Michael Stuart Kelly Posted January 6, 2017 Share Posted January 6, 2017 The headline says it all: ELECTORAL COLLEGE MAKES IT OFFICIAL: TRUMP WINS PRESIDENCY Anticlimax, I know, but it still feels good. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jules Troy Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 "But why is the rum gone?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merjet Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 Billionaire George Soros Lost Nearly $1 Billion in Weeks After Trump Election A WSJ on-line subscription is needed to read the whole article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 4 minutes ago, merjet said: Billionaire George Soros Lost Nearly $1 Billion in Weeks After Trump Election A WSJ on-line subscription is needed to read the whole article. He still has plenty of money left. For Soros, a billion $$$$ is chump-change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merjet Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 At his press conference Jan. 11 Trump said: "And if our politicians had what it takes, they would have done this years ago and you'd have millions more workers right now in the United States, that are 96 million really wanting a job and they can't get. You know that story. The real number. That's the real number." Link. (The quote is at about 47:25 in the video.) 96 million unemployed when the USA population is about 325 million?! There is a basis for this number, but Trump's remark remains ridiculous. The Bureau of Labor Statistics tracks a number Not in Labor Force that is about 96 million now (link). However, the people counted are not "really wanting a job and they can't get [one]." Not in the labor force is defined here, from which I quote: "Since the mid-1990s, typically fewer than 1 in 10 people not in the labor force reported that they want a job." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 5 hours ago, merjet said: There is a basis for this number, but Trump's remark remains ridiculous. Merlin, I agree with this up to a point. Since the Bureau of Labor Statistics itself is a ridiculous sinecure division of the government which has the sole practical purpose of employing useless bureaucrats (and, boy, do they like their salaries! ), any statement--left, right or center--based on statistics and/or other statements coming from that Bureau is ridiculous. Substance-wise, it's almost like citing Alice in Wonderland as grounds for a statement about macro-economics. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merjet Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 MSK, if you don't like the BLS's statistics, here is an alternative. His primers are free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 Pilgrim, I watched “THE TRUMP” press conference and couldn’t stop tittering. OK, it was a really huge laugh, since I don’t giggle . . . . and it was followed by several minutes of chortling. Heads up. Rubio, McCain, and mimsy Lindsay. And The Press, Russia, China, Mexico, The CIA, The FBI, domestic terrorists and ISIS. A straight shooting man with cojones is about to enter office, so I would not piss him off. You have been warned. President Donald Trump, like Ronaldo Maximus, is going to make patriotic Americans very proud of their country. Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 58 minutes ago, merjet said: MSK, if you don't like the BLS's statistics, here is an alternative. His primers are free. Merlin, LOL... All I've seen is the byline so far: Quote Analysis Behind and Beyond Government Economic Reporting An analysis and riff off of government stats? You think that's better? Let me go vulgar a minute and use the language of motion picture promotion. If you polish a turd, you've still got a turd. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merjet Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 8 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: You think that's better? I invite you to show me something better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 13 minutes ago, merjet said: I invite you to show me something better. Merlin, I would probably do like the politicians do during election time: go out and use your eyes and ears. Look at how people have to live and talk to them. Any scientist (except climate scientists ) will tell you that observation is fundamental. Math has to connect to reality if you want to deal with reality. And you don't prove something is real with math. You prove that fundament with observation. After all, if one is going to purport to collect stats on all these people and claim this to be the truth, observing them instead of observing other stats or what self-proclaimed experts say about them is a great start. My favorite tactic from government-based stats experts is that they observe their salaries and who has power over those numbers with great attention, then wiggle all the other stats around that. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merjet Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 10 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: After all, if one is going to purport to collect stats on all these people and claim this to be the truth, observing them instead of observing other stats or what self-proclaimed experts say about them is a great start. Tell that to Trump. He cited the 96 million as the "real number" of people looking for jobs and can't find them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 21 minutes ago, merjet said: Tell that to Trump. He cited the 96 million as the "real number" of people looking for jobs and can't find them. Merlin, I can assure you he personally looked at and talked to a lot more people in the last couple of years than the sum of all of your esteemed government stats sinecurists ever did in their entire bubble-harbored lives. Trump probably cited the 96 million number from the mighty stats-jockeys because that was the only number they cooked up that looked anywhere near the reality he saw. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 2 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Trump probably cited the 96 million number from the mighty stats-jockeys because that was the only number they cooked up that looked anywhere near the reality he saw. Nah... on second thought. Trump probably didn't do that. I think it's more likely he's just looking at a problem, figuring out how to fix it, and saying any old thing to get all those yapping sinecurists out of his way while he gets some actual work done. He quotes them because they love talking about themselves and that will keep them busy for a while. (Oops... there I go again...) Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merjet Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 19 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: the sum of all of your esteemed government stats sinecurists ever did MSK, you have a bad habit of trying to cram your words into my mouth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 Merlin, Granted, I make inferences based on the glee you show when criticizing Trump. I'm being a little harsh, I guess, but the lesson is the same as for the man-made climate change thing. When a group of professionals constantly lies to the public and manipulates things--then gets found out, nothing they do or say gets taken seriously after that. Not until they earn their respect back. And that's going to take some time, that is if there is an actual effort on their part to show some integrity instead of playing more word and number games. You may take government stats folks seriously. You may respect them (which I infer since you even referred me to one). I don't. You may produce a big fat silence when people talk about seeing things with your own eyes and ears as a standard. I don't. If you want to bash Trump, go ahead. But if you want to bash him and imply that these government stats folks are the standard you are using, I'm sorry, but I just can't take that seriously. My eyes and ears are far more valid to me than second-hand info from proven liars. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merjet Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 27 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: If you want to bash Trump, go ahead. But if you want to bash him and imply that these government stats folks are the standard you are using, I'm sorry, but I just can't take that seriously. I see. Trump erroneously cites government stats as "real numbers", but I am the one who deserves the blame for relying on government stats even an iota. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolf DeVoon Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 Not just Trump, nor was he first to say 95 million Not In Workforce 33 minutes ago, merjet said: Trump erroneously cites the government stats CNBC, Jan. 2 http://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/02/95-million-american-workers-not-in-us-labor-force.html There's a disincentive to work. 43 million receive Food Stamps, 65 million in Medicaid http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-11-27/when-work-punished-tragedy-americas-welfare-state ... or do no work and scrape along on $45,000 in benefits, plus a little dope dealing or prostitution Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 25 minutes ago, merjet said: ... but I am the one who deserves the blame for relying on government stats even an iota. Merlin, I wouldn't call it blame. But calling Trump ridiculous while accepting the ridiculous government stats as legit and correct shows a clear bias. There's nothing wrong with being biased. We all are in this and that. If you hate Trump or have contempt for him, my suggestion is to own it. But, hell, do as you please. As will I... Seven more days... seven more days... Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merjet Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 8 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: But calling Trump ridiculous while accepting the ridiculous government stats as legit and correct shows a clear bias. ..... If you hate Trump or have contempt for him, my suggestion is to own it. But, hell, do as you please. Are you trying to say that Trump wasn't ridiculous when he said there were 96 million people looking for a job but can't find one? As I have said many times, I do not fit your false dichotomy of there are only Trump-haters and Trump-lovers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 18 minutes ago, merjet said: Are you trying to say that Trump wasn't ridiculous when he said there were 96 million people looking for a job but can't find one? Merlin, Yes. He's not playing stats. He's playing public perception games to counter other people who play public perception games. The thing is, he's winning. He's president-elect. Ask anyone who's out of a job if they give a hoot who says what number. And once they get a job, one that Trump will help appear (which is why they voted for him), ask them if they think he's ridiculous. On the contrary, they think he rocks. The other folks don't count. They didn't vote for him, don't like him, and will never understand that he's a producer, not a gotcha artist. And they've lied their asses off about stats for decades. They will never understand that their game of replacing gotcha for reality in the government is one of the big reasons the other folks are out of a job. Frankly, I don't think they understand why Trump won. They think he's ridiculous... Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merjet Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 1 hour ago, merjet said: Are you trying to say that Trump wasn't ridiculous when he said there were 96 million people looking for a job but can't find one? 54 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Yes. He's not playing stats. Trump cites a government-made statistic (96 million people), a statistic that he obviously failed to understand, but according to you he wasn't ridiculous. Gimme a break. The population of the USA is about 325 million people. 96/325 implies an unemployment rate of 29.5%, even including infants and toddlers in the denominator! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolf DeVoon Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 56 minutes ago, merjet said: Trump cites a government-made statistic (96 million people) Yup. https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS15000000 325 total - 17 million under age 17 = 308 adults - 40 million over age 70 = available adult workforce of 238 million In 2015, 121.5 million were employed on a full-time basis, less now, so let's say 120 million = 50% unemployed or part-time recent estimate: 20% of total employed are part-time, therefore total employed: 150 million = 37% unemployed 52 percent of U.S. households—more than half—now receive benefits from the government (Jul 2014) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 Merlin, You claimed I put ideas in your head, but you are very quick to put ideas into Trump's head. I don't think you have a clue what he is doing. Not a clue. If you did, you would not be laughing at him. You would be laughing at the people who think like you do right now. Rush Limbaugh, for instance, says a person should not be allowed to enjoy himself as much as he is doing watching the reactions to Trump, especially on things like you are talking about. Rush sees what I see and he also says people who make your kind of objection don't have a clue. They are judging Trump according to standards they have always used, and they don't understand why those standards don't apply anymore. So all they can do is repeat and try again after each cigar blows up in their faces. They don't see the standards Trump plays by, so they think he's a failure and ridiculous when he keeps winning over and over. See this one, for instance, where he calls the gotcha folks Wile E. Coyote. Hell, even you are getting your own information from the Acme Bureau of Labor Statistics. The link I just gave you is not about that particular job market number you find so much merriment in, but the principle is the same: the older comfortable standard is wrong for evaluating Trump correctly. I know Rush has commented on that number before, but I'm not going to waste my time looking it up. If you are interested, seek over there and ye shall find. I know there's stuff because I've heard him talk about it several times. He might use language you find more to your liking. But look at what you win with your merriment. It's a big fat zero. You win the right to say gotcha (maybe) and maybe feel a pleasant surge of vanity. Do you gain anything else? Money? Power? Sex? A productive job? Are you taking out Trump? Etc.? No, no, no, no and no. Etc. The fact is, you've got nothing with this. Meanwhile, look at what Trump has got. Anywho, enjoy yourself. I don't know what value there is in one-upmanship right now. It's starting to get old for me. We can go back and forth all day and I believe we will still be in the same spot. So I'm letting it go. I'm having fun, but I've got to do some writing on a project... Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merjet Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 5 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Merlin, You claimed I put ideas in your head, but you are very quick to put ideas into Trump's head. Wrong again. I showed what came out of Trump's mouth. I haven't claimed to read his mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now