Message-ID: <3EC1DC61.5020604@whitebuddha.com> Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 01:03:46 -0500 From: jeff <jefflist@whitebuddha.com> Subject: Re: Gini ratio
Zscoundrel wrote:
> I think that Samuel Clemmons said it best, ". . . There are Lies, Damn
> lies, and Statistics . . ."
That quote really annoys me. Translation: "Statistics can be cooked.
Maybe stats for the Gini ratio here are cooked." That is the question
here.
>
>
> It would actually take days to really give you a decent analysis, but
> as a statistics junky and an analyst I will share some of my
> concerns. I am bothered by MANY of the assumptions they make in the
> process of filtering the data to arrive at their conclusions. Also, I
> have been following the economy since Nixon, and I don't really
> remember hearing about this before, but I assume that is due to the
> complexity of the data and the difficult nature of the calculations.
Wealth inequality seems to be a very objective concept, but I do imagine
it must be a lot of work to calculate.
>
> One of the things I look at is how they portray the data. The year to
> year percentage change chart is almost useless as an indicator the way
> they portray it. The data is not really linear (hell, it doesn't even
> really have any trend) but they use a line chart to represent the data
> because that matches the other charts.
Why is the "year to year percentage change chart" useless? What is
wrong with the graph not being linear?
> This tells me that the authors are more concerned with looking good
> than clearly communicating the data.
> It makes me wonder about what other short cuts they have taken that
> don't show.
It seems to me the authors are showing a high level of abstraction.
What is wrong with that. I would need a detailed analysis of the
calculations to determine the accuracy of this graph but not to
understand the point made by this graph. I have not looked at a
detailed analysis, but this graph does fit with my knowledge of history
and a few other disciplines.
All you have written is your opinion. How about some facts. You don't
need to spend days on this. I think you could do a lot better spending
10-15 minutes, if you are not too busy.