Podcast Episode Details
Back to Podcast Episodes
The Economic Data Is Politically Biased And I Have Proof
Today’s Letter Is Brought To You By A Golden Visa for the Bitcoin-Forward Investor!
Bitizenship helps Bitcoiners secure EU residency and a path to Portuguese citizenship, without abandoning their long-term thesis.
Bitizenship Helps You:✔ Unlock visa-free travel across Europe✔ Secure residency with minimal physical presence✔ Maintain Bitcoin exposure through a regulated structure✔ Set up a future-proof Plan B for your family✔ Gain one of the world’s strongest passports in 5 years
Time-Sensitive Update: Portugal may pass new citizenship rules within the near future, doubling the timeline to 10 years.
Lucky for you, there’s time to lock in the current law if you act now.
To investors,
The finance industry runs on economic data. Investors around the world consume various data points, draw conclusions from the data, and make capital allocation decisions based on that data.
But what if the data being consumed by investors is inaccurate? What if the data is politically biased?
It would essentially guarantee misguided investment decisions are being made.
Bad inputs lead to bad outputs. You can’t make good decisions if you are basing those decisions on inaccurate or biased data.
This brings us to a bombshell discovery of provably false and politically biased data by Fundstrat and Tom Lee. In a recent report to clients, Fundstrat pointed out how the University of Michigan consumer survey has become completely unreliable due to a sharp rise in political bias.
Before I cover that bias and inaccuracy, let me explain the University of Michigan survey. The survey is described as “a monthly survey that measures American consumers’ attitudes toward the economy, personal finances, and their readiness to spend. Considered a leading economic indicator, the survey, which has been conducted since 1946, uses a minimum of 500 phone interviews and provides insights into consumer optimism or pessimism. The results are used to predict economic trends, including consumer spending and the overall health of the economy.”
Now lets go back to the political bias and inaccuracies. We have known for awhile there are differences in political affiliations when it comes to inflation expectations. Fundstrat shows that here:
Democrats expect inflation to be 5.3% a year from now, while Republicans believe it will be 1.5%. Of course, the truth is likely somewhere in-between. But this political difference is not a problem because it is clear, transparent, and easily understood. You can summarize the difference as politics breaking the economic brains of those being surveyed.
Is it dumb? Of course. Would I accuse the University of Michigan of tipping the scales in any way? No, not at all.
But Fundstrat takes their analysis a step further. They show that the University of Michigan survey has been corrupted over the last two years. They used to survey Republicans and Democrats on a 50/50 basis for years, but there was an explicit change in early 2024.
The University of Michigan survey has shifted left on the political aisle. Rather than 50/50 survey pool, the surveyed group is now 65% Democrats and the trend is only getting worse. You can see in the chart how absurd the change has been.
So what is the big deal?
If I am being nice, the University of Michigan has suddenly screwed up their data collection methodologies. Frankly, I find that hard to believe given how well they stayed unbiased for years. If I put on my conspiratorial hat, we need to ask why University of Michigan is manipulating the data and putting their fingers on the scale?
I will leave it to each of you to decide whether you think the data issues are intentional or not.
And to provide t
Published on 2 weeks, 1 day ago