|
Fuzzy Math
On 8/7/11 3:08 PM, Eisboch wrote:
"wf3h" wrote in message ... On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 12:43:57 -0400, wrote: So you agree the real unemployment rate is a lot worse than the numbers. I think that is what the OP was going for. nope. what i said was that you're too stupid to understand how it's measured and so is he ---------------------------------------------------------- I am "stupid" because I posed a legitimate question? Not counting those who have given up looking, even though employable, is dishonest and totally misleading to the public. Hint: The "real" unemployment rate is near 20%. That's scary. Eisboch (not so dumb after all) It's been that way for a long, long time (not counting those not looking) |
Fuzzy Math
On Sun, 7 Aug 2011 16:07:09 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote: In article , says... "wf3h" wrote in message ... On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 12:43:57 -0400, wrote: So you agree the real unemployment rate is a lot worse than the numbers. I think that is what the OP was going for. nope. what i said was that you're too stupid to understand how it's measured and so is he ---------------------------------------------------------- I am "stupid" because I posed a legitimate question? Not counting those who have given up looking, even though employable, is dishonest and totally misleading to the public. Hint: The "real" unemployment rate is near 20%. That's scary. Eisboch (not so dumb after all) The problem is if you're not looking, you're not looking. That makes you "retired" from the work force. Then what happens is when hiring increases, the "unemployment" rate often rises due to people who get back in the game and start looking again. I agree it's a stupid way of getting to the unemployment rate. Good for the pols only - they can easiily make the numbers look better than they are. But since those books have been cooked for years they aren't fooling anybody. A general rule is just double the number. Maybe food stamp use, about 20% of the population now, is a close match with the "real" unemployment rate. Bob cracks me up. 20% of the nation is on food stamps, and he's pulling in about +150k but whining about it. http://abcnews.go.com/Business/surge...stamps-united- states/story?id=14231657 The U.S. is spending about $70 billion a year in food stamps. The trend in food stamps is definitely up, mainly due to the sustained unemployment. http://www.leftandrightnews.com/2011...ipation-soars/ Of course, the Republicans don't actually give a damn about the poor... http://www.economist.com/node/18958475 |
Fuzzy Math
On Sun, 7 Aug 2011 15:08:22 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:
"wf3h" wrote in message ... On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 12:43:57 -0400, wrote: So you agree the real unemployment rate is a lot worse than the numbers. I think that is what the OP was going for. nope. what i said was that you're too stupid to understand how it's measured and so is he ---------------------------------------------------------- I am "stupid" because I posed a legitimate question? no. you're stupid because you expect the metrology to change so that bush looks better and the black president looks worse Not counting those who have given up looking, even though employable, is dishonest and totally misleading to the public maybe so. but obama didnt change the method of measurement. |
Fuzzy Math
On Sun, 07 Aug 2011 19:26:16 -0400, wf3h wrote:
On Sun, 7 Aug 2011 15:08:22 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: "wf3h" wrote in message ... On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 12:43:57 -0400, wrote: So you agree the real unemployment rate is a lot worse than the numbers. I think that is what the OP was going for. nope. what i said was that you're too stupid to understand how it's measured and so is he ---------------------------------------------------------- I am "stupid" because I posed a legitimate question? no. you're stupid because you expect the metrology to change so that bush looks better and the black president looks worse Not counting those who have given up looking, even though employable, is dishonest and totally misleading to the public maybe so. but obama didnt change the method of measurement. Well, I think there are stupid people here, along with racist/fascist ones. But, I don't think Eisboch is one, at least I don't see any direct evidence of it. He's certainly nowhere near the level of crazy/stupid of some (that sounds like I'm saying he is crazy/stupid on some level, but I couldn't figure out how to phrase it properly). :-) I believe there are rational people on the right (not on the far right, however, or even the extreme left - like Earth Firsters who are off the deep end). A conversation/debate is possible in that situation. As long as both sides recognize that there are facts and made up facts, then it's possible. The extremes on both sides tend to promote or invoke violence or hatred to "prove" something or to "solve" something. That's just wrong in a civil society. I'm not equating the two extremes. The right is far more likely to do nasty things, but there is a left element that exists. To deny that would be irrational. It's pretty easy to make a factual error. Maddow's recent one about Limbaugh. The issue is whether or not one is willing to be corrected and to admit the error. It's hard to argue that Maddow doesn't have a left-leaning agenda, but it's also impossible for a rational person to think that Limbaugh has anything but his own self-interest in mind, and he's willing to lie and/or distort the truth to support himself. He would never admit a factual error. Sorry for the rant. :D |
Fuzzy Math
On 8/7/2011 3:08 PM, Eisboch wrote:
"wf3h" wrote in message ... On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 12:43:57 -0400, wrote: So you agree the real unemployment rate is a lot worse than the numbers. I think that is what the OP was going for. nope. what i said was that you're too stupid to understand how it's measured and so is he ---------------------------------------------------------- I am "stupid" because I posed a legitimate question? Not counting those who have given up looking, even though employable, is dishonest and totally misleading to the public. Hint: The "real" unemployment rate is near 20%. That's scary. Eisboch (not so dumb after all) Yes, this was the same dolt who some time ago claimed Germany had significantly less than 20% unemployment. Same deceptive math, but they want to believe what the want to believe. |
Fuzzy Math
In article ,
says... On 8/7/2011 3:08 PM, Eisboch wrote: "wf3h" wrote in message ... On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 12:43:57 -0400, wrote: So you agree the real unemployment rate is a lot worse than the numbers. I think that is what the OP was going for. nope. what i said was that you're too stupid to understand how it's measured and so is he ---------------------------------------------------------- I am "stupid" because I posed a legitimate question? Not counting those who have given up looking, even though employable, is dishonest and totally misleading to the public. Hint: The "real" unemployment rate is near 20%. That's scary. Eisboch (not so dumb after all) Yes, this was the same dolt who some time ago claimed Germany had significantly less than 20% unemployment. He's only a dolt because he talks with the nuts, insults almost everybody he speaks to, and repeats the same things over and over. Otherwise, he's usually right. German unemployment is about 6%. Anybody can find that with a few key clicks. Same deceptive math, but they want to believe what the want to believe. Here's some more economic facts. There's a whole bunch countries with an AAA credit rating. Austrailia Austria Canada Denmark Finland France Germany Guernsey Hong Kong Isle of Man Liechtenstein Luxembourg Netherlands Norway Singapore Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom Many people in the U.S.A. call those countries "socialist" because they all have universal health care and old age pensions. Seems crazy to them. The U.S.A. has an AA rating and no universal health care. Second class compared to the countries on the above list. The U.S.A. does have food stamps. About 20% of Americans qualify for and use food stamps. You can't buy beer with food stamps, so personally I don't want to ever depend on food stamps. Even if I had beer money on the side. Food stamps are second class "money." Many people living in the countries with AAA ratings have trouble understanding why 20% of the people in the U.S.A. are on food stamps, with which they can't buy beer. Seems crazy to them. You can decide for yourself who's crazy. |
Fuzzy Math
On 08/08/2011 9:45 AM, Boating All Out wrote:
In , says... On 8/7/2011 3:08 PM, Eisboch wrote: "wf3h" wrote in message ... On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 12:43:57 -0400, wrote: So you agree the real unemployment rate is a lot worse than the numbers. I think that is what the OP was going for. nope. what i said was that you're too stupid to understand how it's measured and so is he ---------------------------------------------------------- I am "stupid" because I posed a legitimate question? Not counting those who have given up looking, even though employable, is dishonest and totally misleading to the public. Hint: The "real" unemployment rate is near 20%. That's scary. Eisboch (not so dumb after all) Yes, this was the same dolt who some time ago claimed Germany had significantly less than 20% unemployment. He's only a dolt because he talks with the nuts, insults almost everybody he speaks to, and repeats the same things over and over. Otherwise, he's usually right. German unemployment is about 6%. Anybody can find that with a few key clicks. Same deceptive math, but they want to believe what the want to believe. Here's some more economic facts. There's a whole bunch countries with an AAA credit rating. Austrailia Austria Canada Denmark Finland France Germany Guernsey Hong Kong Isle of Man Liechtenstein Luxembourg Netherlands Norway Singapore Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom Many people in the U.S.A. call those countries "socialist" because they all have universal health care and old age pensions. Seems crazy to them. The U.S.A. has an AA rating and no universal health care. Second class compared to the countries on the above list. The U.S.A. does have food stamps. About 20% of Americans qualify for and use food stamps. You can't buy beer with food stamps, so personally I don't want to ever depend on food stamps. Even if I had beer money on the side. Food stamps are second class "money." Many people living in the countries with AAA ratings have trouble understanding why 20% of the people in the U.S.A. are on food stamps, with which they can't buy beer. Seems crazy to them. You can decide for yourself who's crazy. Rating agencies are bull****. USA should have lost triple A 3 years ago. I never understood why China was rated so low. Only $1.55 trillion in civic, provincial and federal debt combined. And offset that they have lent others more money than tat which makes China in a positive balance. But then these were US companies doing the ratings. And we know liberal media downplays that everyone but Moody downgraded USA, it wasn't just S&P. No doubt in a US treasury you will gt your money back, the real question is will it be worth as much. And that later prt has a certain risk that assures it will not be worth as much. -- Seems like paying your bills with real money is no longer the accepted behavior in USA. Perhaps that is the problem and not the the solution. |
Fuzzy Math
On Mon, 8 Aug 2011 10:45:02 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote: In article , says... On 8/7/2011 3:08 PM, Eisboch wrote: "wf3h" wrote in message ... On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 12:43:57 -0400, wrote: So you agree the real unemployment rate is a lot worse than the numbers. I think that is what the OP was going for. nope. what i said was that you're too stupid to understand how it's measured and so is he ---------------------------------------------------------- I am "stupid" because I posed a legitimate question? Not counting those who have given up looking, even though employable, is dishonest and totally misleading to the public. Hint: The "real" unemployment rate is near 20%. That's scary. Eisboch (not so dumb after all) Yes, this was the same dolt who some time ago claimed Germany had significantly less than 20% unemployment. He's only a dolt because he talks with the nuts, insults almost everybody he speaks to, and repeats the same things over and over. Otherwise, he's usually right. German unemployment is about 6%. Anybody can find that with a few key clicks. Same deceptive math, but they want to believe what the want to believe. Here's some more economic facts. There's a whole bunch countries with an AAA credit rating. Austrailia Austria Canada Denmark Finland France Germany Guernsey Hong Kong Isle of Man Liechtenstein Luxembourg Netherlands Norway Singapore Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom Many people in the U.S.A. call those countries "socialist" because they all have universal health care and old age pensions. Seems crazy to them. The U.S.A. has an AA rating and no universal health care. Second class compared to the countries on the above list. The U.S.A. does have food stamps. About 20% of Americans qualify for and use food stamps. You can't buy beer with food stamps, so personally I don't want to ever depend on food stamps. Even if I had beer money on the side. Food stamps are second class "money." Many people living in the countries with AAA ratings have trouble understanding why 20% of the people in the U.S.A. are on food stamps, with which they can't buy beer. Seems crazy to them. You can decide for yourself who's crazy. Actually, the US still has AAA from the two others, and S&P has had all sorts of problems lately, not to mention their $2T error. The problem with the other AAA rated countries is that they don't have the financial depth to be the backstop currency. The US does and will remain the currency of last resort for the foreseeable future. |
Fuzzy Math
On Mon, 08 Aug 2011 10:23:37 -0600, Canuck57
wrote: On 08/08/2011 9:45 AM, Boating All Out wrote: In , says... On 8/7/2011 3:08 PM, Eisboch wrote: "wf3h" wrote in message ... On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 12:43:57 -0400, wrote: So you agree the real unemployment rate is a lot worse than the numbers. I think that is what the OP was going for. nope. what i said was that you're too stupid to understand how it's measured and so is he ---------------------------------------------------------- I am "stupid" because I posed a legitimate question? Not counting those who have given up looking, even though employable, is dishonest and totally misleading to the public. Hint: The "real" unemployment rate is near 20%. That's scary. Eisboch (not so dumb after all) Yes, this was the same dolt who some time ago claimed Germany had significantly less than 20% unemployment. He's only a dolt because he talks with the nuts, insults almost everybody he speaks to, and repeats the same things over and over. Otherwise, he's usually right. German unemployment is about 6%. Anybody can find that with a few key clicks. Same deceptive math, but they want to believe what the want to believe. Here's some more economic facts. There's a whole bunch countries with an AAA credit rating. Austrailia Austria Canada Denmark Finland France Germany Guernsey Hong Kong Isle of Man Liechtenstein Luxembourg Netherlands Norway Singapore Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom Many people in the U.S.A. call those countries "socialist" because they all have universal health care and old age pensions. Seems crazy to them. The U.S.A. has an AA rating and no universal health care. Second class compared to the countries on the above list. The U.S.A. does have food stamps. About 20% of Americans qualify for and use food stamps. You can't buy beer with food stamps, so personally I don't want to ever depend on food stamps. Even if I had beer money on the side. Food stamps are second class "money." Many people living in the countries with AAA ratings have trouble understanding why 20% of the people in the U.S.A. are on food stamps, with which they can't buy beer. Seems crazy to them. You can decide for yourself who's crazy. Rating agencies are bull****. USA should have lost triple A 3 years ago. I never understood why China was rated so low. Only $1.55 trillion in civic, provincial and federal debt combined. And offset that they have lent others more money than tat which makes China in a positive balance. But then these were US companies doing the ratings. And we know liberal media downplays that everyone but Moody downgraded USA, it wasn't just S&P. No doubt in a US treasury you will gt your money back, the real question is will it be worth as much. And that later prt has a certain risk that assures it will not be worth as much. "I never understood...." Yes, we get that you never, don't, and will never understand. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:56 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com