jcd11235 0 #26 June 11, 2008 QuoteI guess both y'all need waaahmbulances... Not at all. We merely understand why your artificially modular analysis won't lead to conclusions valid in the real world.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #27 June 11, 2008 QuoteQuoteI guess both y'all need waaahmbulances... Not at all. We merely understand why your artificially modular analysis won't lead to conclusions valid in the real world. Too bad y'all couldn't realize that I wasn't asking for a real-world solution but consideration of the effect of a single, isolated input....even AFTER I repeated that half a dozen times. I guess reading really IS fundamental.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #28 June 11, 2008 QuoteToo bad y'all couldn't realize that I wasn't asking for a real-world solution but consideration of the effect of a single, isolated input....even AFTER I repeated that half a dozen times. I guess reading really IS fundamental. I understood it completely, just as I understood that your artificial limitations precluded drawing any useful conclusions except that your analysis would be virtually useless.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #29 June 11, 2008 QuoteQuoteToo bad y'all couldn't realize that I wasn't asking for a real-world solution but consideration of the effect of a single, isolated input....even AFTER I repeated that half a dozen times. I guess reading really IS fundamental. I understood it completely, just as I understood that your artificial limitations precluded drawing any useful conclusions except that your analysis would be virtually useless. Still ass-hurt because I wouldn't let you have your "but the government won't be able to pay the soldier" strawman argument? Let it go, dude - unless you're willing to prove that people that get their paycheck from a government source are going to continue to spend that money regardless of tax effects, JUST BECAUSE the check came from the government - because that's the ONLY way your argument makes sense.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #30 June 11, 2008 Quote Still ass-hurt because I wouldn't let you have your "but the government won't be able to pay the soldier" strawman argument? Look who's building straw men. Go ahead and find any reference I made to soldiers not getting paid anywhere in your bogus series of threads. Quote Let it go, dude - unless you're willing to prove that people that get their paycheck from a government source are going to continue to spend that money regardless of tax effects, JUST BECAUSE the check came from the government - because that's the ONLY way your argument makes sense. What are you talking about? My argument was that the modular premise of your analysis rendered your conclusions inaccurate for any real world economy.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #31 June 12, 2008 Quote Quote Still ass-hurt because I wouldn't let you have your "but the government won't be able to pay the soldier" strawman argument? Look who's building straw men. Go ahead and find any reference I made to soldiers not getting paid anywhere in your bogus series of threads. I beg your pardon, it was, indeed, someone else that was trying to say that the soldier wouldn't get paid. My apologies. Quote Quote Let it go, dude - unless you're willing to prove that people that get their paycheck from a government source are going to continue to spend that money regardless of tax effects, JUST BECAUSE the check came from the government - because that's the ONLY way your argument makes sense. What are you talking about? My argument was that the modular premise of your analysis rendered your conclusions inaccurate for any real world economy. By God, you're right - never MIND the fact that I stated over and over that it was theoretical and NOT real world - in that case, why did you even answer?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #32 June 12, 2008 QuoteBy God, you're right - never MIND the fact that I stated over and over that it was theoretical and NOT real world - in that case, why did you even answer? So you acknowledge that any conclusions that you might reach with your analysis are useless in the real world? Why bother with it at all?Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #33 June 12, 2008 QuoteQuoteBy God, you're right - never MIND the fact that I stated over and over that it was theoretical and NOT real world - in that case, why did you even answer? So you acknowledge that any conclusions that you might reach with your analysis are useless in the real world? Why bother with it at all? I stated from the beginning that the discussion was DELIBERATELY over simplified to isolate a specific variable and it's effect - are you acknowledging that your inability to understand that and subsequent argument was an attempt to derail the conversation?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #34 June 12, 2008 QuoteI stated from the beginning that the discussion was DELIBERATELY over simplified to isolate a specific variable and it's effect - are you acknowledging that your inability to understand that and subsequent argument was an attempt to derail the conversation? No, I'm saying your analysis didn't isolate any specific variable accurately. GIGO: Garbage in, garbage out.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #35 June 12, 2008 QuoteQuoteI stated from the beginning that the discussion was DELIBERATELY over simplified to isolate a specific variable and it's effect - are you acknowledging that your inability to understand that and subsequent argument was an attempt to derail the conversation? No, I'm saying your analysis didn't isolate any specific variable accurately. GIGO: Garbage in, garbage out. And yet, oddly enough, billvon and others WERE able to understand and respond with valid arguments within the parameters.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #36 June 12, 2008 Quote And yet, oddly enough, billvon and others WERE able to understand and respond with valid arguments within the parameters. Some tried. But I side with GIGO on this one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #37 June 12, 2008 QuoteQuote And yet, oddly enough, billvon and others WERE able to understand and respond with valid arguments within the parameters. Some tried. But I side with GIGO on this one. Perhaps...those who were willing to think about it, did. Others only tried to poke holes into something that was never intended to be airtight, and indeed was ADMITTED from the start to not be airtight.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
