Rocks and shoals
So no poking the bear I say. That and you should never be fooled by the calm weather; the big rocks are always right under the surface and we are still far to close to shore to think this is all over with.
Plenty of other topics. For all the new bemused readers, and the poor PR folks now being assigned to check in every day, I will update my unemployment graphic and add a new twist. The unemployment story is kind of curious in that in ink I only see a story from the PG. The monthly labor force dump is de rigueur all around, yet no story in Trib or PBT or elsewhere as yet. Kind of curious. PG did also note the factoid we pointed out last week that the total employment count for the region is highest since April of 2001. I would say the highest other than just for April of 2001, but I parse. So with the December data just out this is what I get for the history of how regional unemployment looks to me.
What are the red numbers I added this time? I have generally failed in my quest to create a neologism that sticks; I am nowhere near smart enough to ever discover an equation, we will leave that to the physicists; but it is a far lower bar to create a metric. We obsess a bit to much on the monthly level of unemployment. Its the trend and the long term that really matters. So what I have done is create a measure of how many percenage points the region has been above or below the national unemployment rate cumulatively for distinct periods. So for the prolonged periods where the regional and national rates diverge, there is a cumulative number of "unemployment percentage points-months" that can be added up. I have noted what I have gotten for each of the significant periods for Pittsburgh on the chart. A name? It could be the Briem Unemployment Metric? Umm...... maybe not.
* and for those who read between the lines.. Note that the PG story makes a step toward clarity by pointing out that the lower percentage expecting their property tax to go down applies to a universe much bigger than just residential properties. Note where in that it references "residential and commerical owners" which is a point that was just skipped in the previous reporting. Still not quite right in that a lot of the virtually zero valued parcels I excluded in my higher number are parcels that have no owners really. Some are owned by the city itself, or just don't have owners period. Dead parcels with long gone owners that exist in a legal netherworld or otherwise are not relevant to the question at hand. I am quite sure that if you are talking a universe of Pittsburgh residential owners.. which would be the universe most analagous to those showing up at these meetings or lets say voters in the city.. you are talking a percentage a lot closer to my 65% number previously. If that is all too much minutia or too complicated in summary: a parcel is not a parcel. There are some folks out there with toolsheds separately deeded. or Probably should not treat them the same as a person. Citizens United not withstanding. Counting something valued at $1000, and which has a total annual tax of well under $100 as equivalent to most homes is confusing the issue.
Yeah, 12 step program is failing.