If I were a betting man…
NBA Champions: Miami Heat
MVP: Kevin Durant
Scoring Leader: Kevin Durant
Defensive Player of the Year: Dwight Howard
Rookie of the Year: Blake Griffin
Coach of the Year:Nate McMillan
Top Rebounder:Kevin Love
Most Blocks: Dwight Howard
Most Assists:Chris Paul
Best Record: Miami Heat 68-14
It was a year ago that the government introduced the “Cash for Clunkers” program. So did the “Cash for Clunkers” program work? The jury’s still out on this one, apparently. A recent article suggests that the program was a wash. I remember when the Cash for Clunkers program was going on in August and September of last year, many scoffed at the notion that such a program would actually stimulate the economy. An oft-cited criticism was that the program would only “borrow sales from the future”, such that we’d see a big dip in sales in the months after the program had ended. In short, the program would not stimulate new demand for new car purchases overall. My view is that I agree that the program pulled demand forward, creating a large drop in demand for new cars immediately after the end of the clunkers program; however, I feel that there are other considerations to ponder about before arriving at a conclusion. One way to think about whether the program was successful or not is to consider what would’ve happened if there wasn’t the Cash for Clunkers program.
Consider the timing of the Cash for Clunkers program: The program ran during the peak season for auto sales (dealerships in August are feverishly trying to sell off their inventory before the new models arrive in September). Dealerships also probably did not feel a need to discount the vehicles as much as they would’ve without the clunkers program, because they saw the government check as a government-sponsored “marketing fund” for their advertisements, which may have increased their revenues per unit (RPUs). Also, because the program garnered a lot of press, dealerships piggybacked off the buzz by spending more on advertisements, which increased sales during that period (source). And if you were driving a car that’s at least 5 years old–a decent number of folks out there–and you aren’t exactly loaded, wouldn’t you at least be curious to check whether your car qualified for the program? I’d think that it would get more people to flirt with the idea of buying a new car (that would not have even entered one’s consciousness in a bad recession, otherwise), which at the very least helps to divert some of the attention away from all of the economic woes one read about in the news. The consensus out there is that the auto sales and car manufacturing industries during those two months likely would’ve seen lower sales, if there wasn’t a clunkers program. In that scenario, the media would’ve jumped all over the state of the auto sales industry, and report it as a harbinger of worse things to come (e.g., an especially weak retail shopping season). This would’ve further depressed consumer confidence. Perhaps more dealerships would’ve closed. Car manufacturers would be in even worse shape than they are today.
Consider that the Christmas shopping season immediately follows the auto industry’s peak season (which may be a reason why the program was so short?). Perhaps if there hadn’t been this program, consumer confidence levels would’ve been even lower during last year’s Christmas shopping season, resulting in a lower GDP, etc. Some would argue that the clunkers program really hurt retail sales during the Christmas shopping season, I presume, because car buyers who cashed in on the clunkers program have no more money to spend after a car purchase. However, I’d say that only a small percentage of the population (those who bought cars) would be affected whereas a further weakened economy (if one buys the argument that the clunkers program helped) and the resultant decreased spending would’ve affected many more consumers.
Quite frankly, I don’t know whether the program worked. Not ready to side one way or the other just yet. Just some things to consider, that’s all.
No betting this year for me, but curious to see how far off or close these predictions are, on Feb 6, 2011.
NFC East: 1) Cowboys 2) Redskins 3) Giants 4) Eagles
NFC North: 1) Vikings 2) Packers 3) Bears, 4) Lions
NFC South: 1) Saints 2) Falcons 3) Panthers 4) Bucs
NFC West: 1) 49ers 2) Cardinals 3) Seahawks 4) Rams
AFC East: 1) Jets 2) Patriots 3) Dolphins 4) Bills
AFC North: 1) Ravens 2) Steelers 3) Bengals 4) Browns
AFC South: 1) Colts 2) Titans 3) Texans 4) Jaguars
AFC West: 1) Chargers 2) Broncos 3) Raiders 4) Chiefs
NFC Championship: Vikings over Cowboys
AFC Championship: Jets over Colts
Super Bowl XLV: Jets over Vikings
For the rest of 2010 and next year, I’ll be spending much of my leisure time outside of work, studying the works of Tolstoy and F. Chopin. 2010 marks the centennial anniversary of Tolstoy’s death and the bicentennial anniversary of Chopin’s birth. One of my regrets in college was not signing up for either of the quarter-long classes on War & Peace and Anna Karenina. I think reading works of literary realism and its central themes of one’s struggles (social, personal, spiritual), morality, etc, would do me some good at this stage of my life & career. Because I have self-diagnosed myself as having ADHD, I’ll start with his short stories and essays before tackling his larger works.
Still working on the Chopin Etudes Op. 25. I’m hoping I have fewer distractions this time around. It’s good that at my new residence, I’ll have an actual piano to practice on, which should help things along. My hope is that I can reach a level where I’ll be able to think about the music from the composer’s point-of-view/intent, but also be able to play the piece differently on a sunny day versus on a rainy day. Maybe I’ll make a recording of each etude after I’ve learned it.
I should preface this post by stating that I am in no way responsible or for how you choose to invest your money. That said, today I sold my remaining taxable mutual funds, to help pay off my student loans (yay, i’m officially debt free!). Not touching my retirement accounts though. Cashing out now after months of crawling back to close to pre-financial crisis levels is pretty much a no-brainer, considering that student loans these days have a higher interest rate (4.5-7%) than stock returns on average.
My investment philosophy for the most part hasn’t changed much. If I had more dough, I’d still be continuing with my passive investment approach (i.e., buying mostly index mutual funds w/ low fees). However, at this stage in my life, cash is king and I believe there are better types of investments out there. I’ve pretty much accepted the fact that the behavior of the stock market is out of one’s control. I’d rather invest in things that I have more control over. Such as Formal education, furthering one’s skills, or learning a new trade. Ironically, this is coming from someone who was initially skeptical about the value of graduate school just two years earlier. Now two years wiser, I believe that while one’s still young, the best investment one can make is to invest in him or herself (and others too). Go back to school and get an advanced degree/degree or learn new skills to make yourself more competitive out there on the job market. Don’t believe the hogwash about buying a house to make money (it depends on one’s financial situation and opportunity costs) or your prospects of beating the stock market. Go get better and try to help others along the way.
(Disclaimer: Potential spoiler alerts below! You’ve been warned.)
Went to watch Inception on IMAX the other day. Overall, thought it was a good movie. I generally like movies about dreams vs. reality, or any movie that gets me thinking about it days after watching it. Some of the main concepts: Dream vs. Reality, “Leap of Faith”, dreams being multi-directional (dreams are based on reality, but can also serve as inspirations for new realities), and operates upon many layers of conscious and subsconscious thoughts, to name a few.
The “Leap of Faith” concept is probably the most interesting idea in the movie, at least for me. At the same time though, the movie seems to beg the audience to take a ‘leap of faith’ too. Here are a few things in the story that seemed to suggest this:
1. I couldn’t understand why Cobb’s wife was on a ledge of a building across from the one that their hotel room was in. How did she get there and why wasn’t she on the ledge of the same building?
If being able to see his kids was that important to Cobb, why couldn’t the grandparents arrange to take the kids abroad to meet their dad again or live there? Why was Cobb so pessimistic about the likelihood of his wife’s death being ruled a suicide, that he had to flee the country and never come back to see his kids? Her DNA is on the other building and his aren’t I presume, and I’m not so sure that what the movie suggests as evidence/motive is enough to convict him of murder.
2. Fischer pointing a gun to his head in the bathroom, as if about to commit suicide, to test Cobb’s theory. Why would anyone do that? So if his hypothesis is wrong, he’s dead. If he’s right, he wakes up. What a great deal! Fischer wasn’t depressed or deranged; in fact, he was extremely wealthy and stood to inherit his father’s empire. Not believable, unless i missed something here.
3. I guess the leap of faith is also reflected in the other team members’ instantly believing what Cobb said about if anyone died in a dream on their mission, they would forever
be in a state of limbo. Might Cobb have made this up to get them to stay onboard and finish the job?
4. The old man at the long table in the beginning and end of the movie, is supposed to be Saito, the character played by Ken Watanabe. The young Saito’s eyes were brown. The old Saito had green eyes. How does that work?
Maybe I have to watch the movie again to make sense of these things. One thing’s for sure, this post is suffering from severe overanalysis and is time to drift off to sleep.
Yesterday, I attended the Mummies of the World exhibit at the California Science Center. It wasn’t what I expected.
I thought I’d be viewing mostly Egyptian Pharaohs wrapped in cloth and the elaborately-decorated sarcophagus. Turns out it was much more graphic than that. Most of the mummies on display had much of their mummified flesh, hair, and bones all exposed (see pictures, if you dare!), from different parts of the world. There were even mummies of squirrels, cats, baby crocodiles, etc. Here’s a summary of observations, thoughts, etc during the 75 minute exhibit. Much of this is rather self-evident; some of it serves more as a reminder of things.
Differences in physical appearances among different people are overrated. Differences in physical attributes (e.g., skin color, ethnicity, etc.) tend to be exaggerated and exploited by leaders for dumb reasons. A mummy from Peru bears quite a resemblance to a mummy from Eastern Europe, don’t you think?
The significance of cultural relics and their persistence over time. Ancient Egyptians wore amulets around their necks for protection. Today, people wear amulets, charms, etc, to signify something of importance to them, religious reasons, as a fashion symbol, etc
The mummy of a Peruvian woman, who lived over 3,400 years ago, wore tattoos. Symbolic items such as amulets and tattoos seem rather universal among different cultures and still carry its meaning over many, many generations. It’s suggested that the tattoo’s purpose was to ward off evil spirits or protect against illnesses. Today, some people wear tattoos for similar reasons (e.g., “I’m a tough guy, don’t f with me”, aesthetic purposes, etc). I could’ve sworn I saw painted fingernails, too, but not sure if that’s discoloration or actual fingernail paint.
The idea of an afterlife is nearly universal. The Ancient Egyptian mummies were prepared for the afterlife. The Peruvian civilizations believed in good and evil spirits. The mummies of Europe were of Judeo-Christian faiths.
The exhibit was eerily quiet for the number of people that attended. I’m sure some of it was out of reverence for the dead, but I think a lot of was because the mummies reminded us–up close and personal–of our own mortality. Most of the time spent at the exhibit was thinking about how these people lived, and how that differed from the way we live today.
Studying mummies can have other applications such as unlocking clues to diseases. Mummies from the 18th century in Europe are being used today to shed light on the complex history of tuberculosis. How about arthritis/autoimmune diseases, etc?
Cultural anthropology-related questions. What methodology should one use to arrive at objective reality? How does one identify the “webs of significance” (Weber), to understand the subject and its system of symbols using our own lens, not the subject’s? In studying cultures, should the starting point be focusing on similarities than on differences, or the other way way around?
Heard a 5-year old girl ask her mom, “Mommy, is that a mummy? Why doesn’t it move?”. The 5-year old had no concept of what a mummy was, probably couldn’t comprehend the concept of death yet, or that the mummy was over two millennia old. To her, it was nothing more than a pinata at her friend’s birthday party or some tree in her backyard. Lest you develop a superiority complex from reading this, the sophisticated mind of an adult is not without a penchant for greed, genocide, wars, corruption, etc. You would have to wonder how a higher power, extraterrestrial life, etc, may view us?
While driving through Silicon Valley today, we were reminded of what Steve Jobs said in his commencement speech at Stanford in 2005, about trusting that the dots will eventually connect. It was then that I realized that I’ve been doing a lousy job wrt trusting that the dots will connect. Admittedly, I’ve been over-planning ever since the start of business school and thinking in terms of elaborate decision-trees, which if you think about it, is futile since there’s no way to reliably estimate the probabilities of certain events occurring in our lives. Instead, it may make more sense to first ask myself what’s important to me, in terms of what I want in my profession/career. I think what I value the most are, in order of importance: 1) Freedom to create new things/value, 2) that “Winning” feeling, 3) competition/strategy 4) authority to make key decisions and be fairly evaluated/recognition. 5) Flexibility in setting my schedule/hours, where I live, etc. The extrinsic stuff like pay is of course, important too, but the above intrinsic things are stuff we tend to overlook.
So the following things happened today:
1) saw SI cover of the Heat trio (w/ DWade in the middle, and LeBron sitting to his left, signifying second-fiddle status?), 2) saw that someone posted on their Facebook about how it’s better to try than to regret, and 3) conversation with a friend about taking risks while we’re still young, and “connect the dots” convo. When I began to understand the common thread, I then felt more at peace with whatever lies ahead.
