On January 08 2017 00:54 uiCk wrote:
I can't ignore that quote, you brought it up to make your argument (which btw u use after you tell me to ignore it)
my argument? how would you know what "argument" i'm making? all you do is post that you're confused and don't understand what's going on
the only reason i posted that number was because it was a simple, easy to understand way to demonstrate how out of place and meaningless the numbers krugman brought up are
On January 08 2017 00:54 uiCk wrote:
So how you get the 2 mil figure ?
Total jobs hiers (openings filled , whatever term you want) - Total jobs loss (fired due to jizzing, lost job to Juan in tequila country, company failure) ?
what do you mean how do i get it? open a newspaper and ask for the 2016 jobs report
So monthly jobs report is not jobs added - jobs lost (encompassing everything)?
I wouldn't be confused if you would explain yourself clearly, because IMO I have feeling you talking out of your ass.
Your argument being that "involuntary job loss" is BS num that has nothing to do with "job loss out of the economy" (which is what Trump is trying to do), using jobs reports to prove a point (which makes no sense) + insults and angryness
I wish one of your guys had children if I could kick them in the fucking head or stomp on their testicles so you can feel my pain because thats the pain I have waking up everyday -- Mike Tyson
He did have a point, he just went overboard with it, as he usually does. Santafairy sadly completely disregards opinions that are not the same as his if he finds any mistake at all to them, even if they have truth to them.
The article just shows how populistic behaviour works and gains popularity while praying on the simple minded with insignificant acts.
1
Santafairy Korea (South). Jan 10 2017 22:41. Posts 2226
On January 08 2017 00:54 uiCk wrote:
I can't ignore that quote, you brought it up to make your argument (which btw u use after you tell me to ignore it)
my argument? how would you know what "argument" i'm making? all you do is post that you're confused and don't understand what's going on
the only reason i posted that number was because it was a simple, easy to understand way to demonstrate how out of place and meaningless the numbers krugman brought up are
On January 08 2017 00:54 uiCk wrote:
So how you get the 2 mil figure ?
Total jobs hiers (openings filled , whatever term you want) - Total jobs loss (fired due to jizzing, lost job to Juan in tequila country, company failure) ?
what do you mean how do i get it? open a newspaper and ask for the 2016 jobs report
I wouldn't be confused if you would explain yourself clearly, because IMO I have feeling you talking out of your ass.
why are you still posting about this? it's all there if you read. you haven't added or followed anything since dropping the op ed into thread
On January 10 2017 19:29 uiCk wrote:
Your argument being that "involuntary job loss" is BS num that has nothing to do with "job loss out of the economy" (which is what Trump is trying to do),
why are you calling that an argument without creating a thought of your own? you haven't added a single one since dumping the article, just flung tomatoes. it's not the government's job to stop a waitress from getting fired from shoney's and moving to applebee's. and it shouldn't be. it's not an issue. we don't want the economy to stop churning, we want there to be movement within it.
On January 10 2017 19:29 uiCk wrote:
using jobs reports to prove a point (which makes no sense)
i'm not responsible for this repeatedly going over your head, don't look at me and go "so what?" just because it's taken you a week and 20 posts to start to get something, that's on you
trump: "there's good news we kept some jobs from going to mexico"
krugman: "Oh yeah? Then how come 75,000 people were involuntarily separated from their jobs that day? 1100 is a drop in the bucket compared to that LOL BTFO"
barack obama: "hey guys there's good news the economy grew by 2 million jobs this year"
krugman: "Oh yeah? Then how come 18 million people were involuntarily separated from their jobs? 2 million is a drop in the bucket compared to that LOL BTFO"
oh but that's different becau- YES, it's different, it's not related in either case, that's the point. it's just a big number meant to dazzle you. krugman is misleading in a way that shouldn't be hard to realize if you take 5% of the time spent baiting me and think critically. these aren't insults, you're better than this, i believe you can figure it out
It seems to be not very profitable in the long run to play those kind of hands. - Gus Hansen
Yeah, but still 800 jobs saved is quite an insignificant amount to US's economy for that to be dealt with by the president-elect himself....
Both ways taken are meant to accomplish the same goal, its just by different people presenting different perspective. One is misleading, other is time well wasted.
Meanwhile, Obama still accuses Putin and still no fucking evidence has been shown anywhere by anyone. I hope Americans don't stick their heads in the sand. I do not know whats the political gain for democrats/USA by this. While it would "weaken" Russia's positions worldwide, they d perform a hari-kari on a local level by implying its Putin that elected Trump. I really do not see any meaningful gain out of this for any american, so what the fuck are they doing, even if it were true, which obviously isn't as Assange has pointed out and as they are not providing any evidence, why the fuck would they make it public ever.... thats a rhetorical question, I just do not see where this political move is going and what is it trying to accomplish, cuz undermining Putin and Republicans just seems like a silly goal and things are never that simple
On January 08 2017 00:54 uiCk wrote:
I can't ignore that quote, you brought it up to make your argument (which btw u use after you tell me to ignore it)
my argument? how would you know what "argument" i'm making? all you do is post that you're confused and don't understand what's going on
the only reason i posted that number was because it was a simple, easy to understand way to demonstrate how out of place and meaningless the numbers krugman brought up are
On January 08 2017 00:54 uiCk wrote:
So how you get the 2 mil figure ?
Total jobs hiers (openings filled , whatever term you want) - Total jobs loss (fired due to jizzing, lost job to Juan in tequila country, company failure) ?
what do you mean how do i get it? open a newspaper and ask for the 2016 jobs report
I wouldn't be confused if you would explain yourself clearly, because IMO I have feeling you talking out of your ass.
why are you still posting about this? it's all there if you read. you haven't added or followed anything since dropping the op ed into thread
On January 10 2017 19:29 uiCk wrote:
Your argument being that "involuntary job loss" is BS num that has nothing to do with "job loss out of the economy" (which is what Trump is trying to do),
why are you calling that an argument without creating a thought of your own? you haven't added a single one since dumping the article, just flung tomatoes. it's not the government's job to stop a waitress from getting fired from shoney's and moving to applebee's. and it shouldn't be. it's not an issue. we don't want the economy to stop churning, we want there to be movement within it.
On January 10 2017 19:29 uiCk wrote:
using jobs reports to prove a point (which makes no sense)
i'm not responsible for this repeatedly going over your head, don't look at me and go "so what?" just because it's taken you a week and 20 posts to start to get something, that's on you
You're the one who initiated a disagreement, by making assumptions on my reasoning (which I didn't post, making this even more odd)
trump: "there's good news we kept some jobs from going to mexico"
krugman: "Oh yeah? Then how come 75,000 people were involuntarily separated from their jobs that day? 1100 is a drop in the bucket compared to that LOL BTFO"
barack obama: "hey guys there's good news the economy grew by 2 million jobs this year"
krugman: "Oh yeah? Then how come 18 million people were involuntarily separated from their jobs? 2 million is a drop in the bucket compared to that LOL BTFO"
If this is what you got from that article, maybe you are the one with weak reading skills and making stuff up. Again, why bring up the 2 million.
oh but that's different becau- YES, it's different, it's not related in either case, that's the point. it's just a big number meant to dazzle you. krugman is misleading in a way that shouldn't be hard to realize if you take 5% of the time spent baiting me and think critically. these aren't insults, you're better than this, i believe you can figure it out
It's numbers to put things into perspective. The US economy is huge, there are millions of jobs movements a month, and 600-3000 (or whatever trumps.monthly job tally is) is a drop in the bucket in comparison YES.
Why do I think this is a PR move mostly and has little to do with his policy?
- Trump has never shown an ounce of economic / policy knowledge (he hiers people to do the thinking/crunching). The people he's hiering are pretty much all free market hawks, and doubt (a significant) protectionism (most likely some symbolic tariffs on some insignificant products) will be implemented (its counter to deregulation/freemarkets)
- "his" policy will rely on conventional rebublican policy: slash taxes, deregulate : financials and tech are winners, low education manufacturing is the loser (that's just how it is, unless the US is looking to go from a developed nations to a developing)
I wish one of your guys had children if I could kick them in the fucking head or stomp on their testicles so you can feel my pain because thats the pain I have waking up everyday -- Mike Tyson
Btw spitfire, what says you about Trump agreeing that Russia was behind the hacking (at least partially, because he likes to add that everyone is hacking the US)
I wish one of your guys had children if I could kick them in the fucking head or stomp on their testicles so you can feel my pain because thats the pain I have waking up everyday -- Mike Tyson
1
Santafairy Korea (South). Jan 11 2017 18:49. Posts 2226
On January 08 2017 00:54 uiCk wrote:
I can't ignore that quote, you brought it up to make your argument (which btw u use after you tell me to ignore it)
my argument? how would you know what "argument" i'm making? all you do is post that you're confused and don't understand what's going on
the only reason i posted that number was because it was a simple, easy to understand way to demonstrate how out of place and meaningless the numbers krugman brought up are
On January 08 2017 00:54 uiCk wrote:
So how you get the 2 mil figure ?
Total jobs hiers (openings filled , whatever term you want) - Total jobs loss (fired due to jizzing, lost job to Juan in tequila country, company failure) ?
what do you mean how do i get it? open a newspaper and ask for the 2016 jobs report
I wouldn't be confused if you would explain yourself clearly, because IMO I have feeling you talking out of your ass.
why are you still posting about this? it's all there if you read. you haven't added or followed anything since dropping the op ed into thread
On January 10 2017 19:29 uiCk wrote:
Your argument being that "involuntary job loss" is BS num that has nothing to do with "job loss out of the economy" (which is what Trump is trying to do),
why are you calling that an argument without creating a thought of your own? you haven't added a single one since dumping the article, just flung tomatoes. it's not the government's job to stop a waitress from getting fired from shoney's and moving to applebee's. and it shouldn't be. it's not an issue. we don't want the economy to stop churning, we want there to be movement within it.
On January 10 2017 19:29 uiCk wrote:
using jobs reports to prove a point (which makes no sense)
i'm not responsible for this repeatedly going over your head, don't look at me and go "so what?" just because it's taken you a week and 20 posts to start to get something, that's on you
You're the one who initiated a disagreement, by making assumptions on my reasoning (which I didn't post, making this even more odd)
if you didn't want to or aren't capable of talking about the article that you posted, you didn't have to, nobody's forcing you to make 20 posts saying nothing, just unplug the keyboard
trump: "there's good news we kept some jobs from going to mexico"
krugman: "Oh yeah? Then how come 75,000 people were involuntarily separated from their jobs that day? 1100 is a drop in the bucket compared to that LOL BTFO"
barack obama: "hey guys there's good news the economy grew by 2 million jobs this year"
krugman: "Oh yeah? Then how come 18 million people were involuntarily separated from their jobs? 2 million is a drop in the bucket compared to that LOL BTFO"
If this is what you got from that article, maybe you are the one with weak reading skills and making stuff up. Again, why bring up the 2 million.
How old are you? Do you need someone to draw you a picture?
oh but that's different becau- YES, it's different, it's not related in either case, that's the point. it's just a big number meant to dazzle you. krugman is misleading in a way that shouldn't be hard to realize if you take 5% of the time spent baiting me and think critically. these aren't insults, you're better than this, i believe you can figure it out
It's numbers to put things into perspective. The US economy is huge, there are millions of jobs movements a month, and 600-3000 (or whatever trumps.monthly job tally is) is a drop in the bucket in comparison YES.
and the entire economy net grows by 2 million jobs per year. that's less than 18 million, which is the sophistic number of involuntary job separations brought up by krugman. so for any event or act of policy, this use of apples and oranges figures lets any jackass can come in and go "Yeah but that's nowhere near 18 million so it's bad" which is asinine. how do you still not see this when it's right in front of you and been repeated five times?
in no case are the numbers describing the same category of things, if you wanted an honest perspective you or krugman would be trying to dig up the number of people who both get laid off and their job sent overseas (no, it doesn't literally mean over a sea, if the job goes to mexico that's the same) and then whine about how he didn't save enough jobs and that he should have saved 0 and how that would have actually been better than saving 1k jobs because it's scam
It seems to be not very profitable in the long run to play those kind of hands. - Gus Hansen
Sounds good Santa, you didn't like the numbers he used (incomplete, paints wrong picture) and seem to say Krugman will be biased towards Trump no matter what.
I wish one of your guys had children if I could kick them in the fucking head or stomp on their testicles so you can feel my pain because thats the pain I have waking up everyday -- Mike Tyson
On January 11 2017 17:20 uiCk wrote:
Btw spitfire, what says you about Trump agreeing that Russia was behind the hacking (at least partially, because he likes to add that everyone is hacking the US)
If I were Trump I would've done that sooner, would be pretty braindead if he didn't come out with such a statement and would put pressure on himself. Obviously, he has to distance himself a bit now as false news or not, media is media and sheep are sheep.
Russia is definitely trying to push false information and gain secret intelligence through various means on a global scale including in the USA(it's something daily in my country for example as they are financing political parties and media to do their bidding and I'm guessing it's like that throughout whole Eastern Europe ). Information war is something standard between countries. I believe I even read somewhere that its how the Rotschilds gained their wealth at first, trading information in Germany I believe... dunno might be bullshit, but the thing is, its something standard
So is the USA and China. In this particular case, however, there is zero evidence STILL provided by any intelligence and someone like Julian Assange confirms that it is just false news spreading. The US gov issues statements like " Assange s opinion is not to be trusted" which is beyond fucking hilarious, coming from the people that basically did the same shit with Iraq " oh guys trust us we have this secret information we cannot reveal, but we gotta go into Iraq cuz of mass destruction weapons and shit.....*time passes* .... oh just joking guys ".
As Assange has pointed out, surely if he ever did a false move there would be tons of people to instantly point it out to discredit him instead of having false charges pressed against him...It's quite weird no one has shot him yet too, but I'm guessing he indeed does not go out of the embassy at all
Also liberals managed to make a complete joke out of the whole political belief system in a matter of months. I cannot believe such imbeciles have such power in such a movement. Glad this is happening so the trash gets carried out, financial elite wont accept such stupidity.
So I didn't blindly trust the 4chan claim either as they still haven't supplied any proof of the fake news either, however after reading various sites ( been researching few days in a row) I've seen a bunch of people that claim to be 4chan lurkers/posters to say that the first time someone mentioning that they re working on this is November 1st, which is much more proof than anyone has given so far.
The "report" info flow has allegedly begun in the late of July which still confirms what the 4chan user said he s been doing that since August - pretty close dates.
This is the biggest troll ever pulled off in the history of the internet. Those guys have set the bar so high now, that there s now way they ll beat it any time soon. The problem is americans are still pushing through with the story, which will bring nothing good. Can easily see this escalating into big internal conflict. I'm quite skeptical when it comes to such stuff, however, and hope it won't happen. Its amazing how far this has gone :/
Still awaiting proof from either side. I'd say 4chan has much more credibility than any agency in the USA though, those guys are info suppliers of the anonymous and Assange, but then again there have been some pretty nasty things there too so....
Then again an impeachment could push the country towards actual change since this system is obviously fucking retarded and this would push change into the political environment worldwide
Yep which brings the question, if its not 4chan, then how the hell does this dude post such info 3 months before the report goes out if its the work of spies ???
1
Santafairy Korea (South). Jan 15 2017 05:34. Posts 2226
