• 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!

Top Ex-White House Economist Admits 94% Of All New Jobs Under Obama Were Part-Time

Re: Top Ex-White House Economist Admits 94% Of All New Jobs Under Obama Were Part-Tim

er uh Pol, I like how when you repeat your obedient "disbelief" of the BLS numbers you slip in the word "either". You try to give the impression you're open minded and don't believe 24% or 5%. You were not being skeptical when you first posted the "totally ridiculous but easily believed by conservatives" 24% number. You were obediently casting aspersions on the Obama economy and job numbers. here, read it yourself.



You used the 24% to make a statement. Now you post as if you never believed it. Seems dishonest to me. Anyhoo, I find it quite vile when people knowingly push narratives that they know have no basis in fact. Be it "the president was born in Kenya" or "he wants to kill old people" or "the BLS is lying". they are simply putting their agenda ahead of integrity and America.

Vern, what I posted was that, IMO, I don't believe either number is accurate, so why are you claiming that I said otherwise? :thumbdown:
 
Re: Top Ex-White House Economist Admits 94% Of All New Jobs Under Obama Were Part-Tim

Vern, what I posted was that, IMO, I don't believe either number is accurate, so why are you claiming that I said otherwise? :thumbdown:

good job not responding to my point. You do that better than most if not all conservative (and conservative like posters). You only alluded to not believing the "totally ridiculous but easily believed by conservatives" 24% number when called out. When you first posted the "totally ridiculous but easily believed by conservatives" 24% number you used it to obediently flail at the Obama economy and the BLS. Here read your post

how can they honestly tell us that unemployment is at 5%, or 3% or whatever other number they choose to report? I read recently that the number of unemployed is closer to 24% nationally, so how is this a vibrant economy, unless "vibrant " means something other than what it used to mean in the past!


Now instead of obediently reiterating the false conservative narrative that "the BLS is lying about UE", please explain why you post it. this is a debate forum. It's not a chat room and it's not an echo chamber.
 
Re: Top Ex-White House Economist Admits 94% Of All New Jobs Under Obama Were Part-Tim

So, I once had a temporary assignment where I worked Monday-Saturday, midnight -10 am.
Since that is certainly only part of Mom-Fri 9-5, by your interpretation, I was only working part time, even though I was working 60 hours/week. Or now, when I work Mon-Fri 7-3, that's part time (not many people in the D.C. area work 9-5)

Are you seriously going to defend your interpretation? And it seems a little presumptuous to ignore the definition the authors use for a definition nobody else uses but you, and apply it to their work.

Oh, and I

I did not read your reply...you know I am not getting into some silly, little discussion with you because your precious BLS has been attacked. You are not on my Ignore List for nothing.

I saw you post a statement to someone else, I corrected it.

The BLS part time definition is utter nonsense. It is a bureaucratic term...nothing else.

The actual part time definition is as I posted...every dictionary I checked agrees.

Thus the ZH article title is accurate (or is virtually impossible to be proven innacurate)...period.

You don't like it...take it up with someone else as I am not interested in debating a proven fact - or anything else - with you.

We are done here.


Happy New Year.
 
Re: Top Ex-White House Economist Admits 94% Of All New Jobs Under Obama Were Part-Tim

good job not responding to my point. You do that better than most if not all conservative (and conservative like posters). You only alluded to not believing the "totally ridiculous but easily believed by conservatives" 24% number when called out. When you first posted the "totally ridiculous but easily believed by conservatives" 24% number you used it to obediently flail at the Obama economy and the BLS. Here read your post




Now instead of obediently reiterating the false conservative narrative that "the BLS is lying about UE", please explain why you post it. this is a debate forum. It's not a chat room and it's not an echo chamber.

I can understand why she cant tell the difference. She is replying to you, after all.
 
Re: Top Ex-White House Economist Admits 94% Of All New Jobs Under Obama Were Part-Tim

I did not read your reply...you know I am not getting into some silly, little discussion with you because your precious BLS has been attacked. You are not on my Ignore List for nothing.

I saw you post a statement to someone else, I corrected it.

The BLS part time definition is utter nonsense. It is a bureaucratic term...nothing else.

The actual part time definition is as I posted...every dictionary I checked agrees.

Thus the ZH article title is accurate (or is virtually impossible to be proven innacurate)...period.

You don't like it...take it up with someone else as I am not interested in debating a proven fact - or anything else - with you.

We are done here.


Happy New Year.

I find this fascinating. He says he didn't read my post, which implies that he saw that I had posted, clicked on reply, wrote his reply with my quoted post there in the window, and yet didn't read any of it.

Now there are plenty of posts I don't read, but it's never occurred to me to reply to them, and I don't think I could without reading them.

Also interesting is that he's accusing me of replying in defense of BLS. But I have not done so at all in this thread. I have in no way supported or commented on the BLS definition of part time. That the authors are using the BLS definition is irrelevant. If they used a different definition, I would have commented on and used that one.

What I suspect is that DA60 realized that by his use of part time, that people working well over 40 hours/week would be "part time" as long as they didn't work traditional hours. He has to know that's ridiculous, but he seems incapable of admitting error. His insanely long ignore list (which he selectively abandons) is clear evidence of his fear of opposing views.
 
Re: Top Ex-White House Economist Admits 94% Of All New Jobs Under Obama Were Part-Tim

Vern, what I posted was that, IMO, I don't believe either number is accurate, so why are you claiming that I said otherwise? :thumbdown:

Maybe you do not know Vern. But he is, imo, obsessed with liberal agendas. And when he cannot disprove what someone who is attacking Obama/democrats is saying...he will attack them personally.

It is SOP for him. And I am not the only one who knows it.

I generally just smile and nod and ignore him.

I certainly do not take him seriously in the slightest.

I suggest you do the same...but it is up to you.
 
Re: Top Ex-White House Economist Admits 94% Of All New Jobs Under Obama Were Part-Tim

Maybe you do not know Vern. But he is, imo, obsessed with liberal agendas. And when he cannot disprove what someone who is attacking Obama/democrats is saying...he will attack them personally.

It is SOP for him. And I am not the only one who knows it.

I generally just smile and nod and ignore him.

I certainly do not take him seriously in the slightest.

I suggest you do the same...but it is up to you.

Oh DA, that’s precious. Posting facts is my SOP. Ignoring the facts and then whining about Vern (and in double space bullet format) is SOP for conservatives (and posters who lack the courage to admit they’re conservative). And if you ignore me as you claim how come you’re still desperately trying to rationalize the lies in the title of the lying editorial? Now let’s look at what you’re ignoring in your latest whine.

Polgara, posted her usual “I agree with (put conservative narrative here) and don’t forget about (put other conservative narrative here)” post. She posted “she read” UE was 24% and then used it to flail obediently at that Obama economy. When called out on her “totally ridiculous yet easily believed by conservatives” 24% number she tried to pretend she didn’t believe it either. Not only do I find that dishonest on her part but also typical.

And by the way, she knows what she posts is not true when she posts it. You find out after you post it. And see how quickly she back tracks from the "totally ridiculous yet easily believed by conservatives” 24% number? You’re still flailing about with “nuh uh, if you ignore what the report actually says and squint your eyes just right, the editorial isn’t lying”.
 
Re: Top Ex-White House Economist Admits 94% Of All New Jobs Under Obama Were Part-Tim

Yeah, Your almost exclusive reliance on alt-DOOM, Zero-Cred/Zero-Hedge is obsessive.
Zero Hedge and "thoughts" SIX in a row.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_Hedge

Zero Hedge is an English-language financial blog that aggregates news and presents editorial opinions from original and outside sources. The news portion of the site is written by a group of editors who collectively write under the Pseudonym "Tyler Durden" (a character from the novel and film Fight Club).

Critics assert that Zero Hedge's content is Conspiratorial, Anti-establishment, and Economically Pessimistic,[3] and has been criticized for presenting Extreme and sometimes pro-Russian views.[1][4][5]
[......]
In 2009, shortly after the blog was founded, news reports identified Daniel Ivandjiiski, a Bulgarian-born former hedge-fund analyst who was Barred from the industry for Insider Trading by FINRA in 2008, as the Founder of the site, and reported that "Durden" was a Pseudonym for Ivandjiisk..."

"Thoughts"?
More in link.
slash/trash
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom