GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-04-2013, 05:48   #21
Ruble Noon
"Cracker"
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 11,018
Quote:
Originally Posted by IvanVic View Post
You are either a blithering idiot, or just legitimately mentally handicapped. This has been explained to you I don't know how many times, and none of this has changed under this president, it's always worked that way.

What a foul little beastie you are. You and MZKBA go on believing that the actual number of unemployed is 7.8%. Funny that you guys don't post for a long while yet, when an unemployment thread opens, there you are. Do you have an alarm that alerts you to these threads?
Ruble Noon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2013, 08:29   #22
Cavalry Doc
MAJ (USA Ret.)
 
Cavalry Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 41,911


It's a small program, you can download it, a link is at the bottom of unemployment checks after the 20th week.

[/sarcasm]
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
--Gunhaver
Don't let the guys quoted above contact your reps more than you.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Cavalry Doc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2013, 09:14   #23
MZBKA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruble Noon View Post
What a foul little beastie you are. You and MZKBA go on believing that the actual number of unemployed is 7.8%. Funny that you guys don't post for a long while yet, when an unemployment thread opens, there you are. Do you have an alarm that alerts you to these threads?
To say that the "actual number of unemployed is 7.8%" doesn't make any sense. Do you think 7.8% of a person is unemployed?

If the unemployment rate is 7.8%, then 7.8% of the labor force is unemployed. This is what the unemployment rate measures. It's what the words "unemployment rate" has measured since before any of us were born. It's not the media's fault if you don't understand what unemployment numbers mean: It's your fault.

IvanVic is right: This has all been explained -- slowly -- to you in other threads. You either choose to ignore the definition, or you are incapable of understanding and processing new information.
MZBKA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2013, 09:17   #24
SPIN2010
Searching ...
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: On the move ... again!
Posts: 1,840
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happypuppy View Post
... They hit the magic age of 45 or so lost their job and no one wants to hire them. They now work in retail or at 7-11
If you can find that. I went to my own business model ... all bets are off.
SPIN2010 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2013, 09:26   #25
series1811
CLM Number
Enforcerator.
 
series1811's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Retired, but not expired.
Posts: 14,311
Quote:
Originally Posted by MZBKA View Post
The labor force is defined as the number of people working or looking for work.

The unemployment rate is defined as the percentage of the labor force that is not working.

If many unemployed people stop looking for work, even though they haven't found jobs,, the unemployment rate will drop. This may be counter-intuitive, but it is not the fault of the media -- it's just the definition of of unemployment rate.

If people are too ignorant to know what the unemployment rate tells us, it does not point to a giant conspiracy.
See, it's not that the definition of the word "unemployment" has been politically manipulated to avoid having to reveal the actual level of unemployment in this country. But, rather, the simple answer is that people who don't agree with it, or see how brilliant it is, are ignorant.

(Similiar to the ignorance of the people just too stupid to see how brilliant Obama's liberal policies are and how he is the only thing keeping us morons who didn't vote for him, from being in a real s**tstorm.)
__________________
I sure miss the country I grew up in.

Last edited by series1811; 02-04-2013 at 09:27..
series1811 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2013, 09:29   #26
series1811
CLM Number
Enforcerator.
 
series1811's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Retired, but not expired.
Posts: 14,311
Quote:
Originally Posted by MZBKA View Post
To say that the "actual number of unemployed is 7.8%" doesn't make any sense. Do you think 7.8% of a person is unemployed?
You can't make this stuff up. Does anyone still wonder how Obama got elected?
__________________
I sure miss the country I grew up in.
series1811 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2013, 09:52   #27
aircarver
Silver Membership
Ride Continues
 
aircarver's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Ft. Worth TX
Posts: 24,881


Quote:
Originally Posted by series1811 View Post
You can't make this stuff up. Does anyone still wonder how Obama got elected?
One wonders how he operates his 'Obamaphone' ...

.
__________________
They'd created a vast, permanently unemployed underclass, dependent upon the Republic's stupendous welfare machine for its very existence, and in so doing, they'd sown the seeds of their own destruction. No one could place two-thirds of a world's population on the Dole and keep them there forever without the entire system crashing . . . but how in hell did one get them off the Dole? -David Weber, Flag in Exile
aircarver is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2013, 09:59   #28
Cavalry Doc
MAJ (USA Ret.)
 
Cavalry Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 41,911



It's really not hard to understand, the books are being cooked to skew the numbers.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
--Gunhaver
Don't let the guys quoted above contact your reps more than you.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

Last edited by Cavalry Doc; 02-04-2013 at 10:39..
Cavalry Doc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2013, 10:32   #29
kirgi08
Silver Membership
Watcher.
 
kirgi08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Acme proving grounds.
Posts: 27,573
Blog Entries: 1


Ya reckon CD.'08.
__________________
I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6

If you look like food,You will be eaten.

Rip Chad.You will be missed.
kirgi08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2013, 11:05   #30
series1811
CLM Number
Enforcerator.
 
series1811's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Retired, but not expired.
Posts: 14,311
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc View Post
It's really not hard to understand, the books are being cooked to skew the numbers.
Liberals (here and at the MSM) seem to think that if they just keep saying that anyone who doesn't regard U-3 as the only true indicator of our unemployment situation, is ignorant, that substitutes for a reasonable argument.

It doesn't.
__________________
I sure miss the country I grew up in.

Last edited by series1811; 02-04-2013 at 11:06..
series1811 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2013, 16:41   #31
MZBKA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,691
Quote:
Originally Posted by series1811 View Post
See, it's not that the definition of the word "unemployment" has been politically manipulated to avoid having to reveal the actual level of unemployment in this country. But, rather, the simple answer is that people who don't agree with it, or see how brilliant it is, are ignorant.
If you think the unemployment numbers are calculated using the number of people on unemployment benefits, you believe something that's false - you're ignorant. It's not an insult, it's a fact.

Your claim is that the word unemployment is, under the Obama administration, being manipulated. How so? U-3 has been the reported unemployment rate since before you were born, and the methods for calculating the rate haven't changed since the 70s

Was it manipulative when the media reported the U-3 rate under Bush II? Clinton? Bush I? Reagan? Carter? Ford? Etc.

The last time you claimed something was being manipulated, it was the polls that showed Obama would win the election. The media was oversampling liberals, according to you. A big media conspiracy, according to you. In the end, you were wrong, the polls were right. I wish you'd been right, but there's a big difference between the world we live in and the world as I want it to be. Even if you want the unemployment rate to be higher or for there to be a big conspiracy, for whatever reason, it simply isn't the case.
MZBKA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2013, 16:43   #32
MZBKA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,691
Quote:
Originally Posted by series1811 View Post
Liberals (here and at the MSM) seem to think that if they just keep saying that anyone who doesn't regard U-3 as the only true indicator of our unemployment situation, is ignorant, that substitutes for a reasonable argument.

It doesn't.
Nobody here has said anything close to what you're claiming, Mr Strawman
MZBKA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2013, 17:27   #33
Cavalry Doc
MAJ (USA Ret.)
 
Cavalry Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 41,911


Quote:
Originally Posted by MZBKA View Post
Nobody here has said anything close to what you're claiming, Mr Strawman
So, you missed or didn't read & understand post number three in this thread.

Sorta funny in a sad sorta way.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
--Gunhaver
Don't let the guys quoted above contact your reps more than you.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

Last edited by Cavalry Doc; 02-04-2013 at 17:27..
Cavalry Doc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2013, 18:42   #34
IvanVic
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 3,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruble Noon View Post
You and MZKBA go on believing that the actual number of unemployed is 7.8%.
1) A simple % of the population without a job (regardless of whether they're looking for a job, etc.)

2) The unemployment rate

^These two things are not the same. Do you understand that?

If you don't, then nobody is going to be able to get through to you.

I do not think that the % of people without a job is 7.8%. I understand that the % of people without a job is much higher than 7.8%. However, since I have a fully functioning brain, I'm also able to simultaneously understand that the unemployment rate distinguishes between some of those people, and purposefully does not include some of them, which is why it's a smaller percentage.

It hasn't been done that way to fool you, it isn't some massive conspiracy to fool Ruble Noon. It has always been done that way (for several, statistically necessary reasons), and those of us who have achieved consciousness, and possibly a 2nd grade understanding of math, are able to understand two things at once. You know, that whole walking and chewing gum thing.
IvanVic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 09:06   #35
series1811
CLM Number
Enforcerator.
 
series1811's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Retired, but not expired.
Posts: 14,311
Quote:
Originally Posted by MZBKA View Post
If you think the unemployment numbers are calculated using the number of people on unemployment benefits, you believe something that's false - you're ignorant. It's not an insult, it's a fact.

Your claim is that the word unemployment is, under the Obama administration, being manipulated. How so? U-3 has been the reported unemployment rate since before you were born, and the methods for calculating the rate haven't changed since the 70s

Was it manipulative when the media reported the U-3 rate under Bush II? Clinton? Bush I? Reagan? Carter? Ford? Etc.

The last time you claimed something was being manipulated, it was the polls that showed Obama would win the election. The media was oversampling liberals, according to you. A big media conspiracy, according to you. In the end, you were wrong, the polls were right. I wish you'd been right, but there's a big difference between the world we live in and the world as I want it to be. Even if you want the unemployment rate to be higher or for there to be a big conspiracy, for whatever reason, it simply isn't the case.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MZBKA View Post
Nobody here has said anything close to what you're claiming, Mr Strawman
If that isn't the pot calling the kettle black.

I think you are rolling us all into one ball. I never claimed half that stuff you are saying.

Get a grip. You guys won. You can calm down now. The plan seems to be working.
__________________
I sure miss the country I grew up in.

Last edited by series1811; 02-05-2013 at 09:07..
series1811 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 10:28   #36
MZBKA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc View Post
So, you missed or didn't read & understand post number three in this thread.

Sorta funny in a sad sorta way.
I posted post number 3 in this thread. I understood it just fine. Series' post didn't address my post.
MZBKA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 13:46   #37
series1811
CLM Number
Enforcerator.
 
series1811's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Retired, but not expired.
Posts: 14,311
Quote:
Originally Posted by MZBKA View Post
I posted post number 3 in this thread. I understood it just fine. Series' post didn't address my post.
No, I did. But, as usual, you just didn't like what I said.

You guys will just have to settle for the 51 per cent of idiots who bought into the liberal's scam in this election. You're not going to do any better until more illegals get their citizenship.
__________________
I sure miss the country I grew up in.
series1811 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 16:10   #38
Ruble Noon
"Cracker"
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 11,018
Quote:
Originally Posted by IvanVic View Post
1) A simple % of the population without a job (regardless of whether they're looking for a job, etc.)

2) The unemployment rate

^These two things are not the same. Do you understand that?

If you don't, then nobody is going to be able to get through to you.

I do not think that the % of people without a job is 7.8%. I understand that the % of people without a job is much higher than 7.8%. However, since I have a fully functioning brain, I'm also able to simultaneously understand that the unemployment rate distinguishes between some of those people, and purposefully does not include some of them, which is why it's a smaller percentage.

It hasn't been done that way to fool you, it isn't some massive conspiracy to fool Ruble Noon. It has always been done that way (for several, statistically necessary reasons), and those of us who have achieved consciousness, and possibly a 2nd grade understanding of math, are able to understand two things at once. You know, that whole walking and chewing gum thing.
So you are now agreeing that the unemployment numbers do not tell the whole story.
I guess it was too much of a tax on your mush filled cranium to actually read the article. If you had, you might, emphasis on might, have gleaned the gist of the article which is the spin that is being put on these numbers by the obama admin, the MSM and the truth about the actual number of unemployed Americans via the labor force participation rate.

Here are some stats and a question from the article that you can peruse and answer

Quote:
First of all, lets take a look at the percentage of the civilian labor force that has been employed over the past several years. These numbers come directly from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. As you can see, this is a number that has been steadily falling since 20062006: 63.1
2007: 63.0
2008: 62.2
2009: 59.3
2010: 58.5
2011: 58.4
In January, only 57.9 percent of the civilian labor force was employed.
Do the numbers above represent a positive trend or a negative trend?
Even a 2nd grader could answer that question.
Anyhow, tell me about this alert system. Is it a GT function?
Ruble Noon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 16:13   #39
HarlDane
Senior Member
 
HarlDane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: San Joaquin Valley
Posts: 7,138
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruble Noon View Post
You and MZKBA go on believing that the actual number of unemployed is 7.8%.
Seriously, do you honestly think that anyone whose reading comprehension is above a 4th grade level actually believes that anyone has claimed the % of unemployed people is really 7.8% in this thread?

__________________
-HarlDane-
"Son of the San Joaquin"
The mediocre mind is incapable of understanding the man who refuses to bow blindly to conventional prejudices and chooses instead to express his opinions courageously and honestly. A. Einstein
HarlDane is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 16:16   #40
jakebrake
cracker
 
jakebrake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: too close to philly
Posts: 7,915
ruble, don't take this the wrong way, but...

a) we know the media couldn't tell the truth if their lives depended on it (and, i'm starting to wish it did)

and, b) in a way it's true. so many have lost unemployment comp, that they have found other ways to get free $ from the government .

i'm guessing closer to 17.8 in reality.
__________________
God made man, Sam Colt made us equal, John Moses Browning made us civilized... freemasons club Number 57
jakebrake is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:51.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,191
302 Members
889 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 16:42