Erollisi Marr - The Nameless

Go Back   Erollisi Marr - The Nameless > NON EQ Stuff (Real life, other games, etc.) > Steam Vent


Reply
 
Add/Share Add/Share Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-22-2004, 09:29 AM   #26
Chiteng
Supporter
 
Chiteng's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 10,240
So your calling the papers liars? Trith?
__________________
It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster.

Voltaire

'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'

French Priest
Chiteng is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2004, 09:57 AM   #27
Trith
The lesser of two weevils
 
Trith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Shreveport, Louisiana
Posts: 3,490
Send a message via MSN to Trith
It's not the papers I'm calling liars...
Trith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2004, 09:58 AM   #28
Chiteng
Supporter
 
Chiteng's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 10,240
Well the papers HERE say that unemployment is going UP.
__________________
It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster.

Voltaire

'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'

French Priest
Chiteng is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2004, 10:02 AM   #29
Trith
The lesser of two weevils
 
Trith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Shreveport, Louisiana
Posts: 3,490
Send a message via MSN to Trith
Funny..they say going down here...and Florida..and Texas..and..oh nm you get the idea. In my search for articles earlier I was shocked to see how many articles from state news agencies were claiming huge DROPS in state-wide unemployment. Maybe if I get bored later I will try to compile them for you.

These were recent articles too..within last 2 months at the oldest.
Trith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2004, 10:03 AM   #30
Hormadrune
Sociopathic bully?
 
Hormadrune's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: PA
Posts: 11,895
Trith- you might want to read the articles you post. Not all bad news, but where's this robust job market you keep talking about?

From your CBS article (Newsmax is on par with World Weekly News and I won't be bothered with it anymore than you'd be bothered with me posting articles directly from MoveOn.org).

1) "At best, it's a wash," said Irwin Kellner, chief economist for CBS.MarketWatch.com and the Weller professor of economics at Hofstra University. "Realistically, people are not hiring."

2)"Despite numbers that were far stronger than expected in January, the labor market has to be described as stagnant," said Sophia Koropeckyj, an economist at Economy.com. "Most of the gains in January can be dismissed as due to seasonal factors."

3)...however, temporary help services cut 2,000 jobs in January, a sign that many firms do not feel the need to add even marginal workers to their workforce.


More relevant data than Trith's 2 month old article

In March, 1.99 million of the 8.35 million unemployed Americans had been out of work longer than 26 weeks, the highest percentage of long-term joblessness in 20 years. The figures do not include those who have given up looking for work.
Intriguing....
__________________
WoW-Ghostlands-US: Prae | sp | Prolonix | Horm | Ulfhednar | l
EQ: Hormadrune <Retired> <OFS> <CoI> <Affy> <CE>
Hormadrune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2004, 10:14 AM   #31
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
I am not required to die to drive. If people would be more careful and considerate of their alcoholism, no one would ever die from a DUI.

Huge difference you are trying to make apples into oranges and it won't work.
Reading comprehension got you baffled again Trith?

Nowhere did I say one manner of death was more or less justified or allowable than another. I said that one should not judge the means of death as a statistic. That devalues the lives of those lost. Not even close to what you are arguing.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2004, 10:14 AM   #32
Trith
The lesser of two weevils
 
Trith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Shreveport, Louisiana
Posts: 3,490
Send a message via MSN to Trith
There is only one thing that needs mentioning.

Unemployment down from 5.9 to 5.7
'nuff said.
Trith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2004, 10:20 AM   #33
Trith
The lesser of two weevils
 
Trith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Shreveport, Louisiana
Posts: 3,490
Send a message via MSN to Trith
Nowhere did I say one manner of death was more or less justified or allowable than another. I said that one should not judge the means of death as a statistic
And my point was very valid. In a war situation like we have now, why would anyone even bother with keeping statistics and touting them for political gains like the Dem's are doing now.

I couldn't help but laugh when I heard Senator Teddy "100 proof" Kennedy say just a few days ago "We have soldiers dieing in Iraq" blah blah blah..and it hit me that here is a man who has no clue. It's a war..soldiers die during wars. Why are the Dem's trying to make political gains out of a fact of life? Has this nation gone that fucking soft?
Trith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2004, 11:48 AM   #34
Sakkath
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: London, UK
Posts: 1,026
Originally Posted by Trith
(correct me if I'm wrong..but doesn't "fall" mean to do down..?)
Only if you're intelligent enough to interpret the data. The initial jobless claims is NOT the same as the unemployment rate. The initial jobless claim number is the number of NEWLY unemployed people that week. You claimed that 'unemployment is falling' (current tense). Looking at up-to-the-minute figures, the most recent of which was released this morning; I maintain that unemployment in the US is RISING.

It is true that unemployment fell from November to January, but that is before the numbers are seasonally adjusted (i.e. christmas jobs, esp in retail and tourism). Since then it has steadily RISEN with no declines.

I can counter your '5.9 to 5.7, nuff said' with '3.9 to 5.7' (3.9% being the unemployment rate the month before Bush took office). It's equally meaningless.

I hope that the unemployment situation in the US reverses, I'm confident that it will. But you are making yet another misleading statement.

Last edited by Sakkath; 04-22-2004 at 11:54 AM.
Sakkath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2004, 11:50 AM   #35
Sakkath
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: London, UK
Posts: 1,026
Originally Posted by Trith
Kennedy say just a few days ago "We have soldiers dieing in Iraq"
...
and it hit me that here is a man who has no clue.
Are you refuting his statement?
Sakkath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2004, 11:57 AM   #36
Trith
The lesser of two weevils
 
Trith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Shreveport, Louisiana
Posts: 3,490
Send a message via MSN to Trith
I'm refuting his use of it for political gains. Soldiers do two things in a war..they kill people and they get killed. Kennedy is attempting to con the public into thinking soliders ONLY kill..and that for them to lose lives in a war indicates failure.

It's cheap fucking politics..but coming from the likes of him..it's expected.
Trith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2004, 12:00 PM   #37
Sakkath
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: London, UK
Posts: 1,026
agreed, it's a cheap shot.

Kerryn, get the cif/flash ready whilst we wait for Trith to pipe up on US unemployment figures again.
Sakkath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2004, 02:16 AM   #38
Kerryn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Keren, Naboo
Posts: 1,030
Trith,

Arugments aside, what you're posting is that the unemployment rate is going down, not that it is negative.

So the amount of jobs being lost each month is decreasing but that still means jobs are being lost. When the unemployment rate is negative, only then are jobs being created.

It essence what you're saying is that 350,000 jobs lost in March is an improvement on the 375,000 lost in February but it's still 350,000 jobs lost. The economy is only booming when jobs are created. i.e. the number of people taking up gainful employment is higher then the amount of jobs lost.
Kerryn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2004, 09:00 AM   #39
Valleycrest
Defrocked Irish priest
 
Valleycrest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 659
Originally Posted by Kerryn
It essence what you're saying is that 350,000 jobs lost in March is an improvement on the 375,000 lost in February but it's still 350,000 jobs lost. The economy is only booming when jobs are created. i.e. the number of people taking up gainful employment is higher then the amount of jobs lost.
I'm not sure what how the data is calculated, however the "unemployment rate" that I'm familiar with is the amount people who are unemployed in an economy. In a capitalist economy there will always be people unemployed. In fact it's necessary. Just so where clear on what unemployed means, it's that portion of the workforce who WANTS work and does not have it, so a 5.9 to 5.7 change may not be that astounding. However, considering the amount of workers in the national work force probably just over 100 million, that number is significant. You can't have a negative unemployment rate, it's not possible to have 106% of the population employed.

The jobless claims index is a little different. Yes, 350,000 jobs were lost in March, but the index fails to show the amount of jobs gained which could have been 351,000 which would show a substantial improvement in the labor market.

Now, having said all of that, this "improvement" in the economy is not an accident. This is all part of the political economic cycle. It's an election year and an incumbent is seeking reelection. There is naturally going to be a boom in the economy. We've had expansionary fiscal an monetary policy for almost 3 years now, representing most of the time Bush has been in office. It's inevitable to see these types of improvements in the economy. Unfortunately, they come with a price, in this case we could see either substantial inflation or severe deficit issues or both in the next few years.

Originally Posted by bumbleroot
Wars are right or wrong based upon their ideology, not by the number of deaths, lack thereof, or the manner of atrocities.
This quote is a winner. If only things were this black and white. I could argue the position that we should never gone to war in any conflict the US has ever had. Wars aren't right or wrong or justified, it's always been a matter of whether the pros outweigh the cons. We've gone to war (Yes, the US) many times throughout our history when we shouldn't have. The UK, France, Spain, almost all of the European countries have also gone to war when they shouldn't have. Controversial wars and politics have always surrounded every war. Why should this one be any different?
Valleycrest 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 -8. The time now is 08:28 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.