My primary point is that the graphs show the reasonably distant past as well as the present but there is no meaningful comparison between the two in them. I think they are intellectually dishonest. Honestly I think they fit into the "lets make it say what we want" category. They use data which ignores a huge confounding variable - the data shown in the graphs I posted doesn't include that variable and is much better from a statistical viewpoint.
My point from the start has been that the graphs in the op purposefully choose data that ignores inflation in order to exaggerate the magnitude of the current recession.
NJ5 said that inflation has not had a major effect on the graphs, the graphs I've posted clearly show that inflation has had a huge impact on the data - the two sets of graphs look nothing alike. The original set of graphs has exponential curves (which is what would be expected from inflation) while the second set of graphs does not.
Most of the time so far I've been arguing purely on the merits of the statistics, not on the conclusions drawn from the statistics.
Essay Pro