Modbert
Daydream Believer
- Sep 2, 2008
- 33,178
- 3,055
- 48
Memory Hole Alert - NYTimes.com
And why did they remove the original number?
Weigel : Heritage Has New Unemployment Projections for the Ryan Budget
I wonder if anyone will still try to defend the original numbers, even with Heritage conceding they were unrealistic. Though I will be interested in the thoughts of whether even this new update is feasible as according to the creator of the model that Heritage is using.
You can see the unemployment forecast, with the amazing 2.8 percent prediction, in the fourth set of figures.
But go to the same place right now, and you get this:
Yep — they took the offending number out.
I mean, really, guys — this is all over the blogosphere; did you really think you could get away with pretending it was never there?
But this does bring back memories: during the Social Security debate, Cato tried to expunge all evidence that it had ever used the word “privatization”, when it was easy to show that its project was originally the Project on Social Security Privatization.
And why did they remove the original number?
Weigel : Heritage Has New Unemployment Projections for the Ryan Budget
I just talked to Bill Beach at Heritage's Center for Data Analysis, who tells me that the team re-ran part of its model for the Path to Prosperity. The unemployment projections, which predicted sub-7 percent unemployment in 2012 and sub-3 percent unemployment in 2020, were too low.
"We adjusted the full employment unemployment variable," said Beach. "Nothing else changes as a result of that, but the employment number changes."
The new numbers -- 7.89 percent unemployment in 2012, and 4.27 percent unemployment in 2020.
I wonder if anyone will still try to defend the original numbers, even with Heritage conceding they were unrealistic. Though I will be interested in the thoughts of whether even this new update is feasible as according to the creator of the model that Heritage is using.