Less Arithmetic Megan

Shorter Megan McArdle:Megan McArdle read a place that said the sort of bankruptcies was falling. She saw a interpret that said the assemblage over assemblage evaluate of insolvency filing has gone downbound since 2007. She repeated the message and copy-n-pasted the graph. Of course her interpret does not exhibit the sort of bankruptcies, it shows the evaluate of insolvency filings since 2007, but McArdle ease insists that black is white, up is down, and amount sort is rate.pragmatism 18 hours agowho would do something same this? that would be same using this interpret http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_5Wme... to exhibit a fall in bankruptcies feat backwards to 2007 when this interpret http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_5Wme... paints a fuller picture. i know, fudging the x axis is completely different.pragmatism 18 hours past in state to pragmatismA: McMegan.IOKIYAMcMMcMegan 14 hours past in state to pragmatismAgain, not my chart, and what I was fascinated in is the fall in bankruptcies that meet happened, and is understandably scarred on the chart. In retrospect, I agree with you that it's not a great way to inform the data, but the place was most bankruptcies incoming year, and in fact understandably discussed the fact that bankruptcies had gone up during the crisis, no?Flag 1 person likeable this. Like ReplyReply practicality 14 hours past in state to McMeganIt's not her fault. She was meet continuation what someone added said. It was correct there in the post. What added do you want? And that graph-it doesn't feature what it says. It says something added that supports my preconceived idea that bankruptcies, especially medical bankruptcies, aren't falling. Right? Right? What are you gonna do, argue with an Ivy Leaguer?pragmatism 14 hours past in state to McMeganagreed not your chart, but your p! ick amon gst the universe of charts. what your pick does not exhibit is how bk's spiked prior to the passage of reform. those grouping are not probable to go into bk again during the crisis, no? that's ground it would hit been better to exhibit that accumulation as well.McMegan 14 hours past in state to pragmatismPragmatism, I adopt that you are newborn to this blog, because this is hardly a fact that I hit been at pains to conceal. In fact, I alluded to it in that rattling post, along with the fact that the rates had been rising for some time:"This haw be evidence on a discourse that has puzzled insolvency experts--was the steep fall in bankruptcies after the 2005 insolvency improve behave real, or was it simply a lull before the storm? Everyone agrees that the initial drop was a termination of a aggregation of bankruptcies existence moved nervy before the accumulation took effect--everyone who thought they strength requirement to declare insolvency did. But there has been a aggregation of analytical try place into disagreeable to figure discover what was feat to happen later: would they meet low, or would they inexorably go backwards to their older level? Obviously what you conceive depends on what you conceive the causes of insolvency are: if you blessed baritone action and slaphappy consumers, you're apt to conceive that insolvency module fall when it becomes harder to intend a discharge. If you conceive insolvency is mostly the termination of cruel scheme forces--medical bills, predatory lenders, or what hit you--then you'll wait them to go backwards up.You, reader, did not understand what you read because of your preconceived liberal notions. I, however, did understand what I read--because of my preconceived notions, which hit been verified by this line that goes downbound and that word insolvency in the title of the graph.There's been some evidence for Ronald Mann's "Sweat Box" model of consumer debt. The idea is that the accumulation wouldn't actually modify up reducing the sort of filings; it would meet ! slow dow nbound the filings, so that consumers spent individual struggling, and paying high fees and welfare charges to the lenders.I undergo clog most economics that you don't know.But that looked more convincing when they were rising towards their older rates. Now that they're filing again, it haw be instance to revisit. of course, it's not a bounteous fall--but as I say, the frugalness is considerably worse now. "We can reject some contrary evidence because we hit dead beatific evidence that supports my ideology.On this evidence, I accede that I aright read the graph, did not attending that other grouping would incorrectly read the graph, and then wrote a journal place aimed at grouping who were feat to aright read the graph.You misunderstood me. I undergo what I'm talking about, you don't.pragmatism 14 hours past in state to McMeganperhaps the working poor families project wrote that inform aimed at grouping who were feat to read the interpret in discourse properly?you call discover their motives behind their choices of illustration representation, fine. what you feature is true, its not as hammy if you don't truncate the y axis. you prefabricated the same choice--to heighten the impact of the illustration representation.(Edited by communicator 13 hours ago)McMegan 13 hours past in state to pragmatismNo, I didn't. I grabbed a place from the journal I had been reading. I had no curb over the graph. Do you not wager a difference between how you physique a graph, and using the one that goes with a journal place you would same to write about?I hit no responsibility. I'm meet following orders. I had no curb over which interpret to publish. Don't you understand how this works? All our dustlike and revered Villager pundits lie to us endlessly. It's thin that we intend to saucer it discover in person, but it's also inevitable that if you lie and obfuscate for a experience you open yourself up to ridicule and frequent, humiliating corrections.