Page 21 of 50 FirstFirst ... 11192021222331 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 210 of 499

Thread: U.S. Unemployment Falls to Lowest Level Since May 2008[W:489, 497]

  1. #201
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    is everything
    Last Seen
    02-19-17 @ 08:50 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    4,810

    re: U.S. Unemployment Falls to Lowest Level Since May 2008[W:489, 497]

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    do 5 minutes of research before showing up here and making a fool of yourself ?
    I don't like to pass over comments made by others. Yer an exception. I'm going to make a mental list of those topics I will ignore in yer posts. So far it includes housing and, now, Keynesian policy. I'm sure yer not worth listening to on that one as well.

  2. #202
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    is everything
    Last Seen
    02-19-17 @ 08:50 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    4,810

    re: U.S. Unemployment Falls to Lowest Level Since May 2008[W:489, 497]

    Quote Originally Posted by DA60 View Post
    since he took office
    This is the fatal flaw in yer analysis, as pinqy suggested. Can you understand that?

    Let's say a crew of firefighters shows up at a structure that is becoming engulfed. They put out the fire, but as they're accomplishing that, a portion of the building is destroyed. During the next few weeks, a construction crew works to rehabilitate the damaged sections. At a time near the end of that work, you could correctly say that the building is in marginally worse shape than it was before the fire. Would it make sense to argue that the firefighters and construction workers did a lousy job?

  3. #203
    Sage

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    12,252

    re: U.S. Unemployment Falls to Lowest Level Since May 2008[W:489, 497]

    Quote Originally Posted by pinqy View Post
    Why didn't you actually bother to do research first? Why would you just post something you made up with no consideration for reality?
    Get over it. I don't even believe government numbers.

  4. #204
    Sage
    Fenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    25,730

    re: U.S. Unemployment Falls to Lowest Level Since May 2008[W:489, 497]

    Quote Originally Posted by mmi View Post
    I don't like to pass over comments made by others. Yer an exception. I'm going to make a mental list of those topics I will ignore in yer posts. So far it includes housing and, now, Keynesian policy. I'm sure yer not worth listening to on that one as well.
    Yes, you ignore what you cannot rebut intelligently.

    Why post at all then ?

    If you're simply going to run away after being corrected what's the point of debate ?

  5. #205
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    is everything
    Last Seen
    02-19-17 @ 08:50 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    4,810

    re: U.S. Unemployment Falls to Lowest Level Since May 2008[W:489, 497]

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    Yes, you ignore what you cannot rebut intelligently.
    No, I would not ignore that. Otoh, there are other things I would ignore, if you catch my drift.

    >>Why post at all then ?

    There's no problem with that I just pass by yers.

    >>If you're simply going to run away after being corrected what's the point of debate ?

    You have not "corrected" me.

  6. #206
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,145

    re: U.S. Unemployment Falls to Lowest Level Since May 2008[W:489, 497]

    Quote Originally Posted by tres borrachos View Post
    Your incredibly idiotic post about Keynes had nothing - zero - to do with that link that I posted. I wasn't arguing the merits of the stimulus spending, nor the economics behind it - the poster asked me to prove that most of the stimulus money was spent before 2013, and that link showed how the stimulus money was spent, and when.
    No it didn't! The blog piece was an incredibly short-sighted take on the success of the stimulus at restoring economic activity. There was an imbedded link to this graph, but you made no reference to it. Not to mention, it was written in 2011 (before final revisions to the ARRA expenditures were calculated). The data from that chart turned out to be incomplete.

    The chart i provided shows what you claimed you were showing:


    Your clueless and sanctimonious posts show how far behind the discussion you are. You jumped in to drone endlessly about a post I made to someone else, and that was not at all related to your self serving, off topic and boring rant.
    Your inability to properly parrot what someone else said/wrote is not my problem. The blog piece didn't say what you thought it did. Who goes to a blog to find data for a debate on macroeconomic policy?

    Now, go away and post your liberal, Obama loving posts to someone who cares what you think and someone who wants to debate the merits of the stimulus with you. I don't fall into either one.
    I made no mention of liberalism or Obama loving. Your response fails on all accounts because you've bitten off more than you can chew, and now are trying to substitute valid thought with a bitchy attitude. Sorry, that simply won't cut it. If you don't want be called out, refrain from making ultra-partisan talking points lacking the least bit of economic rationale.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  7. #207
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,145

    re: U.S. Unemployment Falls to Lowest Level Since May 2008[W:489, 497]

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    Yes, you ignore what you cannot rebut intelligently.
    Quite the fascinating comment given your history of running away.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  8. #208
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,145

    re: U.S. Unemployment Falls to Lowest Level Since May 2008[W:489, 497]

    Quote Originally Posted by fmw View Post
    Get over it. I don't even believe government numbers.
    Nonsense! You are quick to site government numbers that fit your narrative. When you're called out for misrepresentation, you hide behind your disbelief of the same government numbers you (attempted) to site.

    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  9. #209
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 04:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    re: U.S. Unemployment Falls to Lowest Level Since May 2008[W:489, 497]

    Quote Originally Posted by Kushinator View Post
    No it didn't! The blog piece was an incredibly short-sighted take on the success of the stimulus at restoring economic activity. There was an imbedded link to this graph, but you made no reference to it. Not to mention, it was written in 2011 (before final revisions to the ARRA expenditures were calculated). The data from that chart turned out to be incomplete.

    The chart i provided shows what you claimed you were showing:




    Your inability to properly parrot what someone else said/wrote is not my problem. The blog piece didn't say what you thought it did. Who goes to a blog to find data for a debate on macroeconomic policy?



    I made no mention of liberalism or Obama loving. Your response fails on all accounts because you've bitten off more than you can chew, and now are trying to substitute valid thought with a bitchy attitude. Sorry, that simply won't cut it. If you don't want be called out, refrain from making ultra-partisan talking points lacking the least bit of economic rationale.
    I'd like to point out that tres was lying when she claimed " wasn't arguing the merits of the stimulus spending" and that she was merely trying "prove that most of the stimulus money was spent before 2013, and that link showed how the stimulus money was spent, and when"

    If you trace back the posts, you will see that she certainly did argue about the merits of the stimulus spending, even going so far as to trot out that old trope about shovel-ready projects.
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  10. #210
    Sage
    Chomsky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Third Coast
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    18,367

    re: U.S. Unemployment Falls to Lowest Level Since May 2008[W:489, 497]

    Quote Originally Posted by tres borrachos View Post
    Huh? You say that the GOP controlled "both branches of government, including both the house & senate" for the entire 8 years of Bush 43's Presidency. Not accurate. In 2006 the Democrats won both the House and the Senate. What point were you trying to make?
    I stand corrected.

    When I was double checking the linked data in my post I missed the 110th Congress, where the Dems did indeed control the house.

    Thank you for pointing that error out.

    However the senate was 49-49 (+2 independents), so with Mr. Cheney as the Senate tie-breaking vote the GOP retained control. Since the 2 Indies caucus with the Dems I see how you might think that signifies Dem control, but as we see with Joe Lieberman for example, his vote could not be counted upon, and he often voted against the Dems.

    Irrespective of all this, Mr. Bush still wielded veto control then, just as Mr. Obama currently does now. The buck has to stop somewhere.
    "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." - Sinclair Lewis

    The 10 Commandments of Logic - (Courtesy of Abbazorkzog Blog)

Page 21 of 50 FirstFirst ... 11192021222331 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •