• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US Job Market Loses Steam

Goldenboy219 said:
But lets assume the specific institution has a bias lean; does that automatically relieve you from explaining to all of us the inaccuracies of MG's source? To be honest, i think you are just blowing hot air. If you could explain the shortcoming, you would have done so already.
Click to expand...


As most liberals will tell you, it is not up to me to prove a negative. MG posted that biased tripe, and approaches the debate with the same "Bush did it" mentality that is currently a losing card for liberals in this country. If MG wants to make the assertion that he so willingly used biased sources to make it, then let him back that up. Then I'll show where he is wrong. But for you to want me to spend endless hours debunking, and spinning my wheels, only to in the end have you dismiss what I work on, or better yet not even reply further, my answer is no thanks, find someone else to use that tactic on.


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
The EPI? Really? Nothing more biased out there? Economic Policy Institute is a well known biased org.


j-mac
Click to expand...

Bias doesn't matter. Accuracy does. You don't have to prove a negative. I would never ask youto do that. But I see nothing inaccurate with this source. Do you?
 
Boo Radley said:
Bias doesn't matter. Accuracy does. You don't have to prove a negative. I would never ask youto do that. But I see nothing inaccurate with this source. Do you?
Click to expand...


Yes, well, let me be clear. In their numbers I wouldn't know without some real digging, but in their premise? Absolutely. They start out with their conclusion, then seek to prove that by comparing apples to Ice Cream.

j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Yes, well, let me be clear. In their numbers I wouldn't know without some real digging, but in their premise? Absolutely. They start out with their conclusion, then seek to prove that by comparing apples to Ice Cream.

j-mac
Click to expand...

Fair enough, but you can accept the numbers and argue the premise. I see no problem with that.

That said, how many things do you present that does just what you complain about here? When has the American (non)thinker ever not started out with a conclusion? ;)

However, I just want it clear that accuracy matters and not bias. If accurate, we can take the information and seek our own conclusions. if inaccurate, it needs to be thrown out. And any source that has a history of being inaccurate, like NRO and Beck or Moveon.org or Oberman, need to be avoided fromt he start. Accuracy is the standard. Bias is just whining. ;)
 
Please tell me what is wrong with the info I posted. What info is fatually incorrect?
 
Middleground said:
Please tell me what is wrong with the info I posted. What info is fatually incorrect?
Click to expand...

Are you asking me or j? I certainly am not arguing any of it is factually incorrect.
 
Boo Radley said:
Fair enough, but you can accept the numbers and argue the premise. I see no problem with that.
Click to expand...

The numbers are what they are. To compare private sector job growth to Defense spending is asinine in the maximum. It takes the reader of that tripe for stupid.


That said, how many things do you present that does just what you complain about here? When has the American (non)thinker ever not started out with a conclusion?
Click to expand...


I haven't used an Am Thinker article for quite some time. When was the last time you saw me use it? Oh, and BTW, again apples to dump trucks. When I do use the opinions of conservative writers in the Am Thinker, it is always in an opinion section, whether here, or any of the other forums we battle on Joe, and you have never proven them "wrong" per se, just that you hold different opinions, so don't try and hold me to standards you have no intention on holding yourself to.

However, I just want it clear that accuracy matters and not bias. If accurate, we can take the information and seek our own conclusions. if inaccurate, it needs to be thrown out. And any source that has a history of being inaccurate, like NRO and Beck or Moveon.org or Oberman, need to be avoided fromt he start. Accuracy is the standard. Bias is just whining.
Click to expand...

Not at all, it has never mattered to liberals, accuracy that is. The only thing that does matter are the ends. I noticed that you left out this EPI trash from your list. Bias is not whining, it is a fact, and a sad one that we have let skew our information.


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
The numbers are what they are. To compare private sector job growth to Defense spending is asinine in the maximum. It takes the reader of that tripe for stupid.
Click to expand...

Not sure I agee with you on that. But, that is an argument you can make.


I haven't used an Am Thinker article for quite some time. When was the last time you saw me use it? Oh, and BTW, again apples to dump trucks. When I do use the opinions of conservative writers in the Am Thinker, it is always in an opinion section, whether here, or any of the other forums we battle on Joe, and you have never proven them "wrong" per se, just that you hold different opinions, so don't try and hold me to standards you have no intention on holding yourself to.
Click to expand...

