Youth unemployment trending up, a reliable recession leading indicator

[The Economy is Getting Worse]

https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/560889427778601023/1177440834627588137/F_nTYVgXkAAzevb.png?ex=6572843a&is=65600f3a&hm=98cb34eccd77286e6a808ee3d2521a90766f41381427a3998cb5150e69456fb3&=&format=webp&width=1108&height=572

[The Economy is Getting Worse]

You're just desperate for there to be a recession before the election, aren't you?

Also, the chart is too wide for the page.  Please edit the image and decrease the width.

It almost seems like, since that makes Biden less likely to win reelection. That said, it looks more like statistical noise and is still among the lowest in the entire chart. Total nothingburger.

There hasn't been any false positives with this indicator. Every time this indicator has started going up by this amount, it has always been followed by recession (in grey in the above chart).

[The Economy is Getting Worse]

You're just desperate for there to be a recession before the election, aren't you?

Also, the chart is too wide for the page.  Please edit the image and decrease the width.

It almost seems like, since that makes Biden less likely to win reelection. That said, it looks more like statistical noise and is still among the lowest in the entire chart. Total nothingburger.

There's an old saying that economists have successfully predicted 23 out of the last 3 recessions.

I'm also reminded of the British general who confidently predicted in 1914 that the war would be over by winter.  Eventually he was right.

Every fed rate hike cycle has ended up recession. Why do you think this time is different?

[The Economy is Getting Worse]

You're just desperate for there to be a recession before the election, aren't you?

Also, the chart is too wide for the page.  Please edit the image and decrease the width.

It almost seems like, since that makes Biden less likely to win reelection. That said, it looks more like statistical noise and is still among the lowest in the entire chart. Total nothingburger.

There hasn't been any false positives with this indicator. Every time this indicator has started going up by this amount, it has always been followed by recession (in grey in the above chart).

Also...

The one in 1991 and 2001 occurred right after a recession grey. It probably was a continuation of the same recession. The one in 1985 doesn't show anywhere near as much spike.

[The Economy is Getting Worse]

You're just desperate for there to be a recession before the election, aren't you?

Also, the chart is too wide for the page.  Please edit the image and decrease the width.

It almost seems like, since that makes Biden less likely to win reelection. That said, it looks more like statistical noise and is still among the lowest in the entire chart. Total nothingburger.

There hasn't been any false positives with this indicator. Every time this indicator has started going up by this amount, it has always been followed by recession (in grey in the above chart).

Also...

The one in 1991 and 2001 occurred right after a recession grey. It probably was a continuation of the same recession. The one in 1985 doesn't show anywhere near as much spike.

Cope.

Also,

https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations

There is a clear mechanism: when the economy is bad, less experienced people are the first people to stop being hired and start being laid off. Again, there are no false positives with that indicator. Youth employment continuing to rise after a recession has already begun isn't a counterexample.

[The Economy is Getting Worse]

You're just desperate for there to be a recession before the election, aren't you?

Also, the chart is too wide for the page.  Please edit the image and decrease the width.

It almost seems like, since that makes Biden less likely to win reelection. That said, it looks more like statistical noise and is still among the lowest in the entire chart. Total nothingburger.

There hasn't been any false positives with this indicator. Every time this indicator has started going up by this amount, it has always been followed by recession (in grey in the above chart).

Also...

The one in 1991 and 2001 occurred right after a recession grey. It probably was a continuation of the same recession. The one in 1985 doesn't show anywhere near as much spike.

Cope.

Also,

https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations

There is a clear mechanism: when the economy is bad, less experienced people are the first people to stop being hired and start being laid off. Again, there are no false positives with that indicator. Youth employment continuing to rise after a recession has already begun isn't a counterexample.

I circled 4 different counterexamples on your chart. And the recessions were clearly over by the time the 1991 and 2003 spikes occurred. Your claim that they were both "a continuation of the same recession" is not backed by any evidence.

And youth unemployment is still at record lows despite the modest increase.

Unemployment can continue to rise after the GDP has started growing, because the job market is still weak. Ie youth unemployment was still going up after the grey in the 2008 recession. On the other hand, when the youth employment turns around after hitting a bottom, it's always lead to a recession.

The stock market of the Dot Com bubble didn't bottom until late 2002, for example.

[The Economy is Getting Worse]

You're just desperate for there to be a recession before the election, aren't you?

Also, the chart is too wide for the page.  Please edit the image and decrease the width.

It almost seems like, since that makes Biden less likely to win reelection. That said, it looks more like statistical noise and is still among the lowest in the entire chart. Total nothingburger.

There hasn't been any false positives with this indicator. Every time this indicator has started going up by this amount, it has always been followed by recession (in grey in the above chart).

Also...

The one in 1991 and 2001 occurred right after a recession grey. It probably was a continuation of the same recession. The one in 1985 doesn't show anywhere near as much spike.

Cope.

Also,

https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations

There is a clear mechanism: when the economy is bad, less experienced people are the first people to stop being hired and start being laid off. Again, there are no false positives with that indicator. Youth employment continuing to rise after a recession has already begun isn't a counterexample.

I circled 4 different counterexamples on your chart. And the recessions were clearly over by the time the 1991 and 2003 spikes occurred. Your claim that they were both "a continuation of the same recession" is not backed by any evidence.

And youth unemployment is still at record lows despite the modest increase.

Unemployment can continue to rise after the GDP has started growing, because the job market is still weak. Ie youth unemployment was still going up after the grey in the 2008 recession.

The stock market of the Dot Com bubble didn't bottom until 2002.

What about the non-negligible 2017 spike?

The spike was much smaller than the current one. Also gigantic tax cuts/deregulation was passed around the time, possibly stalling the recession (which would likely have happened around 2020 with or without COVID based on the inverted yield curve).

The problem right now is that every single indicator points to a recession. Inverted yield curve, PMI employment estimates, youth unemployment, credit contraction, defaults, etc.