Latest / Stuff You Should Know / What's the misery index?

Transcript

What's the misery index? · Stuff You Should Know

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Welcome to you stuff you should know from house Stuff
• 0:03
  Speaker 1: Works dot com. Hey, and welcome to the podcast. I'm
• 0:12
  Speaker 1: Josh Clark, and there's Charles W. Chuck Bryant. The W
• 0:16
  Speaker 1: stands for Wayne Dr Wayne Coyne. It gets you every time.
• 0:22
  Speaker 1: I know, it's funny to be forty five years old
• 0:25
  Speaker 1: and named after Wayne Coyne because he's like forty eight. Right, No,
• 0:29
  Speaker 1: he's in the fifties too, But it would be weird.
• 0:32
  Speaker 1: I would have been named after a very uh like
• 0:35
  Speaker 1: kindergarten age Wayne coin A. Right. You know, maybe your
• 0:39
  Speaker 1: parents were friends with his parents and they really thought
• 0:41
  Speaker 1: a lot about him. Play he's a real achiever, right
• 0:44
  Speaker 1: that Wayne Coyn going places? Okay, Uh, that's a weird
• 0:48
  Speaker 1: side track. It was already out of the gate. Man.
• 0:51
  Speaker 1: How are you feeling. I'm good. I got a lot
• 0:54
  Speaker 1: on your plate, got a lot going on. Oh you
• 0:57
  Speaker 1: know what today is? What? Dude? Today is the day
• 1:04
  Speaker 1: that I leave this office and I go to a
• 1:06
  Speaker 1: shop in Edmond Park and pick up four brand new
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: last chance garage hats. Oh wow, it's a big day,
• 1:14
  Speaker 1: very big day. So I have a couple of people
• 1:17
  Speaker 1: would like to thank It's a bigger deal than it
• 1:19
  Speaker 1: should be for a grown man in a hat. But
• 1:21
  Speaker 1: we all understand, first of all, Katie, my custom patchmaker,
• 1:27
  Speaker 1: this is really where it all came together. The patches
• 1:29
  Speaker 1: isn't right, the hat's not right. Katie killed it. It
• 1:33
  Speaker 1: looks identical and you can find her work at tulip
• 1:37
  Speaker 1: cake dot com c U L I P. Cake. And
• 1:41
  Speaker 1: I said, you know people might ask you to make
• 1:44
  Speaker 1: you to make them last chance garage patches. Did you
• 1:47
  Speaker 1: have her destroy the mold? And I said, I don't
• 1:49
  Speaker 1: you know. It's on you. It's up to you legally.
• 1:54
  Speaker 1: I'm just saying you might get requests. You should have
• 1:57
  Speaker 1: been like Ivan the Terrible who blinded his architect, except
• 2:00
  Speaker 1: that they built his pal Now, I don't care people.
• 2:02
  Speaker 1: I'd love to see these things around and la mood
• 2:06
  Speaker 1: big hats l A m o O d uh for
• 2:09
  Speaker 1: big heads because part of the problem was finding uh
• 2:14
  Speaker 1: big and tall hat. Yeah, man, like, uh the problem
• 2:17
  Speaker 1: I have with hats these days. I don't look like
• 2:18
  Speaker 1: I have a huge head, but they just fit so
• 2:21
  Speaker 1: snugly and they don't go far down enough on my head.
• 2:25
  Speaker 1: So I finally looked up oversized hats and found La
• 2:27
  Speaker 1: mood hats and dude, they're exactly like the old hat
• 2:32
  Speaker 1: except it doesn't stink. Oh yeah, like these are great.
• 2:35
  Speaker 1: I got four brands, an improvement for sure. So are
• 2:37
  Speaker 1: you gonna put one in like the seed Vault in Norway? Uh?
• 2:41
  Speaker 1: Probably one there. Uh, there will be one in the
• 2:43
  Speaker 1: nuclear suitcase, and um, I'll wear the other two at
• 2:49
  Speaker 1: the same time at the same that's right. Anyway, I'm
• 2:53
  Speaker 1: super excited. So it's pretty cool. Thank you to Katie
• 2:55
  Speaker 1: and the mood Hats for allowing me to spend too
• 2:59
  Speaker 1: much money getting four hats remade. And speaking of while
• 3:02
  Speaker 1: we're thanking people, we we owe a long overdue thank
• 3:05
  Speaker 1: you to a guy who um made us a really
• 3:09
  Speaker 1: cool sign. Um. Oh you mean the sign this guy
• 3:13
  Speaker 1: made for us like seven years ago. Yeah. His name's
• 3:15
  Speaker 1: Matt Street. He's at fat Bison dot com. And it
• 3:17
  Speaker 1: made a really cool woodcarved sign. It was in our
• 3:20
  Speaker 1: TV show. It was like like the production company got
• 3:23
  Speaker 1: clearance rights for it and all this stuff, and we
• 3:25
  Speaker 1: love the sign, but we just forgot to ever thank Matt.
• 3:27
  Speaker 1: So Matt, thank you so much for the sign. We
• 3:29
  Speaker 1: love it. We have it hanging here in the studio.
• 3:32
  Speaker 1: It is a work of art and we appreciate it.
• 3:34
  Speaker 1: We're sorry for the oversight. Um. Is that all the
• 3:38
  Speaker 1: thank you? So let's talk about the misery index high. Yeah.
• 3:42
  Speaker 1: What a great transition, have you? Um? Had you heard
• 3:44
  Speaker 1: of it before you came across this article? Yeah? I
• 3:47
  Speaker 1: didn't know a lot about it though, And um, apparently
• 3:49
  Speaker 1: it's going a little bit out of fashion lately from
• 3:51
  Speaker 1: what I understand. Yeah, I think so, because well, well
• 3:55
  Speaker 1: let's get into it. Okay. It turns out economics as
• 3:58
  Speaker 1: a whole is in danger of going out of fashion.
• 4:01
  Speaker 1: I've read this really interesting article on a on, which
• 4:04
  Speaker 1: is maybe the greatest website on the planet a e
• 4:07
  Speaker 1: O N dot It might be dot CEO because British
• 4:10
  Speaker 1: about a lot of websites. I think I said about
• 4:12
  Speaker 1: a on a lot and and it just seems like
• 4:15
  Speaker 1: I'm talking about different ones. But there's this article by
• 4:18
  Speaker 1: Allen J. Levinovitz and it's called the New Astrology, and
• 4:22
  Speaker 1: he basically makes a parallel between economics and economists and
• 4:27
  Speaker 1: economic theory when you take economics and try to apply
• 4:31
  Speaker 1: it to future forecasting and the um the b CE
• 4:37
  Speaker 1: Chinese astrologers that basically directed the way that the economy
• 4:42
  Speaker 1: or the government was going to move based on the
• 4:46
  Speaker 1: movements of the stars, you might as well just do that.
• 4:49
  Speaker 1: He drew some pretty pretty interesting parallels between the two
• 4:52
  Speaker 1: that that economics in and of itself is not necessarily flawed,
• 4:56
  Speaker 1: but when it's used to forecast the future, then it
• 4:58
  Speaker 1: becomes inherently flaw odd. Yeah, this this article really kind
• 5:02
  Speaker 1: of kind yeah, a little bit. Yeah, to an extent.
• 5:06
  Speaker 1: I mean, the misery index is a legitimate economic tool,
• 5:09
  Speaker 1: and it's hit or miss in a lot of ways. Yeah.
• 5:12
  Speaker 1: I think one thing that hit home to me with
• 5:14
  Speaker 1: researching this is it just seems impossible to say that
• 5:19
  Speaker 1: there's one correct way of doing things right or that
• 5:24
  Speaker 1: is absolute, and you're like, you know, if you do
• 5:26
  Speaker 1: things this way, then there will be nothing but growth
• 5:29
  Speaker 1: in jobs and the GDP s and g m P
• 5:33
  Speaker 1: and uh, it just it just doesn't seem to work
• 5:36
  Speaker 1: that way, right. I think the problem is is that
• 5:38
  Speaker 1: if you listen to economists, they like to act like
• 5:41
  Speaker 1: they do have a handle on that kind of thing.
• 5:43
  Speaker 1: But if you really look into economics, it's very politicized.
• 5:46
  Speaker 1: There's liberal economics and there's conservative economics, and the fact
• 5:50
  Speaker 1: that each one saying it's right kind of makes you
• 5:53
  Speaker 1: think that maybe no one is, you know, but the
• 5:56
  Speaker 1: misery index actually is is it started out from a
• 6:00
  Speaker 1: guy who was pretty good at walking the line between
• 6:03
  Speaker 1: conservative and liberal economics. UM, a guy uh what was
• 6:08
  Speaker 1: his name Okin? Yeah, Arthur Oakin, and he uh he
• 6:12
  Speaker 1: worked on Kennedy's staffs, Council of Economic Advisors, John F.
• 6:16
  Speaker 1: Kennedy that is, and he was, UM, I get the feeling,
• 6:20
  Speaker 1: one of the main influences and talking Kennedy, who initially
• 6:24
  Speaker 1: did not necessarily agree, but talking Kennedy into kind of
• 6:28
  Speaker 1: trying to enact both conservative and liberal economic policies simultaneously.
• 6:34
  Speaker 1: Right they were. The US was intercession when Kennedy took
• 6:37
  Speaker 1: office in nine one, UM, and they talked him into
• 6:41
  Speaker 1: not only increasing government spending like welfare programs. They raised
• 6:47
  Speaker 1: the UM, the minimum wade and UM some other stuff
• 6:51
  Speaker 1: like that, but they also cut taxes, which is, you
• 6:55
  Speaker 1: do one or the other. You cut taxes and hope
• 6:57
  Speaker 1: everything goes for the best because businesses will start investing
• 7:00
  Speaker 1: and spending, or you start you start investing in welfare
• 7:04
  Speaker 1: programs to help your ailing UM lower in middle classes. Right,
• 7:09
  Speaker 1: you don't do both, and Kennedy did both and it
• 7:12
  Speaker 1: was successful. Yeah. He well he at first he said,
• 7:16
  Speaker 1: I don't know about this. I don't know about this author.
• 7:18
  Speaker 1: Mike Kennedy sounds like a robot. My kinda did too.
• 7:22
  Speaker 1: Actually this is fine, but Arthur mr Okun Okon, I
• 7:28
  Speaker 1: think it's a weird name. Okay, you in uh. He
• 7:33
  Speaker 1: talked him into it and said trust me, and things
• 7:37
  Speaker 1: worked out in that case. Yeah. Well, and a lot
• 7:40
  Speaker 1: of guys, including Oaken's names, were made by this advice
• 7:45
  Speaker 1: that panned out like the US Center to Boom and
• 7:49
  Speaker 1: um Okin ended up as being the head of the
• 7:51
  Speaker 1: Council of Economic Advisors for Kennedy's successor, Lyndon Johnson. Right, yeah,
• 7:56
  Speaker 1: and um one thing that economic economists economists love to
• 8:01
  Speaker 1: do is um I mean, he loved the forecasts and
• 8:05
  Speaker 1: all that stuff. But it's all about data, man. They
• 8:08
  Speaker 1: love to pour over data, like stuff that makes the
• 8:11
  Speaker 1: average person their mind bleed from boredom. They just find
• 8:16
  Speaker 1: it fascinating. That's what they do on Friday nights. Friday nights,
• 8:19
  Speaker 1: they pour over data, historical data, trying to find you know,
• 8:22
  Speaker 1: it's like the big puzzle and they're all trying to
• 8:24
  Speaker 1: solve it, so they pour over this data. Oakland did,
• 8:27
  Speaker 1: and um he said, you know what, I noticed something
• 8:30
  Speaker 1: here between when we started recording some some decent unemployment rates,
• 8:39
  Speaker 1: which I didn't know. I didn't know we started that.
• 8:41
  Speaker 1: It seems like it would have gone back before then.
• 8:43
  Speaker 1: But between sixty he said, you know what, I've noticed
• 8:46
  Speaker 1: that the gross national product rises three for every percentage
• 8:51
  Speaker 1: point that unemployment falls. With the caveat that unemployment has
• 8:57
  Speaker 1: to be between three and seven point five percent, which
• 9:00
  Speaker 1: is a pretty like, it's pretty bold statement to say
• 9:03
  Speaker 1: I've noticed this is a definite trend. It is, and
• 9:06
  Speaker 1: it came to be called Oakland's law because it was
• 9:09
  Speaker 1: verified other people poured over the data and like, this
• 9:12
  Speaker 1: guy is right, man, he just keeps coming up with hits,
• 9:15
  Speaker 1: doesn't he. Um. And the reason you would want to
• 9:18
  Speaker 1: know some arcane piece of data like that is that
• 9:23
  Speaker 1: if you know that that's the case, then you can say, well,
• 9:27
  Speaker 1: if we attack unemployment can get it down a couple
• 9:30
  Speaker 1: of points. We can you know, raise g d P
• 9:34
  Speaker 1: or g MP, you know, by three percent every time
• 9:37
  Speaker 1: we drop it. So when we need to bulk g
• 9:40
  Speaker 1: m P up, we just attack unemployment, right, easy, peasy,
• 9:46
  Speaker 1: uh yeah, and everyone said, thank you are Yeah. Things
• 9:50
  Speaker 1: worked out pretty well for a while, but then the
• 9:51
  Speaker 1: nineteen seventies came along, and UM, if you what, we're
• 9:55
  Speaker 1: gonna talk a little bit about stagflation now. But if
• 9:57
  Speaker 1: you haven't heard it, we have a two good episode
• 10:02
  Speaker 1: I think. So it's called what is Stagflation? From February
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: twenty four, two thousand. Um. Yeah, I think as far
• 10:11
  Speaker 1: as our economics episodes, it was not bad. I went
• 10:15
  Speaker 1: back and listened to a lot of it before I
• 10:17
  Speaker 1: got bored out. Yeah, the first three minutes were great. Um.
• 10:21
  Speaker 1: But yeah, I go back and listen to that. But um,
• 10:24
  Speaker 1: like he said, he served as chairman of the c
• 10:26
  Speaker 1: e A for Johnson, and then in seventy three, a
• 10:29
  Speaker 1: very unfortunate thing happened that kind of ended up rocking
• 10:34
  Speaker 1: the world and the United States in particular with our economy. Um,
• 10:39
  Speaker 1: so we're gonna take a break and we're gonna talk
• 10:42
  Speaker 1: when we get back about the Middle East. All right,
• 11:07
  Speaker 1: what happened in the old I am negative three? The
• 11:13
  Speaker 1: arab oil embargo happened. Right, So, at the time, until
• 11:18
  Speaker 1: very recently, the US was super dependent on foreign oil
• 11:21
  Speaker 1: like like other countries. We wouldn't even sit down at
• 11:25
  Speaker 1: the table with we were getting oil from right. Yeah,
• 11:28
  Speaker 1: we're doing better now, yeah, with our dependency, But back then,
• 11:33
  Speaker 1: very bad, very um. And it was it was a
• 11:36
  Speaker 1: source of anxiety for a lot of people, and that
• 11:38
  Speaker 1: anxiety actually panned out. So in Um nineteen seventy three,
• 11:43
  Speaker 1: Egypt and Syria and a few other Arab nations invaded
• 11:48
  Speaker 1: the Golden Heights and the Sinai Peninsula to attempt to
• 11:52
  Speaker 1: take back land Um from the State of Israel. The
• 11:56
  Speaker 1: US was found to be supply arms to Israel, So
• 12:02
  Speaker 1: as far as the Arab States were concerned, the US
• 12:04
  Speaker 1: had cast its lot on israel side, and they were
• 12:06
  Speaker 1: fairly peeved about that. So they literally shut off the
• 12:11
  Speaker 1: tap of oil flowing to the United States and other
• 12:16
  Speaker 1: countries that were found considered to be on the side
• 12:18
  Speaker 1: of Israel in this in this war Um huge deal.
• 12:22
  Speaker 1: It was an enormous deal. The the this foreign dependency
• 12:27
  Speaker 1: in the the precarious situation that it placed the United
• 12:31
  Speaker 1: States and came to pass, and the price of oil
• 12:34
  Speaker 1: rose thirty seven. The long lines at the gas station
• 12:37
  Speaker 1: were never seen before or since. Even after the financial
• 12:40
  Speaker 1: crisis of two thousand eight. UM, it was just insane.
• 12:44
  Speaker 1: There was gas rationing in the United States in nineteen
• 12:48
  Speaker 1: because the UM the oil embargo, and after a while
• 12:50
  Speaker 1: the taps were turned back on. But that shocked to
• 12:53
  Speaker 1: the system, screwed the economy up for a decade. Inflation
• 13:00
  Speaker 1: went out of control, and UM a very another unfortunately
• 13:04
  Speaker 1: happened along the same timeline. Unemployment started to creep up.
• 13:10
  Speaker 1: And these two things happening at the same time as devastating. Yeah,
• 13:13
  Speaker 1: and up to this point, so first of all, the
• 13:16
  Speaker 1: US had never had a shock to the system like that.
• 13:19
  Speaker 1: That was one thing. It wasn't a gradual thing. It
• 13:21
  Speaker 1: was like yeah. But the other thing is when you
• 13:25
  Speaker 1: have something that has never happened before, you can look
• 13:28
  Speaker 1: at it and say, wow, what what happened, and new
• 13:30
  Speaker 1: things that have never happened before come out of that.
• 13:32
  Speaker 1: And one of the things was inflation and unemployment going up,
• 13:36
  Speaker 1: because up to this point, economists just assumed that the
• 13:39
  Speaker 1: two were mutually exclusive. If you're if you're UM. If
• 13:43
  Speaker 1: inflation was up, prices were high, that meant that companies
• 13:46
  Speaker 1: could go out and hire more people, so unemployment of
• 13:49
  Speaker 1: course would be low. Yeah, it kind of made sense.
• 13:51
  Speaker 1: Well not not after the oil embargo. The shock to
• 13:54
  Speaker 1: the system led to, like you said, high unemployment rates
• 13:57
  Speaker 1: and high inflation, and uh, it was a miserable time. Yeah,
• 14:01
  Speaker 1: and that was called stagflation. It also led to skateboarding,
• 14:05
  Speaker 1: as we all know. Oh yeah, because of the pools, right, yeah,
• 14:08
  Speaker 1: they could and cal well actually that was the drought.
• 14:11
  Speaker 1: But I think the drought was also tied into the economics. Sure,
• 14:15
  Speaker 1: but they couldn't fill up swimm pools that they started
• 14:17
  Speaker 1: skating in swimming pools. Well, yeah, if you have a drought,
• 14:19
  Speaker 1: then you lose your crops. And if you lose your crops,
• 14:21
  Speaker 1: you lose money, a significant sector of money exactly. So
• 14:25
  Speaker 1: good news. We have half pipes now and quarter pipes
• 14:31
  Speaker 1: and peralta they're still around, right, I think bad news
• 14:35
  Speaker 1: is like you said, it had a devastating effect for many,
• 14:38
  Speaker 1: many years on the United States. So Oakin starts to
• 14:41
  Speaker 1: look around. He said, you know what, things are pretty
• 14:43
  Speaker 1: bad here. One might even say miserable. I haven't gotten
• 14:46
  Speaker 1: any acclaim for a while. Yeah, nothing's been named after
• 14:49
  Speaker 1: me in a while. So let me create this new
• 14:52
  Speaker 1: uh list, new method for looking at the economy. And
• 14:55
  Speaker 1: it turns out to not be like a look over
• 14:59
  Speaker 1: a period of time or anything, but just sort of
• 15:01
  Speaker 1: like a polaroid of that day and not just that
• 15:06
  Speaker 1: day for like the country as a whole, or um
• 15:09
  Speaker 1: for the FED or anything like that. But what he
• 15:13
  Speaker 1: did that was different was he looked into what the
• 15:17
  Speaker 1: what it was like that day or that year for
• 15:20
  Speaker 1: the average American in their daily life. And he called
• 15:24
  Speaker 1: it the misery Index. Yeah, and it was very rudimentary
• 15:29
  Speaker 1: at the time. It was just simple calculation of the
• 15:33
  Speaker 1: yearly rate of inflation plus the unemployment rate. Yeah. So
• 15:36
  Speaker 1: if you have like five percent inflation and two percent unemployment,
• 15:41
  Speaker 1: you have a seven percent misery index. It's as simple
• 15:43
  Speaker 1: as that. I don't know why it got so much,
• 15:45
  Speaker 1: you know what. It was hailed as a big deal
• 15:47
  Speaker 1: because I think Oakin had a a a knack for
• 15:51
  Speaker 1: noticing things that seemed obvious in retrospect, but at the
• 15:55
  Speaker 1: time no one had ever noticed before. I'll buy it.
• 15:59
  Speaker 1: Thank why not? Alright, So now he has this index,
• 16:02
  Speaker 1: and not only can he look at a snapshot of
• 16:05
  Speaker 1: that day, he can go back because he was a
• 16:07
  Speaker 1: a data walk sure he could look at data throughout history. Well,
• 16:12
  Speaker 1: at least in nine, Yeah, which is when we started
• 16:14
  Speaker 1: recording unemployment, like we said, which must have been frustrating
• 16:17
  Speaker 1: for him because our um our inflation rates data goes
• 16:22
  Speaker 1: back to nineteen fourteen. But that's only part of the equation. Well,
• 16:25
  Speaker 1: it must have been like, oh, sure, and to be
• 16:28
  Speaker 1: able to look at the Great Depression, you could have
• 16:29
  Speaker 1: learned a lot, you know. Uh. So he went and
• 16:32
  Speaker 1: he looked back, and he says, here is what we've noticed,
• 16:35
  Speaker 1: and this is so obvious to me, uh, that that
• 16:39
  Speaker 1: presidents and political parties are brought in and out of
• 16:41
  Speaker 1: office largely depending on how the economy is doing. Yeah,
• 16:45
  Speaker 1: but they kind of proved it, but not even just
• 16:48
  Speaker 1: how the economy is doing. Like he he was saying,
• 16:50
  Speaker 1: like the misery index you can use to predict whether
• 16:54
  Speaker 1: the the presidency's going to change hands politically. Yeah. So
• 16:58
  Speaker 1: nineteen fifty six, Uh, misery index is six point five three,
• 17:03
  Speaker 1: which is great. That's during like, yeah, very low, Mr Eisenhower,
• 17:09
  Speaker 1: President Eisenhower, and he got reelected because things were pretty good,
• 17:14
  Speaker 1: right as far as the misery index goes. Yeah, Yeah,
• 17:17
  Speaker 1: everybody was pretty happy, even though they didn't really know
• 17:20
  Speaker 1: what the misery index was because it wasn't invented yet.
• 17:22
  Speaker 1: They just had a general sense. Well, yeah, they didn't
• 17:25
  Speaker 1: call it that at a time. No, They're just like,
• 17:27
  Speaker 1: seems fine to me. You're miserable. We like, no, I'm
• 17:30
  Speaker 1: not miserable, are you. So in Johnson came to the
• 17:35
  Speaker 1: end of his term and the misery index was up
• 17:38
  Speaker 1: to eight point one three, and then he had his
• 17:40
  Speaker 1: Democratic successor, Hubert Humphrey in line, and because the thing
• 17:44
  Speaker 1: had crept up, people a little more miserable and they said, no,
• 17:47
  Speaker 1: get out of here, I want Mr Nixon in office, right,
• 17:50
  Speaker 1: And I guess I'm not. I'm not sure about this.
• 17:53
  Speaker 1: So I don't understand why Johnson was replaced by Humphrey
• 17:58
  Speaker 1: by the Democrats and in this article, and it seems
• 18:01
  Speaker 1: to be because of this misery index that it would
• 18:05
  Speaker 1: have predicted that. But he was the incumbent president, so
• 18:11
  Speaker 1: let's see, so he was he would have should know this. No,
• 18:15
  Speaker 1: he yeah, he was a one term or technically one
• 18:17
  Speaker 1: in a third or one in a quarter because he
• 18:20
  Speaker 1: took over after Kennedy's assassination. But if his term was
• 18:23
  Speaker 1: up in sixty eight, then he would have won the
• 18:25
  Speaker 1: sixty four election. So he technically I think would have
• 18:29
  Speaker 1: been able to have been president. Again, I'm not sure
• 18:32
  Speaker 1: we could have found this out too sure, but I'll
• 18:34
  Speaker 1: bet there's somebody out there who can explain it to us,
• 18:36
  Speaker 1: and so email us, will you? Uh? At any rate,
• 18:39
  Speaker 1: Nixon gets elected and um, the misery index shot up
• 18:43
  Speaker 1: to eleven point six seven during the first term, but
• 18:46
  Speaker 1: then started to this decline enough that he did get
• 18:50
  Speaker 1: re elected. Um. But then uh in n with Watergate,
• 18:54
  Speaker 1: the misery index leapt all the way up to seventeen
• 18:57
  Speaker 1: point oh one. That's not good. Now, that's that is
• 19:00
  Speaker 1: the all time high at the time from what I understand. UM,
• 19:03
  Speaker 1: and that happened around nineteen seventy four, which meant that
• 19:08
  Speaker 1: when Watergate broke, some people who really subscribed to the
• 19:11
  Speaker 1: misery index say Watergate might not have been quite as
• 19:15
  Speaker 1: big a deal. If um, the misery index have been
• 19:18
  Speaker 1: low at the time, he might have been able to
• 19:20
  Speaker 1: squeak by without resigning or being forced out of office.
• 19:24
  Speaker 1: I think everyone has more leeway if things are great,
• 19:27
  Speaker 1: you know. But he his his his his currency had
• 19:31
  Speaker 1: been spent. Man. I watched all the president's men a
• 19:35
  Speaker 1: few weeks ago. Again, you ever seen that great, great movie. Yeah,
• 19:39
  Speaker 1: I've always meant to really really good and just sort
• 19:42
  Speaker 1: of like, they don't make a lot of movies like
• 19:44
  Speaker 1: that anymore. Spotlight reminded me of all it's good. It's
• 19:49
  Speaker 1: just I call it movies for adults. You know. There's
• 19:51
  Speaker 1: no chase scenes or anything remarkable. It's just good dramatic
• 19:56
  Speaker 1: movie making. Yeah, good stuff anyway. Wait, what's wrong with
• 19:59
  Speaker 1: the chasing? Uh? What's wrong with chase? No, there's nothing
• 20:03
  Speaker 1: inherently wrong with this, but I know what you mean,
• 20:06
  Speaker 1: just for the sake of a chasing, which we see
• 20:07
  Speaker 1: a lot of these days, you know what I mean,
• 20:09
  Speaker 1: Like Mark Ruffalo is chasing a priest in a car
• 20:11
  Speaker 1: and spotlight. Yeah, um, where were we? Okay, we're with Nixon. Um, well,
• 20:19
  Speaker 1: not with Nixon, you know what I mean. Ford comes
• 20:21
  Speaker 1: in office for a short time, and he actually managed
• 20:25
  Speaker 1: to get the misery indext year down. Well. I think
• 20:28
  Speaker 1: just the fact that Nixon was out. I think that
• 20:30
  Speaker 1: probably helped um you know and inspire like consumer confidence
• 20:35
  Speaker 1: in the like. So it crept back down to twelve
• 20:37
  Speaker 1: point six six, but not enough to keep um, the
• 20:41
  Speaker 1: Democrats and Jimmy Carter from coming into office and Carter
• 20:44
  Speaker 1: actually cited the misery Index. It was relatively new at
• 20:48
  Speaker 1: the time. He talked too much about it, but it
• 20:49
  Speaker 1: was it was a g whiz thing that you could
• 20:51
  Speaker 1: really just point to, like this post this, This is
• 20:53
  Speaker 1: the misery index. Can you can you hear me? That's
• 20:57
  Speaker 1: my car? But that was his amous quote, can you
• 21:00
  Speaker 1: hear me? It came back to haunt him though, to
• 21:03
  Speaker 1: say the least, because he talked a lot about the
• 21:05
  Speaker 1: misery Index, and then in his term the it reached
• 21:10
  Speaker 1: an all time high of twenty one. Yeah, which, man,
• 21:16
  Speaker 1: I really think that shock to the system under the
• 21:19
  Speaker 1: oil embargo, um and plenty of other stuff. This stuff
• 21:23
  Speaker 1: gets laid at Carter's feet, I think unfairly in a
• 21:26
  Speaker 1: lot of respects. Well, I mean, I would love for
• 21:30
  Speaker 1: someone to really that really knows their stuff to explain
• 21:33
  Speaker 1: to me exactly how much a president's influence has on
• 21:38
  Speaker 1: the economy and how long it takes for that to
• 21:41
  Speaker 1: bear fruit. Yeah, I would love to know that too.
• 21:44
  Speaker 1: I think though, Uh, the guy who came after Carter, Reagan,
• 21:49
  Speaker 1: is a pretty sterling, unassailable example of an impact a
• 21:54
  Speaker 1: president can have on the economy, whether you agree with
• 21:56
  Speaker 1: his politics or his economic policies are not. He most
• 22:00
  Speaker 1: decidedly had an effect on the economy. Yeah. I just
• 22:03
  Speaker 1: remember hearing one time. I need to look this up,
• 22:06
  Speaker 1: but somebody told me once that that the economic impact
• 22:09
  Speaker 1: of the presidential a four year term is felt the
• 22:13
  Speaker 1: most like eight years later or something. Yeah, that makes
• 22:15
  Speaker 1: sense to me. Economies don't move on a dime. Yeah,
• 22:18
  Speaker 1: I just I don't know if that's talking lumbering things.
• 22:21
  Speaker 1: They aren't fully understood by anybody. Yeah, it's interesting to
• 22:24
  Speaker 1: me now more than ever before though, because remember economics
• 22:27
  Speaker 1: used to I know, I was really really surprised when
• 22:31
  Speaker 1: you suggested this one. It's slightly more interesting to me. Oh,
• 22:36
  Speaker 1: just wondering things like that, and during an election season,
• 22:39
  Speaker 1: like are the decisions we make now gonna affect us
• 22:43
  Speaker 1: in one year or two years? Eight years? Uh? Yeah, Well,
• 22:47
  Speaker 1: if there's any economists who are still listening after that
• 22:50
  Speaker 1: initial remark about the new astrology, we'd love to to
• 22:54
  Speaker 1: get a primer on how long it takes for a
• 22:56
  Speaker 1: president to impact an economy, if they do at all.
• 23:00
  Speaker 1: I'm sure it's a arrange, you know, it's not like
• 23:02
  Speaker 1: starting it eight years and really, honestly was Carter that
• 23:05
  Speaker 1: band or was he a victim of cross stars. Yeah.
• 23:10
  Speaker 1: I mean you can make a case where a lot
• 23:12
  Speaker 1: of bills of presidencies not being directly at their feet.
• 23:16
  Speaker 1: But you remember that, uh Simpsons where they unveil a
• 23:21
  Speaker 1: statue of Jimmy Carter in Springfield and on the pedestal
• 23:24
  Speaker 1: it says Malaise Forever, and somebody goes, Jimmy Carter, He's
• 23:28
  Speaker 1: history's greatest monster Carter. So, like we said, it came
• 23:34
  Speaker 1: back to haunt Carter because he talked a lot about
• 23:37
  Speaker 1: the index. It rose a lot. Then Reagan came in
• 23:39
  Speaker 1: was like, well, let's talk about that misery index that
• 23:42
  Speaker 1: you like to talk about so much. That's in an
• 23:44
  Speaker 1: all time high. Reagan got in there, um knocked it
• 23:47
  Speaker 1: down to nine point five five by the end of
• 23:50
  Speaker 1: his term, enough to get Bush Senior in Um, it
• 23:53
  Speaker 1: inched up some then Clinton was able to Uh, it
• 23:57
  Speaker 1: didn't go up that much though. And I read an
• 23:59
  Speaker 1: interesting article to day on whether or not ross Pero
• 24:02
  Speaker 1: really got Clinton elected, because that's sort of the popular
• 24:05
  Speaker 1: thought he was a spoiler. Yeah, I could see that,
• 24:08
  Speaker 1: but um, he was definitely more in line with um
• 24:11
  Speaker 1: Bush seniors policies and Clinton's well at the time, yeah,
• 24:14
  Speaker 1: you would think, but I read, uh, I read one
• 24:16
  Speaker 1: article that said that it was kind of a myth
• 24:18
  Speaker 1: that basically that Clinton won by six million votes and
• 24:21
  Speaker 1: it would have taken of Paros supporters to have uh
• 24:28
  Speaker 1: been aligned with UM with Bush m hm, and supposedly
• 24:33
  Speaker 1: exit polls showed showed it more like thirty And so
• 24:37
  Speaker 1: they're saying it's sort of a myth that Pero swung
• 24:40
  Speaker 1: the election to Clinton. I see, but I mean that
• 24:43
  Speaker 1: was one person's opinion to who knows. You know, I've
• 24:45
  Speaker 1: been reading a lot about you know that we that
• 24:48
  Speaker 1: that suspicion you can't quite kick that there's really no
• 24:51
  Speaker 1: difference between Republicans and Democrats these days, that they're really
• 24:54
  Speaker 1: just kind of all in the same little club. I
• 24:57
  Speaker 1: think people feel that way sometimes. I've been reading a
• 25:00
  Speaker 1: lot about that, and apparently it's all based on neoliberalism.
• 25:05
  Speaker 1: That's like the key and um, there's there's a lot
• 25:09
  Speaker 1: of If you look into Neil liberalism and the policies
• 25:12
  Speaker 1: of neoliberalism, you realize we're like living in the thick
• 25:15
  Speaker 1: of it. But no one everyone's kind of blind to
• 25:18
  Speaker 1: the idea that it's just a single thing that basically
• 25:20
  Speaker 1: everybody in power subscribes to and that it has a
• 25:25
  Speaker 1: triple down effect of screwing over everybody below the top. Um.
• 25:29
  Speaker 1: But just the name itself seems totally fine, you know.
• 25:32
  Speaker 1: But it's uh, it's it's interesting. Yeah. I researched that
• 25:36
  Speaker 1: a little bit lately too. Yeah, there's been some good article.
• 25:39
  Speaker 1: We totally should let's do it, agreed. Man, we're gonna
• 25:42
  Speaker 1: get some emails for that one from billionaires. Yeah. Um,
• 25:48
  Speaker 1: So let's just finish out this quick little recap. Clinton
• 25:52
  Speaker 1: brought it down to seven point three five. Things were great,
• 25:56
  Speaker 1: Bush Junior gets elected. Um, despite the fact that Clinton
• 26:00
  Speaker 1: had a low index. Well, it depends on how you
• 26:02
  Speaker 1: look at the two thousand election. We should do one
• 26:06
  Speaker 1: on that one too. But this is the this is
• 26:08
  Speaker 1: that's considered one of those rare instances where the misery
• 26:10
  Speaker 1: index didn't indicate where it was going to go. But
• 26:13
  Speaker 1: you could also say it might have had things gone
• 26:17
  Speaker 1: slightly differently. In the Supreme Court George W. Bush, the
• 26:21
  Speaker 1: index rose from seven point three five to eleven point four,
• 26:24
  Speaker 1: and then Obama came in it went down to seven
• 26:26
  Speaker 1: point eight seven. But another weird flaw in the system
• 26:29
  Speaker 1: is exposed there because, um, despite the fact that the
• 26:32
  Speaker 1: misery index was lower, things were not good. The stock
• 26:36
  Speaker 1: market had crashed, unemployment was rising at a rapid rate,
• 26:40
  Speaker 1: and they said, you know this. It basically was another
• 26:43
  Speaker 1: example of like, look, this misery index isn't all it's
• 26:45
  Speaker 1: cracked up to be right, so let's work on it. Yeah.
• 26:48
  Speaker 1: I think a lot of people said this is too simplistic.
• 26:51
  Speaker 1: You can't rely on this. But we'll talk about some
• 26:54
  Speaker 1: of the additional factors that people have worked into the
• 26:57
  Speaker 1: misery index after this. All right, Chuck, so the misery
• 27:24
  Speaker 1: index open. Everybody's happy with him. They're like, this is
• 27:28
  Speaker 1: just too simple, especially in what's called the post stag
• 27:31
  Speaker 1: inflation era after the oil embargo. Um. And so some
• 27:37
  Speaker 1: people have said, okay, you can there's certainly there's other
• 27:40
  Speaker 1: things you can add in to give a genuine, true
• 27:42
  Speaker 1: snapshot of what the conditions are like on the ground,
• 27:46
  Speaker 1: as it were. Right, Well, yeah, not only what the
• 27:48
  Speaker 1: conditions are, but whether or not performance over a period
• 27:51
  Speaker 1: of time is getting better getting worse. Yes, And you know,
• 27:55
  Speaker 1: rather than say, oh, under under this president, the misery
• 27:58
  Speaker 1: index was this, you know, and it gives you a
• 28:00
  Speaker 1: pretty good idea this with this one guy UM named
• 28:04
  Speaker 1: Robert Barrow. He wrote a book called Getting It Right,
• 28:08
  Speaker 1: Markets and Choices in a Free Society, and in it
• 28:11
  Speaker 1: he takes the misery index Oakin's Misery Index, and he says,
• 28:15
  Speaker 1: we can add some stuff to this to to make
• 28:17
  Speaker 1: it an even clearer picture, not just of the conditions
• 28:20
  Speaker 1: on the ground, but you can take it and apply
• 28:22
  Speaker 1: it genuinely to a president's entire term to see just
• 28:26
  Speaker 1: how good their economic policies were or weren't for the
• 28:29
  Speaker 1: health of the economy. And he added some other stuff. Yeah,
• 28:32
  Speaker 1: he added four main new measurements. Uh. Took the inflation
• 28:36
  Speaker 1: rate during the last year of the president's term, compared
• 28:40
  Speaker 1: it to the average inflation rate over the entire course
• 28:43
  Speaker 1: of the subsequent presidents, which is based on what you
• 28:47
  Speaker 1: were saying that like the a four year term, the
• 28:52
  Speaker 1: effects are felt like years down the road. So I
• 28:54
  Speaker 1: think that's what he was doing there, right, Yeah, it
• 28:56
  Speaker 1: makes sense. Did the same thing with the rate of unemployment.
• 29:00
  Speaker 1: That was number two. Uh. He added in changes for
• 29:03
  Speaker 1: the thirty year government bond yield over a presidency. And
• 29:07
  Speaker 1: then finally he said, um, I need to look at
• 29:10
  Speaker 1: the difference between the long term GDP growth the real
• 29:14
  Speaker 1: rate of growth. Compare all these things along with the
• 29:18
  Speaker 1: original Uh, this plus this equals this, right, and with
• 29:22
  Speaker 1: the real growth rate. Um, that's where you take the
• 29:25
  Speaker 1: actual change either the shrinking or the growth of the
• 29:29
  Speaker 1: economy the g d P year over year. Right. And
• 29:33
  Speaker 1: he took that for year after year over the course
• 29:35
  Speaker 1: of the presidency and averaged it out. I guess that's right. Yeah,
• 29:39
  Speaker 1: And he came up with what's called the Barrow Misery Index.
• 29:42
  Speaker 1: And UM, a lot of people think that that's where
• 29:44
  Speaker 1: the misery Index started, when in fact it was Oakin
• 29:47
  Speaker 1: who came up with it about twenty years before Barrow
• 29:51
  Speaker 1: took it up and improved it. So under Barrow's Misery Index, UM,
• 29:55
  Speaker 1: Clinton and Reagan, that's Bill. Clinton of course came out
• 29:58
  Speaker 1: on top. And then it got named Steve Hankey about
• 30:01
  Speaker 1: ten years later. This was originally in and then Hankey
• 30:04
  Speaker 1: came along in two thousand six and said, you know what,
• 30:08
  Speaker 1: we need to add even more things. And this all
• 30:10
  Speaker 1: just makes sense. You need to if you want a
• 30:12
  Speaker 1: more detailed picture, then add more detail to the data
• 30:15
  Speaker 1: going in, you know. So he said, we need more
• 30:18
  Speaker 1: detail Uh, why don't we do this. Let's um, let's
• 30:22
  Speaker 1: measure inflation and unemployment like we're doing, and then let's
• 30:26
  Speaker 1: now add interest rates and subtract annual percentages from the
• 30:31
  Speaker 1: GDP to get a more accurate picture. And he said,
• 30:34
  Speaker 1: you can use this anywhere, you can use it all
• 30:36
  Speaker 1: over the world. Well, that's what he did, and that's
• 30:37
  Speaker 1: kind of what made his his version of it pretty famous.
• 30:40
  Speaker 1: He figured out how to apply it to other countries,
• 30:44
  Speaker 1: even countries that used UM price controls to keep inflation
• 30:48
  Speaker 1: in check, which means price inflation is held back artificially.
• 30:53
  Speaker 1: So Hanky looked into other things like UM the exchange
• 30:56
  Speaker 1: rate in the black market, and then given country that
• 30:58
  Speaker 1: kind of thing UM, and he figured out real inflation rates,
• 31:01
  Speaker 1: and he applied it around the world to find out
• 31:04
  Speaker 1: what country is the most miserable in what country is
• 31:07
  Speaker 1: the least miserable. And what he found in two thousand
• 31:09
  Speaker 1: fourteen was that the most miserable country in the world
• 31:12
  Speaker 1: was Venezuela, which had a Hanky misery index of seventy
• 31:17
  Speaker 1: nine point four. It's pretty high, very high. And then
• 31:21
  Speaker 1: Japan had the lowest misery at five point four one. Yeah,
• 31:26
  Speaker 1: the US came in at about nineteen, correct, I think eleven? Yeah? No, no, no,
• 31:31
  Speaker 1: eleven was our Oh I'm sorry. Nineteenth yeah, yeah, ranked
• 31:35
  Speaker 1: nineteen within eleven. I didn't hear that, yeah, because my
• 31:40
  Speaker 1: tooth is still gone. You think it'd be. It would
• 31:44
  Speaker 1: be more pronounced if they were nineteen. I would have
• 31:49
  Speaker 1: heard it clearly as about August can't get here soon enough.
• 31:54
  Speaker 1: So um, there are critics of this one too, though,
• 31:59
  Speaker 1: there's critics all these indexes. Well, yeah, the the A
• 32:02
  Speaker 1: lot of them say, no, still too elementary. Some people
• 32:07
  Speaker 1: say this is all just try like you can't. You
• 32:09
  Speaker 1: can't use this stuff to to make any real predictions.
• 32:12
  Speaker 1: You could use it to look back at the past,
• 32:14
  Speaker 1: but to use it for the future, probably not. But
• 32:17
  Speaker 1: some people do believe in the idea that if you
• 32:19
  Speaker 1: have enough data and the right kind of data, you
• 32:22
  Speaker 1: can get a clear picture of misery. And again that's
• 32:25
  Speaker 1: what we're after here, Like, the whole point of the
• 32:28
  Speaker 1: misery index is to figure out how unhappy and and
• 32:32
  Speaker 1: just low the average person in a country is feeling
• 32:36
  Speaker 1: at that moment, right, so um, HuffPo actually came up
• 32:40
  Speaker 1: with a pretty good one. HuffPo boo in two thousand nine,
• 32:45
  Speaker 1: HuffPo came up with what they called the Real Misery Index, right,
• 32:49
  Speaker 1: and so a lot of people cite the the use
• 32:53
  Speaker 1: of what's called YOU three unemployment statistics, which when you
• 32:57
  Speaker 1: hear unemployment numbers in the news, that till you're hearing
• 33:00
  Speaker 1: that's what the Bureau of Labor Statistics issues as the
• 33:04
  Speaker 1: official unemployment numbers. Right, yeah, And that's the very first
• 33:08
  Speaker 1: thing that people will say if they want to poopoo
• 33:11
  Speaker 1: the unemployment numbers, that that these are these are just
• 33:14
  Speaker 1: false numbers. Yeah. If someone says, hey, man, look how
• 33:17
  Speaker 1: great ex president is doing. Look at the unemployment rate,
• 33:20
  Speaker 1: right man, they're just using the U three. They need
• 33:22
  Speaker 1: to use the U six. Wake up, pal up in
• 33:25
  Speaker 1: your eyes, which you know is valid. Well yeah, so, um,
• 33:28
  Speaker 1: the BLS has six measurements of unemployment you one through
• 33:34
  Speaker 1: U six, and YOU six is the broadest. It includes
• 33:38
  Speaker 1: people who are so discouraged with the state of the
• 33:42
  Speaker 1: job market that they've given up looking for work and
• 33:45
  Speaker 1: they're just like, have given themselves over entirely to judge
• 33:49
  Speaker 1: Alex right, and then um. It also includes people who
• 33:54
  Speaker 1: are working part time but wish they could work full time,
• 33:58
  Speaker 1: but there's no full time work available. I'm a graphic designer,
• 34:01
  Speaker 1: but I work at Starbucks. So that's the U six
• 34:03
  Speaker 1: measurement that and that's considered the the broadest snapshot of unemployment,
• 34:09
  Speaker 1: the real m vision of unemployment. Yeah, like you said,
• 34:13
  Speaker 1: mostly they use you three, I guess because it's in
• 34:15
  Speaker 1: the middle. I mean you one. They would never use
• 34:18
  Speaker 1: you two. Everybody used to like, but not anymore. I
• 34:26
  Speaker 1: still like you too, get yeah, you know, not like
• 34:30
  Speaker 1: I used to. I'm not anything, but I did see
• 34:34
  Speaker 1: that concert they did on the HBO, and I have
• 34:38
  Speaker 1: to hand it to him. My big problem with you
• 34:39
  Speaker 1: two for years was that they just got so out
• 34:42
  Speaker 1: of control with those live shows like these giant spider
• 34:45
  Speaker 1: spaceships and things. And I was always of the belief that, man,
• 34:49
  Speaker 1: you need to go back to basics and just get
• 34:51
  Speaker 1: up on stage and play again. And that's what they
• 34:54
  Speaker 1: did with this new tour. I mean, there was a
• 34:56
  Speaker 1: cool visual element, but the stage set up in the
• 34:58
  Speaker 1: way they did it was very much back to basics
• 35:00
  Speaker 1: in it. I think they really connected with fans again. Yeah,
• 35:04
  Speaker 1: that's kind of help. Yeah, because you can only when
• 35:08
  Speaker 1: the when the interactions between you and the fans rather
• 35:10
  Speaker 1: than the fans and giant spiders. Yeah, you just you
• 35:13
  Speaker 1: can only go so far in that direction. I think
• 35:15
  Speaker 1: they realize that. Sure, anyway, where do you go, Youtuo,
• 35:18
  Speaker 1: I'll defend those guys. Um, even though I know everyone
• 35:23
  Speaker 1: in the world generally wants to punch Bono in the face,
• 35:26
  Speaker 1: I'm not one of them. It's kind of feel weird
• 35:28
  Speaker 1: like them. Yeah, I'm on record. I know if you're listening, well,
• 35:33
  Speaker 1: if you're Jared indicators, any any predictor Bonno is going
• 35:38
  Speaker 1: to come out to be canonized one day. What oh yeah, yeah,
• 35:42
  Speaker 1: you know you're like, there's something about Jared. I don't
• 35:44
  Speaker 1: like him, and you know, we found out about Jared
• 35:47
  Speaker 1: and then um, you're saying something's good, like they're gonna
• 35:52
  Speaker 1: find a cure for cancer and a saliva or something.
• 35:55
  Speaker 1: You never know. Um, so did we even mention what
• 36:00
  Speaker 1: the HuffPo what kind of outrageous numbers they came up with? No, well,
• 36:03
  Speaker 1: we didn't mention everything they used. We were talking about
• 36:05
  Speaker 1: the use six measurement. HuffPo used that measurement the most
• 36:08
  Speaker 1: extreme of unemployment numbers. They also used other things like, um,
• 36:13
  Speaker 1: the inflation rate of food and drink and fuel and
• 36:18
  Speaker 1: healthcare because other The misery index just uses the consumer
• 36:22
  Speaker 1: price index, which is inflation as a whole. HuffPo used, um,
• 36:26
  Speaker 1: the the inflation of some really essential things that people
• 36:30
  Speaker 1: can't do without and where you're gonna immediately feel the
• 36:33
  Speaker 1: pinch when prices go up. With those two factors, right. Um.
• 36:36
  Speaker 1: They also included the rate of credit card delinquency, the
• 36:39
  Speaker 1: cost of housing, how many people are using food stamps
• 36:42
  Speaker 1: that seems like a smart move home, equity loan deficiencies,
• 36:46
  Speaker 1: I guess, people who are laid on their payments. Um.
• 36:50
  Speaker 1: And then they took the average of those seven numbers
• 36:52
  Speaker 1: and added it to the U six unemployment numbers, which
• 36:57
  Speaker 1: here you can step back and say, wait a minute,
• 36:59
  Speaker 1: how would you how are you adding this together? How
• 37:01
  Speaker 1: does this make any sense? You can't just keep adding things, right,
• 37:05
  Speaker 1: And really you can take that all the way back
• 37:06
  Speaker 1: to the initial misery index, Like what you're just adding
• 37:09
  Speaker 1: unemployment percentage and inflation, and all of a sudden you
• 37:12
  Speaker 1: have a magic number that doesn't make any sense. This
• 37:15
  Speaker 1: HuffPo metric really points out the inherent flaw in it.
• 37:18
  Speaker 1: I think, yeah, because in two thousand eight, the Oakland
• 37:21
  Speaker 1: Misery index was eight point one, but huff po's Real
• 37:25
  Speaker 1: Misery Index a k A. You think things are bad,
• 37:28
  Speaker 1: here's how bad they really are index was twenty nine
• 37:31
  Speaker 1: point nine compared to the eight point one, right, and
• 37:33
  Speaker 1: some people are like, oh, well, that just shows how
• 37:36
  Speaker 1: off the oaken misery index is. Who knows. I know
• 37:41
  Speaker 1: they quit doing the real Misery Index at HuffPo like
• 37:44
  Speaker 1: five years ago. I think it was a am I
• 37:47
  Speaker 1: going to call it a stunt. It was a bit
• 37:49
  Speaker 1: of a stunt maybe, but I'm sure really what happened
• 37:52
  Speaker 1: was the writer who was contributing it for free, like
• 37:56
  Speaker 1: left for a paying job. That's probably what U into
• 38:00
  Speaker 1: the huff Real Misery and day Yeah. Um, I was
• 38:04
  Speaker 1: reading this guy, Tim McMahon. He has a site, or
• 38:07
  Speaker 1: he writes first site, I'm not sure it's his. Are
• 38:09
  Speaker 1: not called inflation data dot com. Jim McMahon, Tim his brother,
• 38:15
  Speaker 1: not the Super Bowl Shuffle, No, his brother. Um. So
• 38:18
  Speaker 1: he mentioned this two thousand one paper that concluded that
• 38:22
  Speaker 1: unemployment causes one point seven times more misery than inflation.
• 38:27
  Speaker 1: And so if you're doing any kind of misery index
• 38:30
  Speaker 1: that uses those two, you need to first multiply the
• 38:34
  Speaker 1: unemployment number by one point seven before adding it to
• 38:38
  Speaker 1: UM the inflation number to to properly wait it, and like,
• 38:41
  Speaker 1: how did they come up with that? So I looked
• 38:43
  Speaker 1: at the paper. It was actually pretty clever. There's like
• 38:46
  Speaker 1: twenty three years of this survey of life satisfaction and
• 38:49
  Speaker 1: happiness that these researchers looked at back in two thousand one,
• 38:53
  Speaker 1: and they found that UM economically based or just like
• 38:56
  Speaker 1: how happy are you? Know, here's the thing, it was,
• 38:58
  Speaker 1: how happy are you? It was like a single question
• 39:01
  Speaker 1: like would you say, based on how you're feeling right now,
• 39:04
  Speaker 1: that you are fairly satisfied, unsatisfied, very satisfied with your
• 39:08
  Speaker 1: life right now right? And then they took that that
• 39:11
  Speaker 1: measurement for that that country as a whole, and you
• 39:13
  Speaker 1: can do this for any country that participated in the survey.
• 39:16
  Speaker 1: And then they looked at inflation, and then they looked
• 39:18
  Speaker 1: at UM unemployment for those years and they could figure
• 39:22
  Speaker 1: out the the variation between or the interplay between unemployment
• 39:27
  Speaker 1: and inflation and satisfaction, and they found that uh, that
• 39:32
  Speaker 1: UM that unemployment was one time one point seven times
• 39:38
  Speaker 1: more miserable than inflation in regards to life satisfaction, as
• 39:42
  Speaker 1: that survey. Guess it's pretty clever. It's a lot of
• 39:45
  Speaker 1: hocus pocus, but it's I thought it was pretty clever
• 39:47
  Speaker 1: how they did it. That makes sense to me because
• 39:49
  Speaker 1: to be without work, like if you have a job
• 39:52
  Speaker 1: and things inflation is happening, you still have your job, sure,
• 39:55
  Speaker 1: and you're like, man, this sucks to pay this much more,
• 39:58
  Speaker 1: but you can still conceivably pay for Yeah, I'll cut
• 40:00
  Speaker 1: back here or there if you if you're unemployed, then
• 40:03
  Speaker 1: there's not a lot of hope. Yeah, one, the number
• 40:06
  Speaker 1: might be conservative here. Yeah, I agree with you. Very
• 40:09
  Speaker 1: interesting stuff. So that's uh, that's it, man, that's the
• 40:13
  Speaker 1: misery Index. You got anything else? No, but I'm looking
• 40:18
  Speaker 1: forward to hearing from economists that me too, like in
• 40:22
  Speaker 1: an unbiased way to try to explain things. Me too.
• 40:25
  Speaker 1: If you if you send just you know, these crazy
• 40:27
  Speaker 1: political emails and they're they're gonna fall in deaf years
• 40:31
  Speaker 1: because everyone yells at each other that they're right. I
• 40:34
  Speaker 1: just want to hear some real numbers, do it, chuck. Uh.
• 40:39
  Speaker 1: If you want to know more about the misery Index,
• 40:41
  Speaker 1: you can type those words in the search bar how
• 40:43
  Speaker 1: stuff works dot com. And since I said search bar,
• 40:46
  Speaker 1: just play an old search bar. It's time for a
• 40:48
  Speaker 1: listener mail. I'm gonna call this, uh, follow up on
• 40:54
  Speaker 1: vocal pride once again. Um. Regarding vocal pride, guys, Uh,
• 41:00
  Speaker 1: you guys were offended because someone said local pride was repulsive.
• 41:04
  Speaker 1: But there is another side of this, dudes. I suffer
• 41:07
  Speaker 1: from a neurological disorder known as miss aphonia, which we
• 41:11
  Speaker 1: totally should do a show in this. It's a condition
• 41:14
  Speaker 1: where a person has extreme emotional response commonly occurring sounds,
• 41:18
  Speaker 1: and I remember hearing a lot of times it's like
• 41:20
  Speaker 1: people chewing noises or gum or whatever. Um he said.
• 41:24
  Speaker 1: In my case, my trigger noise is the high pitched
• 41:26
  Speaker 1: s sound when some people speak. Uh. It feels like
• 41:30
  Speaker 1: my brain is cringing, as if an allergic reaction is
• 41:33
  Speaker 1: taking place. Cannot stress enough. This is not a mere annoyance,
• 41:36
  Speaker 1: as a legitimate mental disorder that can vary great and
• 41:39
  Speaker 1: greatly in severity. I don't visibly freak out when I
• 41:42
  Speaker 1: hear my trigger noise, but it really kills me inside,
• 41:44
  Speaker 1: gives me an instant headache. And that's why, which is
• 41:47
  Speaker 1: why I will get away from the noise if at
• 41:49
  Speaker 1: all possible. Um, I believe in avoiding complaining in life
• 41:53
  Speaker 1: and playing the victim. But this disorder really has made
• 41:56
  Speaker 1: my life like a subtle hell. It's been especially toxic
• 41:59
  Speaker 1: to my emily relationships and my ability to learn in school. Um.
• 42:04
  Speaker 1: I felt compelled to email you guys, because you definitely
• 42:06
  Speaker 1: appreciate interesting medical conditions. I think would be a great
• 42:09
  Speaker 1: topic for a show someday. I was a documentary about
• 42:12
  Speaker 1: it called Quiet Please. If you watch the trailer, you
• 42:15
  Speaker 1: might be inspired to watch it to learn what the
• 42:17
  Speaker 1: condition is. Huge. Thanks to everyone of Stuff you Should Know.
• 42:21
  Speaker 1: You make a mundane parts of my life interesting and educational. Uh.
• 42:25
  Speaker 1: I'm gonna anonymize this from Texas because I didn't hear
• 42:29
  Speaker 1: back from him from text. Yeah, text PS was in
• 42:33
  Speaker 1: disbelief when Chuck said he had not seen Billy Madison
• 42:36
  Speaker 1: or Happy Gilmore. That's a good PS. I believe it.
• 42:40
  Speaker 1: It's a good PostScript and post PPS right, not p
• 42:45
  Speaker 1: s S. I think it's post PostScript. Yeah, but people
• 42:48
  Speaker 1: who often put PSS what doesn't mean? Do you think
• 42:52
  Speaker 1: Stuff you Should Know could ever become a television show? Well?
• 42:54
  Speaker 1: Text never we actually did that. We we found out
• 42:58
  Speaker 1: the hard way that it came Yeah, we did a
• 43:00
  Speaker 1: TV show on the Science Channel and it ran for
• 43:03
  Speaker 1: one full season that played out over the course of
• 43:06
  Speaker 1: several days, which we'll always have. We'll always have that
• 43:09
  Speaker 1: season of television we did once. It lasted nine or
• 43:12
  Speaker 1: ten days. Yea, let's just show them all at once,
• 43:16
  Speaker 1: out of order. But you never know, we might get
• 43:20
  Speaker 1: another shot at stardom. But we're not looking to it. No.
• 43:25
  Speaker 1: I like it in this room where no one's looking
• 43:26
  Speaker 1: at us. Jerry be there looking away in discuss That's right,
• 43:34
  Speaker 1: good idea about the mesophonia. I think we mentioned that before,
• 43:37
  Speaker 1: Like that was I really like that vocal fry episode.
• 43:39
  Speaker 1: And that was the one thing that I wish we
• 43:41
  Speaker 1: would have mentioned because it's a legitimate thing that it
• 43:44
  Speaker 1: does affect some people. Um, but yeah, look for a
• 43:47
  Speaker 1: mesophonia episode at some point in the future. Text. If
• 43:51
  Speaker 1: you want to get in touch with us, we're all
• 43:52
  Speaker 1: over social media. We're on Twitter and Instagram at s
• 43:57
  Speaker 1: y s K podcast, We're on Facebook dot com, slide
• 44:00
  Speaker 1: Stuff you Should Know. You can send us an email
• 44:02
  Speaker 1: to Stuff Podcasts at how stuff Works dot com, and
• 44:05
  Speaker 1: you can join us at our very own home on
• 44:07
  Speaker 1: the web. Stuff you Should Know dot com. For more
• 44:14
  Speaker 1: on this and thousands of other topics, visit how stuff
• 44:17
  Speaker 1: Works dot com.