The so called "Economist" gets it wrong again!

Floater

Any responsible publication would double check numbers – particularly at the extreme end of things – before going public.

Why didn’t they do so on this occasion?

Did it have anything to do with the fact that the “high drink debauchery” Irish lifestyle portrayed by these inaccurate numbers slotted nicely into the anti-Ireland editorial slant of the current people in charge of that organization? Couldn’t believe their luck. “Let’s run with it”.

Let's see if they decide to pulp the book and do a re-print.

Floater



The Irish Times, Saturday, September 27, 2003

'Economist' published wrong figures
Sorcha Crowley
The Economist magazine has apologised for errors relating to Ireland in their recently published Pocket World in Figures 2004.

In the new reference book, figures relating to marriage rates and alcohol spend in Ireland suggested that the Republic had the lowest marriage rate in Europe and one of the highest spend on alcohol.

In a statement yesterday the Economist apologised for errors relating to marriage rates figures around the world, "in particular those in Ireland".

"We stated that in Ireland there were 2.1 marriages per 1,000 population (source: Euromonitor). This figure is incorrect," a spokeswoman said.

This figure would make the Irish marriage rate the lowest in Europe by far. The study also found Britain, with 10 marriages per 1,000 population, to have the highest marriage rate.

Figures from the Central Statistics Office (CSO) reveal a much higher rate of marriage per 1,000 population in Ireland: 5.1 per 1,000, which would equate with the average EU marriage rate.
On the alcohol spend, the book states that $1,335.50 per 1,000 is spent on alcoholic drinks for every man, woman and child in Ireland - higher than France, Germany, Austria, Belgium and the Netherlands combined.

In its apology the Economist admitted "figures relating to alcohol spend in Ireland may not be strictly comparable. We apologise for any confusion."

The source of these figures was questioned by the Central Statistics Office and criticised by a senior Irish economist with the Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI). Mr Danny McCoy this week described the book's figures on marriage and alcohol consumption as "ludicrous".

[UNQUOTE]

Cork

RTE included this story in it's news programmes. You can never trust statistics like this. Even, the garda crime figures and hospital waiting lists are up for debate.

Eurostat is also in trouble.

Stats are taking a bit of a beating at the moment.

star gazer

Yeah we may drink a lot, but so do the germans (beer) and the Frwnch (wine). Our culture of the pub would be slightly different to the way the French and Germans would drink at home from a supermarket. The price is probably a fifth of a temple bar pub anyway.

Lies, damned lies and statistics...

Floater

Originally posted by Cork
RTE included this story in it's news programmes.

RTE are still spewing out the same copycat falsehood on their website without correction:

http://www.rte.ie/news/2003/0924/economist.html

You can never trust statistics like this.

No you can't. Lies. Damn lies. And statistics.

However it moves to a different level when they are published in a heavily quoted and sold all over the place publication like The Economist Pocket World in Figures. This info will be re-quoted and used ad-infinitum for several years in other publications.

Even, the garda crime figures and hospital waiting lists are up for debate.

These are IT infrastructure and reporting issues.

Eurostat is also in trouble.

This is a financial fraud issue. Nothing to do with the accuracy of their statistics or negative propaganda by the media of one country directed at another.

Floater

Kappar

You can never trust statistics like this.

You're damn right.
9 out of 10 people know that

Cork

I think salary and housing surveys are also suspect.

House price surveys are often sponsored by banks & slaary surveys are sponsored by recruitment companies.

Floater

Originally posted by Cork
I think salary and housing surveys are also suspect.

House price surveys are often sponsored by banks & slaary surveys are sponsored by recruitment companies.

They are almost always bids for free press coverage in the media.

They both contribute to inflation.

The salary surveys hype up salary expectations and lead to musical chairs recruitment costs for employers.

The house price surveys are part of the media hype surrounding the residential property market which has given Ireland Inc a property problem of no small dimension.

The other cause of property price inflation is the incompetence and corruption surrounding planning and zoning. If there was a surplus of land with planning and zoning in place (which there should be in a sparsely populated country like Ireland) there would surely be no house price inflation to talk about. It would not even be newsworthy.

Floater

star gazer

The economist got far more coverage of their book of statistics than they would have otherwise, and the beauty of it is that not that many people will see that they got some stats horribly wrong, so people will still buy the thing if they see it. A book with inacurate statistics is worthless.

The other cause of property price inflation is the incompetence and corruption surrounding planning and zoning. If there was a surplus of land with planning and zoning in place (which there should be in a sparsely populated country like Ireland) there would surely be no house price inflation to talk about. It would not even be newsworthy.
floater

Everyone involed in the housing industry wants prices to rise fast indefinitely except the poor, embattled first time buyers. Whitle they have votes they don't have money or a powerful media platform. Until a government does something about the injustice, people will suffer high rents, unsuitable accomadation, crippling mortgage or home with parents.

Floater

Originally posted by star gazer
The economist got far more coverage of their book of statistics than they would have otherwise, and the beauty of it is that not that many people will see that they got some stats horribly wrong, so people will still buy the thing if they see it. A book with inacurate statistics is worthless.

I suspect that this will turn out to be one of the few exceptions to the "there is no such thing as bad publicity" concept. Anyone publishing numbers who gets them wrong (be it for malicious or erroneous reasons) is heading down the Arthur Andersen route in terms of reputation and survival.

In this respect numbers are very different to words. There is no wriggle room or bull**** tolerance when it comes to numbers.


Floater

SkepticOne

Originally posted by star gazer
Everyone involed in the housing industry wants prices to rise fast indefinitely except the poor, embattled first time buyers. Whitle they have votes they don't have money or a powerful media platform. Until a government does something about the injustice, people will suffer high rents, unsuitable accomadation, crippling mortgage or home with parents.

Falling prices is usually the big vote killer for the incumbent in countries like Ireland and Britain where there is a very high rate of home ownership. It would be far better for the country if house prices were at a more realistic level but that is not going to happen.

Floater

Originally posted by SkepticOne
Falling prices is usually the big vote killer for the incumbent in countries like Ireland and Britain where there is a very high rate of home ownership. It would be far better for the country if house prices were at a more realistic level but that is not going to happen.

There is a big difference between the housing market in Ireland and Britain. In Britain there is a large amount of moving and trading up and home owners are generally more leveraged. Changes in house prices are marked to market more often there.

High relative property prices in a country are of no benefit to most homeowners – when they sell they will have to find a replacement. The obvious beneficiaries are the recipients of the transaction costs – ie the same people who are sponsoring the house price surveys.

Government measures to create an excess supply of serviced housing land (ie with train stations and bus services as well as water and sewers) would be politically popular because existing home owners will have children who will need their own houses. It is surely irrelevant to the parents that their own home might be worth slightly less or have a stable price rather than a rising price. The alternative for many parents is to remortgage their homes to help the kids pay the inflated prices that they are now faced with. This is hardly a healthy scenario as the parents are advancing in years and is bad financial engineering for Ireland Inc.

Floater

star gazer

I suspect that this will turn out to be one of the few exceptions to the "there is no such thing as bad publicity" concept.
floater

Yeah it could do untold damage to the 'economist' brand name as an expert business publication, i think it'll be a case of short-term gain for long term pain.

Falling prices is usually the big vote killer for the incumbent in countries like Ireland and Britain where there is a very high rate of home ownership. It would be far better for the country if house prices were at a more realistic level but that is not going to happen.
skepticOne

While i agree the last thing we need is a crash in house prices, there is room for a small adjustment downwards. The danger with continuing rise in house prices is that people's expectations are set on the continuation of the rise, people forget the realities and stay focussed on more profits. The tech-boom was a good example of the majority of investors taking their eyes off the ball. I'm not saying our house prices have gone untenably high, i'm saying we need a slowed pace of increase. Even a light decrease.