I agree that there are systematics in the data that are not believable. The bigger question for me is if the long term trends in the data (say over a decade or so) are indicative of what is actually happening in the real world. If you factor in the data from @StefanKarpinski, along with the data from PYPL (which also has systematics that are not believable), consistent long-term growth is noticeable. I would not want to make any quantitative statements but I do think this puts the lie to what some doom sayers (no names mentioned) are saying.
2 Likes