Good for you. I would have never used one, but glad to hear you haven't. And opinions that work the absurd are hardly worth presenting. Anything so mired in inarate and fowl garbage is not conducive to any real discussion, which is why I never engage it. ;)


Not at all, it has never mattered to liberals, accuracy that is. The only thing that does matter are the ends. I noticed that you left out this EPI trash from your list. Bias is not whining, it is a fact, and a sad one that we have let skew our information.


j-mac
Click to expand...

J, this is more of YOUR inaccurate bias. There are liberals and conservatives to which accuracy matters, and liberals and conservative to which accuracy doesn't matter. Any other claim is just silly.
 
Deuce said:
Actually I'd say the important part is the total jobs. Government employees still spend their salaries on things, so it's not like a $50k/year government job is somehow by default putting less into the economy than a $50k/year private sector job.
Click to expand...

Harshaw said:
I never said anything otherwise.
Click to expand...
And yet the theme of this thread is to continuously denounce any and all efforts the government (President) is making to improve the economy even if it means creating temporary state & federal government jobs.

Look, I'll be the first to admit that IMO the President and his economic advisors made a big mistake in proclaiming in February 2009 that the unemployment rate would not increase. He's been hounded by that proclaimation ever since. But I try to look at the other side of that issue...

Unemployment hasn't increased either, and so far the economy hasn't gotten any worse. Therefore, there must be something the man's doing right if all the country has lost were the temporary Census workers who we all know we'd lose anyway. Now, granted private sector jobs haven't come back in the numbers we'd all like to see, but the 71,000 private sector jobs that were created should be hailed as a positive, not a negative.
 
Boo Radley said:
Not sure I agee with you on that. But, that is an argument you can make.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your permission, not that I need it.


Good for you. I would have never used one, but glad to hear you haven't. And opinions that work the absurd are hardly worth presenting. Anything so mired in inarate and fowl garbage is not conducive to any real discussion, which is why I never engage it.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah. You have never used Media Matters, or any related or like progressive site to make your liberal points?


J, this is more of YOUR inaccurate bias. There are liberals and conservatives to which accuracy matters, and liberla and conservative to which accuracy doesn't matter. Any other claim is just silly.
Click to expand...

Nonsense, this is just more of your usual dimissal M.O. Allinsky tactic that is worn out. Find a new shtick Prof.


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Thanks for your permission, not that I need it.
Click to expand...

Of course you don't need it, but I'm merely saying I have no objection.

Oh yeah. You have never used Media Matters, or any related or like progressive site to make your liberal points?
Click to expand...

Apples to Oranges. Media matters is nothing like the American (non)Thinker. They are mostly accurate.



Nonsense, this is just more of your usual dimissal M.O. Allinsky tactic that is worn out. Find a new shtick Prof.


j-mac
Click to expand...

Your opinion aside, it really cannot be argued that both sides have both. And it is kind of foolish to even try to argue otherwise. ;)
 
Boo Radley said:
Are you asking me or j? I certainly am not arguing any of it is factually incorrect.
Click to expand...

I agree that the government had more to do with the recession occurring; that's especially true with the recession continueing, but I'm unaware of which of Bush's policies caused the recession.

Care to point them out to us?
 
Boo Radley said:
Of course you don't need it, but I'm merely saying I have no objection.
Click to expand...


Good, sit down then. :)


Apples to Oranges. Media matters is nothing like the American (non)Thinker. They are mostly accurate.
Click to expand...

OMG! :shock: You have got to be kidding me?






Listen to them Joe, you might learn something.


j-mac
 
apdst said:
That's not greed, nor did people spending more than they could afford cause the recession. It was the doom-saying from politicians that had more to do with the recession, that cause a slow down in spending, more than anything else.
Click to expand...

Now, this IS the dumbest post I've ever read on this or any forum concerning the cause of the current recession.

Of course greed caused all this mess!!!!

People who knowlingly couldn't afford their expensive homes, cars, luxury items, investment bankers taking excessive risks they knew they couldn't afford creating "wealth" only on a ledger using creative financing techniques...

YES! That was greed in every practical sense of the word. People wanted more and more in excess of what they already had or couldn't afford. And as a result, the bottom fell out.
 
