Letter: Statistical reliability
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: 'Without a shadow of doubt,' writes Gavyn Davies, 'the most frustrating aspect of economic forecasting is the fallibility of the raw statistics on which we work.' Why then do economic forecasters, who aren't exactly infallible either, tirelessly persist in presenting their offerings with a decimal-
point precision warranted only by an assumption of omniscience (not just prescience) on the part of all concerned?
Far better, surely, for them to make a virtue of uncertainty (not to say ignorance) - and, incidentally, improve their chances of being proved right, at least before the results forecast are revised - by hazarding guesses accurate to the nearest half, at most quarter, percentage point only.
Who, after all, knows or cares about distinctions (between, say, 1.2 and 1.3 per cent GDP growth) dwarfed by the margin of error?
Yours sincerely,
WALTER GREY
London, N3
11 October
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments