SanchoPanza
SanchoPanza
Joined: May 10, 2010
  • Threads: 34
  • Posts: 3416
February 13th, 2016 at 5:52:28 PM permalink
Quote: MichaelBluejay

Again, where's the part where you showed that unemployment is really 20-25%. You honestly think the excerpt you quoted in any way backs up that claim?

The figures presented take into account the participation falling below two-thirds of the labor force and that painful fact that the so-called created jobs missed 85 percent of the new workers. Of course, one would have to have some familiarity with U-3 and U-6 numbers, but that seems to be immaterial for quite a few people.

"The seasonally-adjusted SGS Alternate Unemployment Rate reflects current unemployment reporting methodology adjusted for SGS-estimated long-term discouraged workers, who were defined out of official existence in 1994. That estimate is added to the BLS estimate of U-6 unemployment, which includes short-term discouraged workers.

"The U-3 unemployment rate is the monthly headline number. The U-6 unemployment rate is the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS) broadest unemployment measure, including short-term discouraged and other marginally-attached workers as well as those forced to work part-time because they cannot find full-time employment.
Unemployment Data Series subcription required(Subscription required.) View Download Excel CSV File Last Updated: February 5th, 2016

"The ShadowStats Alternate Unemployment Rate for January 2016 is 22.9%."
HeySlick
HeySlick
Joined: Jan 13, 2015
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 277
February 13th, 2016 at 6:24:21 PM permalink
Quote: MichaelBluejay

Wrong.

EvenBob posted "Real unemployment at 20-25%".

ams288 replied, "Care to provide a source?"

Then YOU QUOTED AMS288's "Care to provide a source?", and then posted an ostensible answer right below it. Which it's not. Why on earth would you quote it if you weren't talking about it?



No. Like I said, you don't get to just move on to your next error before acknowledging your mistake about the previous one. I've been generous so far:

(1) I posted graphs showing the income inequality trend started way before Obama. You quoted the whole thing, including the graphs, and said, "You're completely wrong/mistaken." I asked you what part was supposedly wrong, and what your evidence was. You had nothing. But you didn't admit your error.

(2) You claimed that Obama divided the country on racial lines. I asked for specific examples of actual policy that supports that claim. Your answer was, "He's done it Subliminally." As though that would qualify as an answer on this planet.

(3) You purported to support the claim that real unemployment is 20-25%, but didn't actually do so. I asked for substantiation, and instead you said you never claimed that unemployment is 20-25%, and try to get me to scrutinize yet some other article.

So, three strikes you're out. You want to engage me, or get me to read something, you have to make a good-faith effort at backing up your positions or admitting when you can't do so. It's pointless to try to honestly debate someone who simply flits to the next misconception after losing every argument.




Here's the link for you and the page number is 5 - scroll down the page and you'll see I NEVER quoted ams288 EVER -- you have no integrity and, give-up on the bogus insinuations/and accusations!

http://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/free-speech-zone/24471-barack-obama-yes-it-has-been-spectacular/5/
MichaelBluejay
MichaelBluejay
Joined: Sep 17, 2010
  • Threads: 29
  • Posts: 797
February 13th, 2016 at 9:46:09 PM permalink
Quote: HeySlick

Here's the link for you and the page number is 5 - scroll down the page and you'll see I NEVER quoted ams288 EVER -- you have no integrity and, give-up on the bogus insinuations/and accusations!



I see now that I mistakenly thought you were the one who quoted ams288, not SanchoPanza. I apologize for my error.

See, that's what a rational person does when presented with incontrovertible evidence that they were wrong: they own up to it. Yet you think I "have no integrity". Right.

In any event, I still contend that your preferred method of debating is to provide no evidence, ignore overwhelming contrary evidence when presented, and then quickly try to change the topic to some other ridiculous claim as though your previous errors never happened. That's just tiresome. I won't play those kinds of games.
HeySlick
HeySlick
Joined: Jan 13, 2015
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 277
February 14th, 2016 at 7:19:54 AM permalink
Quote: MichaelBluejay

]I see now that I mistakenly thought you were the one who quoted ams288, not SanchoPanza. I apologize for my error.

See, that's what a rational person does when presented with incontrovertible evidence that they were wrong: they own up to it. Yet you think I "have no integrity". Right.

In any event, I still contend that your preferred method of debating is to provide no evidence, ignore overwhelming contrary evidence when presented, and then quickly try to change the topic to some other ridiculous claim as though your previous errors never happened. That's just tiresome. I won't play those kinds of games.




