WNYC1139

What do you do for income? In other words, how do you make your living? Sealand does not seem (as far as I can tell) to have an economy that can be taxed. Wikipedia mentions "issuing coins and postage stamps," but does that bring in enough money to support you and/or your family?

No.

See http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm

Excerpt:

"the Government conducts a monthly sample survey called the Current Population Survey (CPS) to measure the extent of unemployment in the country."

A survey, even a sophisticated one, is open to inaccuracy. A saving grace is that it at least is probably comparable over time - so if the survey says 5% one year and 10% the next year, the numbers may not be right but it's reasonable to think that at least unemployment went up.

Conducting surveys is a pretty detailed field of social science, and it's possible to get fairly sophisticated in order to mitigate inaccuracies. I am not qualified to opine on what degree of inaccuracy may exist in the BLS's methodology.

We actually don't know if they UE in the US is higher than what the statistics show. For one thing, the BLS puts out a couple of statistics, showing labor force size (and change), etc. It defines UE as "looking for work" because otherwise UE would be perpetually 50% or something and be a useless statistic. However, it also puts out (estimated) labor force and population size so if you think the "real" unemployment should count "dropouts" you can calculate your own stats using BLS's numbers (a lot of pundits do just that).

For example: here, you can find the measured unemployment for various Metropolitan Statistical Areas in the U.S.

http://www.bls.gov/lau/metrossa.htm

Flint's June 2013 UE is 9.4%. Labor force is 188,427. BUT - in January, 2008 the labor force was 207,454. Does that mean 19,000 people (and dependents) moved out of Flint? We can do our own adjustments (AGAIN, using BLS's measures!) to get a "real" (but made-up) 17.7% unemployment.

The mistake is reading more into "unemployment statistics" than we should. It's just one way of measuring things - at least consistent, but when thinking about the economic picture there is more to think about. The BLS acknowledges this, and gives us the tools to do just that.

Not a The Strange-related question.

How has the fanbase for tabletop RPG's changed in terms of numbers and demographics since the '80's, and where do you see it going from here?

I am in my late 30's and enjoyed playing RPG's in my teens and 20's. On the one hand, it seems as though MMORPG's have supplanted tabletops among people who are now of that age-group, but on the other hand I know of people my age that still play tabletop.

So I don't have a sense as to whether the tabletop industry has enough adherents to sustain itself, or if it's to a degree living off the enthusiasm of people who got into it 20 years ago.

In your view, are there enough young players getting into it to keep it sustainable? I figure that, as industry veterans, you'd have a good perspective. The fact that you're launching a new product probably is indicative of some optimism, but I'm still interested in what exactly you're seeing.

Are you aware of any industry sales figures over time that are available anywhere?

Incorrect.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/nation/gun-homicides-ownership/table/

9.1 guns per 100 people. That's about 1/10th the U.S. rate, but as the pro-gun rights people like to say, it's not the guns but the people using them that's dangerous.

Various statistics I've seen put Honduras' murder rate at about 80-100 per 100,000. By way of comparison, Detroit has about 55, East St. Louis had about 100 as of 2009.

"Lucky to be alive" is hyperbole, unless you were deliberately taunting gang members.