Here’s a recap of the 2010 WSOP Event #8 ($1,500 buy-in NLHE) on June 2nd. This was my first tournament at a casino (I normally focus on cash games) and was worth the cost of tuition and the chance to win $568,974 and a bracelet. The biggest mental adjustment for me heading in was reminding myself that tournament poker is about survival whereas cash games have more to do with +/- EV in the long run (pot odds + implied odds). Here are some of the key hands and observations made:
Key hand #1. 35 minutes into the tournament, blinds at 25/50. Player in MP+2 raised 3x the big blind. The button and SB called. I decide to call with J8 of diamonds in the BB. Flop comes Q,10,6 rainbow, and everyone checks. Turn card puts out a 9s, giving me a straight. Everyone checks around to the original raiser, who bets $500. With a possible flush draw (spades) out there, I raise to $1,400. Villain puts me all-in. Does he have KJ? He has been relatively quiet, yet it’s only been 35 minutes into the tournament. I think about it for awhile and thought the likelihood of him having one of the four possible sets out there was probably the most likely scenario, given that he raised preflop and checked on the flop. When I called, he uttered, “KJ” and thought he had KJ, but he showed QQ (luckily I didn’t muck!). Whew!
Key hand #2. Shortly after the first break, I had pocket 5’s in UTG. The button, who’s got me covered, raises to about 3.5x the BB. BB calls, I call and UTG+2, who has a couple thousand fewer chips than me, calls. Flop comes Ah,5h,10c. Everyone checks around until the button bets a little less than 2/3 the pot. BB folds, I call, UTG+2 calls. Turn puts out a Qd. I check, UTG+2 checks, the button bets about 2/3 of the pot. I go all-in for 3,000 more in chips. UTG+2 calls. Button thinks about it for awhile, and folds (I think he had AK). UTG+2 flips over KJ for the straight (he hit his gutshot…). I’m in bad shape as I need the board to pair. River card doesn’t help. I’m down to $1,900 in chips. Lesson learned: In tournament poker, don’t get too greedy by over-slowplaying and hoping to win a huge pot. Even though you’re ahead, some players will be on big draws. In this example, I should’ve made a big raise on the turn when the button bet. The UTG+2 holding KJ most likely would’ve folded his draw. Unfortunately, by simply calling the was giving him good odds to call there. The irony of this hand is that I made the same mistake as the player who let me catch my inside straight in Key hand #1.
Key hand #3. With only $1,900 in chips, I only have an M of only 5 (1M = cost of living for one round), I don’t really have much of a choice but to go in all-in or fold mode. Shortly after the second break, I have pocket 9’s in the big blind. The button raises to 3x the BB. I go all-in. The player on the button has $8,000 behind him…who looks like your typical online pro, who just moved from another table not too long ago, thinks about it for awhile and asks, “Do you want action?” 10 seconds later, he calls my all-in bet. He flips over AQo. Flop comes 9,9,K and I double-up. Not really a key hand I suppose, but somewhat memorable b/c I hit quads.
Key hand #4. With blinds and antes being pretty high, relative to my stack, I felt I needed to make a move soon if I wanted to have a decent chance of mounting a comeback. I’m in middle position with QJ of hearts. The button, who looks like another online pro, who has a lot of chips in front of him, makes a standard 3x bb raise. I don’t have much in front of me, about 13x the big blind. I just want to see a flop and decide on what to do. Flop comes Qc,7,c,10,d. Because I’ve been going all-in on 4 occasions already, I’m hoping the players are putting me on a very wide-range of hands, so I move all-in. The button shows AK and folds. In retrospect, I should’ve checked and let him continuation bet (although I haven’t seen him play many hands to know how frequently he c-bets). I think the earlier hand in which I let someone catch a straight on me, plus my overzealousness in winning more chips to stay alive, influenced my decision to move all-in pretty fast. I believe this was a key mistake as I likely could’ve extracted another 1,200-1,500 in chips from him if I let him cbet and I raise all-in, which would’ve gotten me out of all-in or fold mode.
Key hand #5. For most of the tournament, I was in all-in or fold mode. I must’ve gone all-in at least 10 times and got called twice. Winning once with four-of-a-kind and losing the other time, which knocked me out of the tournament, which I’ll get to later. After the dinner break, I moved to a different table with an M of 6 (you never want to have M<3). The player to my right looked familiar to me and I later learned that it’s Victor Ramdin, who is a professional poker player very active on the tournament scene. Very nice guy, btw. I go all-in at least 4 times and got no callers. I’ve been surviving by picking up blinds + antes, until my last hand, in which I was holding on AJo in the big blind. 500 players are left in the tournament (2,341 entrants). My stack had dropped to between 5-6M’s, which is probably just above the amount needed to get most people at my table to fold to my all-in bets. UTG+1 bets 3x the bb, everyone folds until it gets to me. I go all-in and he calls. He shows AK of clubs. I’m dominated and my hand doesn’t improve. I’m out.