Thank you --- FYI being forthright isn't some kind of game to me --- (edit/add) I should of used anther term instead of INTEGRITY - you lost creditability when you insisted I made remarks I NEVER made.
MichaelBluejay
MichaelBluejay
Joined: Sep 17, 2010
  • Threads: 29
  • Posts: 797
February 14th, 2016 at 8:10:15 AM permalink
Quote: HeySlick

Thank you --- FYI being forthright isn't some kind of game to me --- (edit/add) I should of used anther term instead of INTEGRITY - you lost creditability when you insisted I made remarks I NEVER made.



First of all, it's credibility, not creditability, but I suppose irony means nothing to you. In any event, on this planet, someone typically loses credibility when they make a big mistake, tell a big lie, or have a pattern of telling minor falsehoods. Making a single small mistake and owning up to it doesn't typically affect credibility with rational people, but if you say otherwise, then I propose that says a lot more about you than me.

In any event, repeatedly changing the topic when you're losing an argument isn't being forthright, it's either exceptionally poor argumentative skills or intentionally playing games. I won't play.
HeySlick
HeySlick
Joined: Jan 13, 2015
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 277
February 14th, 2016 at 8:34:24 AM permalink
Quote: MichaelBluejay

First of all, it's credibility, not creditability, but I suppose irony means nothing to you. In any event, on this planet, someone typically loses credibility when they make a big mistake, tell a big lie, or have a pattern of telling minor falsehoods. Making a single small mistake and owning up to it doesn't typically affect credibility with rational people, but if you say otherwise, then I propose that says a lot more about you than me.

In any event, repeatedly changing the topic when you're losing an argument isn't being forthright, it's either exceptionally poor argumentative skills or intentionally playing games. I won't play.




A narcissist is never sorry because he (or she) perceives himself as perfect. He can’t be wrong. He views himself as superior to everyone and, thus, always right. I've already proven you like to jump to bogus conclusions.
HowMany
HowMany
Joined: Mar 22, 2013
  • Threads: 13
  • Posts: 482
February 14th, 2016 at 8:43:28 AM permalink
Quote: MichaelBluejay

Okay, exactly how has Obama divided the country on racial lines? Please cite specific examples of actual policy. You know, actual evidence based on reality, not unsubstantiated opinion pulled out of the air and declared as fact with nothing to support it.



Liberals always insist that someone else do their work for them. It's hilarious.
MichaelBluejay
MichaelBluejay
Joined: Sep 17, 2010
  • Threads: 29
  • Posts: 797
February 14th, 2016 at 8:54:26 AM permalink
Quote: HowMany

Liberals always insist that someone else do their work for them. It's hilarious.

It's not my work, it's your work, if you're the one making the claim. Apparently you're not only unfamiliar with the concept of burden of proof, but you're essentially bragging about that ignorance.

You're also breathtakingly missing the point that I believe there *is* no evidence to support the loony position. In other words, it's impossible for me to "do the work" to find evidence that doesn't exist.

Bottom line: positions which aren't supported are worthless.
MichaelBluejay
MichaelBluejay
Joined: Sep 17, 2010
  • Threads: 29
  • Posts: 797
February 14th, 2016 at 8:56:53 AM permalink
Quote: HeySlick

A narcissist is never sorry because he (or she) perceives himself as perfect. He can’t be wrong. He views himself as superior to everyone and, thus, always right.

You sound like you're talking about yourself. I've shown that I readily admit error when shown to be wrong. You never have. Does your description sound more like you or like me?

Quote: HeySlick

I've already proven you like to jump to bogus conclusions.

What, because I misidentified who made a particular post? That's all you've got? Seriously? Sure, you win the debate crown for that, no question.
HeySlick
HeySlick
Joined: Jan 13, 2015
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 277
February 14th, 2016 at 9:24:00 AM permalink
Quote: MichaelBluejay

You sound like you're talking about yourself. I've shown that I readily admit error when shown to be wrong. You never have. Does your description sound more like you or like me?

What, because I misidentified who made a particular post? That's all you've got? Seriously? Sure, you win the debate crown for that, no question.




Here comes that entity you consistently avoid -- Subliminal messages/(aka) not being sincere even though they apologize for their actions. Seriously, you could have just said 'I'm sorry' and been done with it - NO, not you....you insisted on going on and on about how right you were about other issues....BS! pure narcissism.

  • Jump to: