Acuppla things

Here's my graph based on Robert Gordon's description, from Sunday: The unemployment rate, sorted, on the X axis. Real GDP growth on the Y axis:

Graph #1: Data in Each Period Sorted by Unemployment Rate

Here's the same data, in chronological order:

Graph #2: Data in Chronological Order

The jiggy lines are different now. But the trend lines are unchanged, as are the numbers in the trend line equations.

That's what I expected to see. But I had to look.

//

Next, how does the graph look if I use the original unemployment values instead of rounding them to one decimal place? Like this:

Graph #3: Data not Rounded

Compare this graph to Graph #1. Or for that matter, you can compare the numbers in the trendline equations to those in Graph #2 (which has the same numbers as #1). With rounding omitted, the numbers are different.

No noticeable change in the trend lines, though. It's not a big change.

//

I wonder... Remember, at the end of Sunday's post, the average of my trend line values for 1970-2006 was 3.2%, the same number Robert Gordon got. But my average for 2006-2016 was a little off.  I got 1.5%. He got 1.4%. I wonder if that difference goes away when the rounding goes away.

Nope. I get 3.2% and 1.5%, same as before.