Overall, I had a lot of fun playing and no regrets. I made at least a couple of costly mistakes that I can learn from, and feel that I did alright considering that I didn’t really get a lot of good starting hands. The best starting hand I got was pocket 10’s (which I had to fold on the turn to a big bet in an earlier hand). Never got any of the premium hands like AA, KK, QQ, JJ, or AK. Made it to around 500 out of 2,341 entrants, not too shabby for a first tourney. Until next year.
Now that I’m done with grad school, I have more time to resume some of my more “impractical” pursuits such as music. One of the goals I’ve put off for some time now (since 2004) has been to learn the complete Chopin Etudes.
Recently, I’ve listened to some recordings (Lipatti, Lugansky, Pollini) of the Chopin Etude Op. 25, No. 5 in E minor, and felt this should be July’s project. Practiced the first section today (“minor seconds” section) and seemed to get the hang of it, with the dissonant-sounding minor seconds. The fingering is a bit awkward for me, with the thumb sliding underneath the palm to play a note, will take some getting used to. Apparently, I had started learning this piece before as I had written “March 27, 2006″ in the score and some notes that I don’t necessarily agree with now. I think I’m more motivated now than before, so I like my chances now.
A couple weeks back, I made an impulse buy on eBay for desktop speakers that normally go for $299 MSRP. The lowest price online was $269 shipped, but I found a Buy-It-Now! listing for those speakers Brand New for $199. And with the Bing Cashback (8%), I was getting the speakers for $183, so it was a pretty sweet deal. It did occur to me that the price seemed too good to be true, but with eBay Buyer Protection, figured it was worth the risk. Either I can sell it and make around $80-100 profit or I can keep it for myself, so I purchased the item using Buy It Now.
A half hour later, I get this email from the seller:
Seller:“im sorry. i put the wrong price in. it was suppose to be 299. i am going to refund you your money back right now. i am sooooooooooooooooo sorry for the inconvenience.”
After seeing that she relisted the item at $299, I replied to the seller:
Me: “As a buyer who bid on this based on trust, the seller should
honor the sale since the wrong price entered was not the buyer’s
fault. I ask that you honor the sale and ship the item to me
(item received within 7 days). I hope you will honor your
commitment to the sale (if you honor the sale, I will post a
positive feedback). Otherwise, as you can understand I will have
to leave a negative feedback to warn any future potential buyers
of this.”
While this technically is a legal contract, eBay can’t do much about it. They can only look into suspending the seller’s account if the offense warrants it. Not sure if eBay did anything, but about a week later, the seller contacts me and agrees to send me the item. Well, I got my speakers today and have decided to keep ‘em (great sound!). As promised, I left the seller a positive feedback.
I’m wondering what made the seller change her mind? How much of it was due to fear of getting a negative feedback vs. empathy? Had she resold it, she likely could’ve netted $80 profit if she wanted to. At any rate, I’m glad that the seller did the right thing.
On Saturday, I attended an afternoon concert in which Emanuel Ax performed the Chopin Piano Concerto No. 2 in F minor with the LA Philharmonic at Walt Disney World Concert Hall. This year marks the bicentennial anniversary of the birth of Chopin and R. Schumann and many orchestras are including many of these composers’ works this season. It was my first time hearing Emanuel Ax perform live, even though I have collected many of his recordings over the years and have foregone many opportunities to hear him perform at Symphony Center. I was particularly excited about this concert since it was a chance to hear one of the best perform a concerto that I’ve learned to play before (Man, can’t believe it’s been a decade since the Concerto Competition!). So Saturday for me was a piano masterclass of sorts. Even though I sat in the nosebleed section five stories up, it was definitely worth the price of admission.
This was the second time I’ve heard this concerto performed live. The other time was back in 1999 when my college buddy W and I attended a concert in which Jean-Yves Thibaudet performed the Chopin Concerto with the CSO. Man, I was such a nerd then as I brought a notebook and pen with me, taking notes on Thibaudet’s phrasing, pedaling, breathing, etc, in preparation for the competition. And overall demeanor…it still amazes me how these performers are so calm when they’re up there on stage. I appreciated the fact that both Ax and Thibaudet performed the piece without much bravado and flair. Especially when many pianists today, in an effort to sell more tickets, throw in needless acrobatic moves and the overuse of rubato, making Chopin sound overly sentimental. Ax’s approach seemed more minimalist than Thibaudet’s. From hearing the two performers, I’ve learned that I need to be more efficient in my hand and finger movements, which will help to make the fast and softer passages sound smoother and reduce the likelihood of hitting the wrong notes. Ax is an older, rotund dude, yet he demonstrates great balance on the bench. That is another area I need to work on to develop better balance/use of torque and be more attentive to breathing for better phrasing. It was also interesting to note that both Ax and Thibaudet were quite light on the right pedal, which worked especially well for the fast Third Movement in creating the theme of childlike exuberance. This is another major area I didn’t do well the first time around, and is something I’ll have to improve, since my pedaling at times blur the notes. When I practice, I’ll need to refrain from using any pedaling until at a later stage of learning a piece.
The highlight for me was Ax’s playing of the Second Movement. I felt that his interpretation was spot-on and brought out a sort of pseudo-Mozartian charm (this concerto, IMO, really shows Mozart’s influence on Chopin). Overall, I really enjoyed the performance. My only quibble with the Ax performance was that there were various times where it sounded a bit flat. Particularly at the end of certain phrases in the Third Movement, Ax elected not to crescendo much, if at all. Often, the last notes of certain key phrases actually sounded softer than the preceding notes. Was Ax trying to ‘play it safe’? Or was Ax simply respecting the composer’s wish to never exceed mezzoforte in dynamics when performing? This makes the built-up tension feel unresolved, creating a hanging audience. This was particularly pronounced in the final phrase, in which I would’ve preferred that it be played in a way that conveyed a mad dash to the finish punctuated with an exclamation mark.
For an encore, Ax played the Nocturne in C sharp minor. After Intermission, the LA Phil played the Shostakovich Symphony No. 6.
I recently checked my tread depth on my tires using the coin test and to my chagrin learned that I need to purchase new tires again. The Fuzion ZRi’s that I purchased in early 2008 for my WRX lasted just 2 years (i should’ve heeded the one review that warned about the tread life). This time around I’m shopping for all-season tires instead of summer tires.
Most consumers aren’t aware that the age or shelf-life of the tires matter. Tires six years old (from when it was manufactured) and older supposedly have a greater chance of the tread pealing off, which can lead to accidents, as detailed in this 20/20 news segment. Tire manufacturers do not list expiration dates on the tires, but you can tell the age of the tires from reading the cryptic codes on the tires.
Assuming there is some validity to this, how should you shop for tires? First, do your research online by reading consumer reviews, test results, and shop around for prices. If you prefer to buy at a tire shop, before you purchase make sure to check the age of the tires.
Purchasing tires online could save you a lot, but also could be tricky since there’s no way to tell the age of the tires that will be shipped to you. Your best bet is to buy a newer model tire (e.g., google “new tire product launch”) and note the product launch date. If the product launch date was less than two years ago and assuming that I’ll keep the tires for 3-4 years, it’d be a tire that I’d consider purchasing.
I composed a new music piece last week which i’ve tentatively titled, “Prelude”. It’s inspired by J.S. Bach’s Preludes and Fugues.
Here’s the audio file. Any feedback would be appreciated. Thx.
Our unemployment rate is now at 9.7%, which is the highest since 1983. Yet the rate of layoffs have slowed. Usually this would mean that while employers are not laying off workers as quickly as in previous months, they’re also not hiring. But according to the article, “The rise in unemployment, after dipping to 9.4% in July, came as more Americans returned to the work force. Teenage unemployment hit 25.5%, the highest since the government began keeping records in 1948.” Hmm. So who qualifies as being “unemployed”? According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics website, it’s rather complicated. Apparently, a 16 year old who flipped burgers at McDonald’s during the summer and quit her summer job last month because of school, would be considered “unemployed”. I’m curious what fraction of the unemployed are cases similar to this, in which unemployment is voluntary. In other words, perhaps some month’s unemployment rate would be of greater concern than another month’s. For example, we may be more concerned about the unemployment rate around or during the Thanksgiving and Christmas shopping season than we’d be for August, since summer is typically slower for sales in many industries, and students are going back to school. What do you think?
