let's rephrase what they said on unemployment lagging a recession:

"2 or more consecutive months of increasing unemployment may possibly be indicative of an ongoing recession, but it also may not be indicative of an ongoing recession. We can only really know if it was or not in hindsight after the recession has been correctly identified by other means."

in other words, they are saying that they don't know shit.

Right, but we aren't talking about bonds. I know it was in the article but you could have skipped that part as it did not apply to anything.

Indicators help predict trends, an unemployment indicator generally rises or falls in the wake of changing economic conditions, rather than anticipating them. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/u/unemploymentrate.asp

Please see my lengthy post on page 1.

Sponsored