Objective Voice said:
Now, this IS the dumbest post I've ever read on this or any forum concerning the cause of the current recession.

Of course greed caused all this mess!!!!

People who knowlingly couldn't afford their expensive homes, cars, luxury items, investment bankers taking excessive risks they knew they couldn't afford creating "wealth" only on a ledger using creative financing techniques...

YES! That was greed in every practical sense of the word. People wanted more and more in excess of what they already had or couldn't afford. And as a result, the bottom fell out.
Click to expand...

Going to post some examples, or just spew filthy personal insults, as usual?

Wanna stop with the vitrial for a moment and ask why the bottom fell out? It fell out, because the government interfered too much with the private sector. The Dems said for years, "we're in economic trouble!", until that's exactly what they got.


Do you want to point out which of Bush's policies caused the recession?
 
j-mac said:
Good, sit down then. :)




OMG! :shock: You have got to be kidding me?






Listen to them Joe, you might learn something.


j-mac
Click to expand...


You have to do better than this. You have to link te media matters article and show them inaccrate. just having a commontator say they were inaccurate is not enough.
 
apdst said:
Wanna stop with the vitrial for a moment and ask why the bottom fell out? It fell out, because the government interfered too much with the private sector. The Dems said for years, "we're in economic trouble!", until that's exactly what they got.

Do you want to point out which of Bush's policies caused the recession?
Click to expand...
Deregulation AND lack of regulatory oversight put this country on the downward spiral it's on today. First, Reagon deregulated the banking industry which lead to the S&L crisis and a near banking/housing collapse in 1998. Then Clinton w/Greenspan pushed cheap housing (mortgage loans) which at the time was the major economic engine the country had. From that, credit was vastly extended. It was this mechanism - credit lending - that put our economy in trouble. Too much uncollateralized debt!!! Too much risk!!!

Now, add to that an unfunded expansion of Medicare (Part D) and two very costly wars - one, of which we should never have started! - and that spells out how Bush contributed greatly to dismal economy. (You can also add in "No Child Left Behind" because it wasn't paid for either, but its impact isn't nearly as troublesome as Medicare and the two wars.)
 
Last edited:
Boo Radley said:
You have to do better than this. You have to link te media matters article and show them inaccrate. just having a commontator say they were inaccurate is not enough.
Click to expand...


Proving once again that you didn't listen to either one of the clips, because they talked about and showed the actual article.


j-mac
 
I wonder why no one uses this measure of unemployment. If anything it's more accurate.

Gallup Daily: U.S. Workforce

18.5 per cent underemployment.
 
j-mac said:
Proving once again that you didn't listen to either one of the clips, because they talked about and showed the actual article.


j-mac
Click to expand...

Yes, I did listen to them, both now and in the past. As I remember, we once showed that your clips were the inaccurate ones.

That said, you make no effort to show anything other than your clip, requring the listener to assume there is no rebuttal. Nor do you even seek a rebuttal, and people who do this are often easily swayed. I do not recommend that anyone accept media matters off hand, but I certainly don't think these type of talking heads should be accepted unchallenged. My problem with you is not in doubting media matters on any particular statement, but tha you take such weak evidence as the gospel. What you presentis more flawed than media matters.
 
phattonez said:
I wonder why no one uses this measure of unemployment. If anything it's more accurate.

Gallup Daily: U.S. Workforce

18.5 per cent underemployment.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure Gallup is the best source for this, but don't dispute at all that there is a large number of underemployed. And there has been for a long time now, getting worse and worse.
 
Boo Radley said:
I'm not sure Gallup is the best source for this, but don't dispute at all that there is a large number of underemployed. And there has been for a long time now, getting worse and worse.
Click to expand...


*Sigh* ok, what's the matter with Gallup?


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
*Sigh* ok, what's the matter with Gallup?


j-mac
Click to expand...

Nothing. It is what it is, a polling service. You have difficulty finding out factual things by opinion.

Did you read all I wrote?
 
Boo Radley said:
I'm not sure Gallup is the best source for this, but don't dispute at all that there is a large number of underemployed. And there has been for a long time now, getting worse and worse.
Click to expand...
What's wrong with Gallup? They weren't measuring opinion here, just the facts about someone's current situation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom