Page 53 of 63 FirstFirst ... 3435152535455 ... LastLast
Results 521 to 530 of 628

Thread: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

  1. #521
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

    Quote Originally Posted by EpicDude86 View Post
    In this case, with his track record of posting countering evidence to your claim, you have a chance to prove this negative.
    I've made it clear that I make no claims about this and have no claims to back up. Don't take cheap shots.

  2. #522
    Traditionalist
    phattonez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    12-05-17 @ 03:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,072

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman View Post
    I've made it clear that I make no claims about this and have no claims to back up. Don't take cheap shots.
    You have no claims to back up? So then you think that the "jobs saved" statistic is baseless or at least a good guess and not empirical data?

    Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully. Psalm 24
    "True law is right reason in agreement with nature . . . Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature [and] will suffer the worst penalties . . ." - Cicero

  3. #523
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

    Quote Originally Posted by phattonez View Post
    You have no claims to back up? So then you think that the "jobs saved" statistic is baseless or at least a good guess and not empirical data?
    No, because that would be YOUR claim that YOU would need to back up.

    I think that nobody on this thread knows whether the jobs saved statistic is good or not. Not me, not you.

  4. #524
    Traditionalist
    phattonez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    12-05-17 @ 03:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,072

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman View Post
    No, because that would be YOUR claim that YOU would need to back up.
    I can't prove a negative. If I challenge you to provide the methodology behind the numbers and you can't provide it, then it casts a ton of doubt into the numbers.

    I think that nobody on this thread knows whether the jobs saved statistic is good or not. Not me, not you.
    I think everyone knows that it is bad because no one is jumping in to help defend you on this.

    Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully. Psalm 24
    "True law is right reason in agreement with nature . . . Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature [and] will suffer the worst penalties . . ." - Cicero

  5. #525
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

    Quote Originally Posted by phattonez View Post
    I can't prove a negative.
    It's not a negative. But whatever - if you don't want to make a claim or can't, don't.

    If I challenge you to provide the methodology behind the numbers and you can't provide it, then it casts a ton of doubt into the numbers.
    No it doesn't. Perhaps I simply don't want to take on your challenge. Which I don't. It proves nothing. I am not the official spokesman for the stimulus.

    I think everyone knows that it is bad because no one is jumping in to help defend you on this.
    Ah, another logical fallacy.

    Perhaps they see that I'm doing a bangup job. Or perhaps, just perhaps, they realize you're being silly by continuing to pursue this.

    Sorry to disappoint you, but I'm just not interested in working on this. Nor explaining why any further.
    Last edited by misterman; 12-20-09 at 11:59 PM.

  6. #526
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Epic Mountain
    Last Seen
    12-28-09 @ 06:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,384

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman View Post
    I've made it clear that I make no claims about this and have no claims to back up. Don't take cheap shots.
    It's not a cheap shot, just saying that you haven't posted any countering evidence and only requested that he produce some sort of evidence. The funny thing is neither of you are producing evidence you're just talking about how the other should produce some evidence.

  7. #527
    Traditionalist
    phattonez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    12-05-17 @ 03:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,072

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

    Quote Originally Posted by EpicDude86 View Post
    It's not a cheap shot, just saying that you haven't posted any countering evidence and only requested that he produce some sort of evidence. The funny thing is neither of you are producing evidence you're just talking about how the other should produce some evidence.
    Well it is kind of hard to find evidence that someone is making up numbers. For instance, I could claim that Barack Obama killed 10 people yesterday. Prove me wrong. Kind of hard to do isn't it?

    But I digress. I have some evidence.
    Job Numbers Nonsense | Unemployment | Underemployment | Stimulus Package | SwiftEconomics.com

    Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully. Psalm 24
    "True law is right reason in agreement with nature . . . Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature [and] will suffer the worst penalties . . ." - Cicero

  8. #528
    Traditionalist
    phattonez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    12-05-17 @ 03:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,072

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman View Post
    It's not a negative. But whatever - if you don't want to make a claim or can't, don't.
    This nonsense again? Anyway, I have a link for you to respond to now. Go nuts.

    Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully. Psalm 24
    "True law is right reason in agreement with nature . . . Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature [and] will suffer the worst penalties . . ." - Cicero

  9. #529
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

    Quote Originally Posted by phattonez View Post
    This nonsense again? Anyway, I have a link for you to respond to now. Go nuts.
    No thanks. What part of I'm not interested in debating this do you not understand?

  10. #530
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,263

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

    Quote Originally Posted by phattonez View Post
    But who is buying treasury bonds these days?
    Foreigner entities, central banks, and various financial institutions.
    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

Page 53 of 63 FirstFirst ... 3435152535455 ... 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
  •