mnealtx 0 #26 January 23, 2010 QuoteQuotePost #3 "3 huge Q's in a row" You said it, so own it. It's ok...Obama still loves you. Yep, 3 Q's: - 2009 1st Q at -6.4 - 2009 2nd Q took it from -6.4 to -.7 = 5.7 in the + direction - 2009 3rd Q took it from -.7 to +2.2 = 2.9 in the + direction - 2009 4th Q took it from +2.2 to +4.0 (est) = 1.8 in the + directionQuote Fixed that for you. 4th Q numbers aren't out yet - or is this another post like your 'recession is over' one? QuoteI do own it, you are either real bad at math or in denial. Speaking of denial... where's the BEA numbers for Q4? Quote- Continue to squirm Why, yes...yes, you are. QuoteCome on, Mike, real easy - can't make it easier for ya. Post 3, this thread - can't make it easier for ya.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #27 January 23, 2010 QuoteFixed that for you. 4th Q numbers aren't out yet - or is this another post like your 'recession is over' one? OK, I'll bet you that when the 4th Q numbers are first released by the BEA that they are within 20% of the 4%. I lose, I don't post for 1 month, you lose and you don't post for 1 month. It wasn't a post, it was a thread and it read, "Recession is over, but..." 2 innacuracies Mike, better go back to spellchecking. QuoteSpeaking of denial... where's the BEA numbers for Q4? It takes a month to tabulate them. Using estimates form experts doesn't denote denial, but refusing to listen to numerous experts IS denial. QuotePost 3, this thread - can't make it easier for ya. Can't answer a simple question: IS THE 1ST Q OF 2009 OBAMA'S DOING OR NOT? Let's look at it this way, if QB "A" starts a game and runs it into the ground, down 4 TD's, they bring in QB "B" and the game ends as he inherited it, maybe some better, but still the team loses; who's fault is the loss? Of course QB "A." A better example is with baseball, the starting picher is given the loss unless he leaves with a tie or lead, no one on base. Blaming the 2009 1st Q on Obama is retarded, I'm glad you're not doing that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #28 January 23, 2010 QuoteQuoteFixed that for you. 4th Q numbers aren't out yet - or is this another post like your 'recession is over' one? OK, I'll bet you that when the 4th Q numbers are first released by the BEA that they are within 20% of the 4%. I lose, I don't post for 1 month, you lose and you don't post for 1 month. At least you're finally admitting you've been talking out of your ass. QuoteIt wasn't a post, it was a thread and it read, "Recession is over, but..." 2 innacuracies Mike, better go back to spellchecking. Where's the BEA statement that the recession is over, Lucky? Another lie? QuoteQuoteSpeaking of denial... where's the BEA numbers for Q4? It takes a month to tabulate them. Using estimates form experts doesn't denote denial, but refusing to listen to numerous experts IS denial. That's the same experts that STILL haven't confirmed your "recession is over" claim, right? Too bad they didn't have the 4Q numbers up when you spouted off upthread - you wouldn't be so desperately trying to cover your ass, now. QuoteQuotePost 3, this thread - can't make it easier for ya. Can't answer a simple question: IS THE 1ST Q OF 2009 OBAMA'S DOING OR NOT? Can't answer a simple question: DOES THE BEA HAVE 4Q NUMBERS UP OR NOT? Oh, wait - you did and they DON'T. Looks like the "3 huge Q's you were talking about was Q1, Q2 and Q3. I offer, again, the First Rule of Holes: When you find you're in one...STOP DIGGING.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #29 January 23, 2010 Quote At least you're finally admitting you've been talking out of your ass. And you're scared to make the bet; you've just been pwned . Make the bet or crawl away. Quote Where's the BEA statement that the recession is over, Lucky? Another lie? That's an aspect of the NBER, not teh BEA, so they wouldn't have it. And again, I never said the recovery was complete even tho the recession is by technical terms over. Quote Too bad they didn't have the 4Q numbers up when you spouted off upthread - you wouldn't have spent umpteen posts desperately trying to cover your ass. Too bad you're too scared to bet. Quote Can't answer a simple question: DOES THE BEA HAVE 4Q NUMBERS UP OR NOT? Nope, and you're scared to bet that the projections are far off. Here I thought Texans were tough. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #30 January 23, 2010 Quote Quote At least you're finally admitting you've been talking out of your ass. And you're scared to make the bet; you've just been pwned . Make the bet or crawl away. You've been pwned this whole thread. Quote Quote Where's the BEA statement that the recession is over, Lucky? Another lie? That's an aspect of the NBER, not teh BEA, so they wouldn't have it. And again, I never said the recovery was complete even tho the recession is by technical terms over. So where's the announcement? Quote Quote Too bad they didn't have the 4Q numbers up when you spouted off upthread - you wouldn't have spent umpteen posts desperately trying to cover your ass. Too bad you're too scared to bet. Too bad you can't learn to quit shooting your mouth off. Quote Quote Can't answer a simple question: DOES THE BEA HAVE 4Q NUMBERS UP OR NOT? Nope, and you're scared to bet that the projections are far off. Here I thought Texans were tough. You know, that might work better on the rest of your 3rd grade class - in the adult world, not so much. Again, some friendly advice - stop digging.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gawain 0 #31 January 23, 2010 QuoteQuotePost #3 "3 huge Q's in a row" You said it, so own it. It's ok...Obama still loves you. Yep, 3 Q's: - 2009 2nd Q took it from -6.4 to -.7 = 5.7 in the + direction - 2009 3rd Q took it from -.7 to +2.2 = 2.9 in the + direction - 2009 4th Q took it from +2.2 to +4.0 (est) = 1.8 in the + direction Not sure if math is not your suit or what, but those are big gains: >12% in 1 year. I do own it, you are either real bad at math or in denial. If you had consulted wiki and the Onion, you would realize that you can't add up GDP growth numbers and say, that equals 12% in a year...first of all, 5.7+2.9+1.8=10.4. Second of all, that still does not reflect overall GDP growth or recession. 2Q09, the GDP still shrank. 3Q09, it grew. 4Q09, estimates say it grew. It means that in 2Q09, it shrank 0.7% from the beginning of the quarter. In 3Q09, it grew 2.2% from where it left off from 2Q. I'm surprised you couldn't find this information from wiki or the vast financial pages of the Onion. I'm going to write their editors a nasty email to let them know they're letting you down...total set-up for failure.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #32 January 23, 2010 QuoteIf you had consulted wiki and the Onion, you would realize that you can't add up GDP growth numbers and say, that equals 12% in a year The transition from -6.4 to est +6 = a 12 point swing. Quotefirst of all, 5.7+2.9+1.8=10.4. True, but the start and end point of the early recovery span a 12 point range. QuoteSecond of all, that still does not reflect overall GDP growth or recession. 2Q09, the GDP still shrank. If you look at shrinking at .7 as compared to 6.4 yes it did, it shrank both quarters, but it's unrealistic to think the economy could go from -6.4 to +2 in one quarter. See, this is how your side calls Obama a failure by saying he hasn't parted the Red Sea in 2 weeks so he's the same as Bush. It's ridiculous but it's all you have so what are ya gonna do? QuoteIt means that in 2Q09, it shrank 0.7% from the beginning of the quarter. Yes, from a previous -6.4 so a massive transitional gain. QuoteIn 3Q09, it grew 2.2% from where it left off from 2Q. No, it grew from a previous -.7 to +2.2% in a transitional sense. See, we're getting hung up on semantics and abstract mathematics, to depart from that and use mean, median and mode type data to see where we're going vs where we cam from you can look at the data in a visual sense and see that. http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdp_glance.htm So we can spar over semantics, 2.2 vs 2.9, or we can say, "your party fucked things up, mine fixd things on deficit stimulus. I would have preferred tax-derrived stimulus, but the righties would cry. I'm surprised your party doesn't have the character to praise Obama for not just raising taxes as he should do like Clinton did. Taxes are not at all-time lows since WWI, but not far from it. QuoteI'm surprised you couldn't find this information from wiki or the vast financial pages of the Onion. I'm going to write their editors a nasty email to let them know they're letting you down...total set-up for failure. It's tired, let it go. Esp from a party that thinks the Heritage Foundation and the Cato institute are reliable and honest. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #33 January 23, 2010 QuoteYou've been pwned this whole thread. A) Immitation = flattery B) You're scared to bet meaning you agree, the GDP will within 20% of 4% in 2009 4th Q QuoteSo where's the announcement? What announcement? QuoteToo bad you can't learn to quit shooting your mouth off. Why should I, I'm willing to back my belief in the estimates. You would be the one shooting the mouth off when you won't back your beliefs. QuoteYou know, that might work better on the rest of your 3rd grade class - in the adult world, not so much. Again, some friendly advice - stop digging. It works on people willing to back their beliefs rather than just using trickery, decsption, denial, etc. So tell me, who's fault was the 1st Q 2009? Even Gawain isn't blaming Obama. No one is, not even you. It would be retarded to blame a guy who came in during a period that is already fucked, has been fucked for 1.5 years + and to say it's his mess and his fault. Just as Clinton pulled yoru tired ideology out of the shitter, so will Obama and the idiot American voter will reinstall another spendy Nazi piece of trash in the name of patriotism. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites LyraM45 0 #34 January 23, 2010 QuoteSeriously...what has been accomplished? Gitmo? Fail Stimulus keeps unemp under 8%? Fail Foriegn policy? Do we have one? War on Terror? Shhh Transparency? Fail Immigration? Nope Health care? On life support Where's the change? Are you Dems getting a little antsy? Antsy? No, considering I'm one of the many intelligent people who voted for Obama and didn't expect him to flip a switch over night and magically fix everything. A year is really not that long in the grand scheme of things. All in due time my friends, all in due time. Let the man have ample time to prove himself one way or the other. What exactly is "ample time," you might ask? Well, I am not certain but I am certain it is not 1 year, IMO.Apologies for the spelling (and grammar).... I got a B.S, not a B.A. :) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,156 #35 January 23, 2010 QuoteQuoteSeriously...what has been accomplished? Gitmo? Fail Stimulus keeps unemp under 8%? Fail Foriegn policy? Do we have one? War on Terror? Shhh Transparency? Fail Immigration? Nope Health care? On life support Where's the change? Are you Dems getting a little antsy? Antsy? No, considering I'm one of the many intelligent people who voted for Obama and didn't expect him to flip a switch over night and magically fix everything. A year is really not that long in the grand scheme of things. All in due time my friends, all in due time. Let the man have ample time to prove himself one way or the other. What exactly is "ample time," you might ask? Well, I am not certain but I am certain it is not 1 year, IMO. It took Saint Ronald Reagan well over a year to reverse his recession.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gawain 0 #36 January 23, 2010 QuoteQuoteIf you had consulted wiki and the Onion, you would realize that you can't add up GDP growth numbers and say, that equals 12% in a year The transition from -6.4 to est +6 = a 12 point swing. That is correct, even though you did not cite a +6 number in your addition. A twelve point swing based on numbers does not translate to a 12% actual change in GDP. QuoteQuotefirst of all, 5.7+2.9+1.8=10.4. True, but the start and end point of the early recovery span a 12 point range. Again, no they don't, you lined up quarterly numbers and said they equal a 12 point range, when, in fact, they don't, and it still does not equate to a 12 point growth in GDP. QuoteQuoteSecond of all, that still does not reflect overall GDP growth or recession. 2Q09, the GDP still shrank. If you look at shrinking at .7 as compared to 6.4 yes it did, it shrank both quarters, but it's unrealistic to think the economy could go from -6.4 to +2 in one quarter. See, this is how your side calls Obama a failure by saying he hasn't parted the Red Sea in 2 weeks so he's the same as Bush. It's ridiculous but it's all you have so what are ya gonna do? When the GDP report came out for 2Q09, it shrank -0.7%. Baseline 100 - 0.7 = 99.3. When the third quarter number came out, it is referencing 99.3, not 100. To carry on the example: If it shrank another 3%, 99.3 - 3% (.03*99.3=2.979) = 96.321. Now, a booming quarter of 4% growth. From 96.321 + 4% (.04*96.321=3.85284) = 100.174. QuoteQuoteIt means that in 2Q09, it shrank 0.7% from the beginning of the quarter. Yes, from a previous -6.4 so a massive transitional gain. No, it's not a gain, it still shrank. Just less than the previous quarter. QuoteQuoteIn 3Q09, it grew 2.2% from where it left off from 2Q. No, it grew from a previous -.7 to +2.2% in a transitional sense. Wrong. http://www.bsu.edu/ibb/US/qtable.htm It's not a "sense" it's a hard number. It's rate of growth from the beginning of the quarter to the end of the quarter was measured at a rate of 2.2%. The beginning of the quarter started where the previous quarter had left off. QuoteSee, we're getting hung up on semantics and abstract mathematics, to depart from that and use mean, median and mode type data to see where we're going vs where we cam from you can look at the data in a visual sense and see that. http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdp_glance.htm A graph that show a percentage statistic is not a baseline reference. QuoteQuoteI'm surprised you couldn't find this information from wiki or the vast financial pages of the Onion. I'm going to write their editors a nasty email to let them know they're letting you down...total set-up for failure. It's tired, let it go. Esp from a party that thinks the Heritage Foundation and the Cato institute are reliable and honest. Why would I want you to let go of such credible sources of information? Even when you don't remember what you're saying to one person versus another (or even me for that matter), you need to have a steady, reliable source of information to keep track of all the garbage and lies you spew. "No!" I say, these resources will not let you down anymore.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 23 #37 January 23, 2010 Quote Quote Seriously...what has been accomplished? Gitmo? Fail Stimulus keeps unemp under 8%? Fail Foriegn policy? Do we have one? War on Terror? Shhh Transparency? Fail Immigration? Nope Health care? On life support Where's the change? Are you Dems getting a little antsy? Antsy? No, considering I'm one of the many intelligent people who voted for Obama and didn't expect him to flip a switch over night and magically fix everything. A year is really not that long in the grand scheme of things. All in due time my friends, all in due time. Let the man have ample time to prove himself one way or the other. What exactly is "ample time," you might ask? Well, I am not certain but I am certain it is not 1 year, IMO. "America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites airdvr 210 #38 January 23, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteSeriously...what has been accomplished? Gitmo? Fail Stimulus keeps unemp under 8%? Fail Foriegn policy? Do we have one? War on Terror? Shhh Transparency? Fail Immigration? Nope Health care? On life support Where's the change? Are you Dems getting a little antsy? Antsy? No, considering I'm one of the many intelligent people who voted for Obama and didn't expect him to flip a switch over night and magically fix everything. A year is really not that long in the grand scheme of things. All in due time my friends, all in due time. Let the man have ample time to prove himself one way or the other. What exactly is "ample time," you might ask? Well, I am not certain but I am certain it is not 1 year, IMO. It took Saint Ronald Reagan well over a year to reverse his recession. Republicans didn't control the hill either.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #39 January 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteSeriously...what has been accomplished? Gitmo? Fail Stimulus keeps unemp under 8%? Fail Foriegn policy? Do we have one? War on Terror? Shhh Transparency? Fail Immigration? Nope Health care? On life support Where's the change? Are you Dems getting a little antsy? Antsy? No, considering I'm one of the many intelligent people who voted for Obama and didn't expect him to flip a switch over night and magically fix everything. A year is really not that long in the grand scheme of things. All in due time my friends, all in due time. Let the man have ample time to prove himself one way or the other. What exactly is "ample time," you might ask? Well, I am not certain but I am certain it is not 1 year, IMO. It took Saint Ronald Reagan well over a year to reverse his recession. Yep, tax cuts and retracting the money supply was brilliant, it took a stagnant economy and turned it into a brief but bad recession. Once the "borrowed" billions hit the market that was repaired, of course the worst debt increase in peacetime was realized. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites airdvr 210 #40 January 24, 2010 QuoteAntsy? No, considering I'm one of the many intelligent people who voted for Obama and didn't expect him to flip a switch over night and magically fix everything. A year is really not that long in the grand scheme of things. All in due time my friends, all in due time. Let the man have ample time to prove himself one way or the other. What exactly is "ample time," you might ask? Well, I am not certain but I am certain it is not 1 year, IMO. Try just one...Gitmo.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,156 #41 January 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteAntsy? No, considering I'm one of the many intelligent people who voted for Obama and didn't expect him to flip a switch over night and magically fix everything. A year is really not that long in the grand scheme of things. All in due time my friends, all in due time. Let the man have ample time to prove himself one way or the other. What exactly is "ample time," you might ask? Well, I am not certain but I am certain it is not 1 year, IMO. Try just one...Gitmo. Interesting you should bring that up. NPR aired a segment last week where one of the Gitmo task force who had been a member of the Bush administration (State Department) agreed that it took months just to assemble the prisoners' files because the previous administration had done such a poor job of record keeping.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites airdvr 210 #42 January 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteAntsy? No, considering I'm one of the many intelligent people who voted for Obama and didn't expect him to flip a switch over night and magically fix everything. A year is really not that long in the grand scheme of things. All in due time my friends, all in due time. Let the man have ample time to prove himself one way or the other. What exactly is "ample time," you might ask? Well, I am not certain but I am certain it is not 1 year, IMO. Try just one...Gitmo. Interesting you should bring that up. NPR aired a segment last week where one of the Gitmo task force who had been a member of the Bush administration (State Department) agreed that it took months just to assemble the prisoners' files because the previous administration had done such a poor job of record keeping. I don't recall Barack's statement being "we're gonna get those files in order in 1 year's time." BTW, I have no doubt it would take government twats a year to find some files.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,156 #43 January 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteAntsy? No, considering I'm one of the many intelligent people who voted for Obama and didn't expect him to flip a switch over night and magically fix everything. A year is really not that long in the grand scheme of things. All in due time my friends, all in due time. Let the man have ample time to prove himself one way or the other. What exactly is "ample time," you might ask? Well, I am not certain but I am certain it is not 1 year, IMO. Try just one...Gitmo. Interesting you should bring that up. NPR aired a segment last week where one of the Gitmo task force who had been a member of the Bush administration (State Department) agreed that it took months just to assemble the prisoners' files because the previous administration had done such a poor job of record keeping. I don't recall Barack's statement being "we're gonna get those files in order in 1 year's time." BTW, I have no doubt it would take government twats a year to find some files. Indeed, clearly Obama is to blame for not realizing that the Bush administration could be so incredibly disorganized that their chaos would take months to unravel.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites airdvr 210 #44 January 24, 2010 QuoteIndeed, clearly Obama is to blame for not realizing that the Bush administration could be so incredibly disorganized that their chaos would take months to unravel. C'mon John...even you know that's not what's holding up the closing. Since Mr. Obama took office a year ago, more than 40 detainees have been removed from the naval base in Cuba - sent off to their homelands or to other countries. If the administration cannot quicken that pace, it would take until a hypothetical second Obama term to actually empty the site.http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/01/22/politics/main6129494.shtml Seems they managed to find 40 files.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,156 #45 January 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteIndeed, clearly Obama is to blame for not realizing that the Bush administration could be so incredibly disorganized that their chaos would take months to unravel. C'mon John...even you know that's not what's holding up the closing. Since Mr. Obama took office a year ago, more than 40 detainees have been removed from the naval base in Cuba - sent off to their homelands or to other countries. If the administration cannot quicken that pace, it would take until a hypothetical second Obama term to actually empty the site.http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/01/22/politics/main6129494.shtml Seems they managed to find 40 files. And the others? From NPR, 1/22/2010 ARI SHAPIRO: The task force included people from agencies across the federal government: state, justice, the Pentagon, Homeland Security and more. First, the team took months assembling a file for each detainee. Those records were scattered in various departments during the last administration. Then the team went through the files one by one, deciding whether each prisoner was best suited for trial, release or indefinite detention. Now, an administration official says the task force is done. With almost 200 men left at Guantanamo, here's how the numbers break down: About 110 are designated for transfer to their home countries or another country, another 35 or so will be put on trial in either military or civilian court, and about 50 detainees will be held indefinitely without trial, most likely at a federal prison in Illinois. Mr. VIJAY PADMANABHAN (Cardozo Law School): It's fantastic that the government, after this many years, has finally completed the task of categorizing individuals into these three categories. SHAPIRO: Vijay Padmanabhan of Cardozo Law School worked on detainee issues at the State Department under President Bush. Mr. PADMANABHAN: I know that when the Bush administration was looking at this issue, we, for a long time, had the problem of not having a clear handle on how many individuals fell into which particular category. Cleaning up the mess left by someone else often takes awhile.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites airdvr 210 #46 January 24, 2010 And it's official...we have our first BBB!Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites hwt 0 #47 January 24, 2010 Quote How is it that having control of both houses and the executive branch has accomplished so little? Regardless of whether I agree with it or not my thoughts last year at this time were along the lines of seeing a ton of stuff I probably won't like buzzing through. What a difference a year makes. It was the independent voter that elected Obama and he made the mistake of turning his back on them by allowing Pelosi / Reid to draft the contents of the bill. These two are Progressive / Communist and was written by extreme left nuts who want to make us a socialist country . Capitalism has its faults , but it is what made this country so prosperous. No one can make a rational decision until you get feedback from both sides of the spec tram. Blue Skies Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites plorensen 0 #48 January 25, 2010 these numbers dont mean shit because im still unemployed.Should have focused on the unemployment issue a year ago instead of Obama care Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Royd 0 #49 January 25, 2010 QuoteIndeed, clearly Obama is to blame for not realizing that the Bush administration could be so incredibly disorganized that their chaos would take months to unravel. Maybe Obama should have added a but or an if, into his statement about closing Gitmo. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,156 #50 January 25, 2010 QuoteQuoteIndeed, clearly Obama is to blame for not realizing that the Bush administration could be so incredibly disorganized that their chaos would take months to unravel. Maybe Obama should have added a but or an if, into his statement about closing Gitmo. Maybe the Bush administration could have done a decent job instead of leaving a shambles.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 2 of 2 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
Lucky... 0 #27 January 23, 2010 QuoteFixed that for you. 4th Q numbers aren't out yet - or is this another post like your 'recession is over' one? OK, I'll bet you that when the 4th Q numbers are first released by the BEA that they are within 20% of the 4%. I lose, I don't post for 1 month, you lose and you don't post for 1 month. It wasn't a post, it was a thread and it read, "Recession is over, but..." 2 innacuracies Mike, better go back to spellchecking. QuoteSpeaking of denial... where's the BEA numbers for Q4? It takes a month to tabulate them. Using estimates form experts doesn't denote denial, but refusing to listen to numerous experts IS denial. QuotePost 3, this thread - can't make it easier for ya. Can't answer a simple question: IS THE 1ST Q OF 2009 OBAMA'S DOING OR NOT? Let's look at it this way, if QB "A" starts a game and runs it into the ground, down 4 TD's, they bring in QB "B" and the game ends as he inherited it, maybe some better, but still the team loses; who's fault is the loss? Of course QB "A." A better example is with baseball, the starting picher is given the loss unless he leaves with a tie or lead, no one on base. Blaming the 2009 1st Q on Obama is retarded, I'm glad you're not doing that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #28 January 23, 2010 QuoteQuoteFixed that for you. 4th Q numbers aren't out yet - or is this another post like your 'recession is over' one? OK, I'll bet you that when the 4th Q numbers are first released by the BEA that they are within 20% of the 4%. I lose, I don't post for 1 month, you lose and you don't post for 1 month. At least you're finally admitting you've been talking out of your ass. QuoteIt wasn't a post, it was a thread and it read, "Recession is over, but..." 2 innacuracies Mike, better go back to spellchecking. Where's the BEA statement that the recession is over, Lucky? Another lie? QuoteQuoteSpeaking of denial... where's the BEA numbers for Q4? It takes a month to tabulate them. Using estimates form experts doesn't denote denial, but refusing to listen to numerous experts IS denial. That's the same experts that STILL haven't confirmed your "recession is over" claim, right? Too bad they didn't have the 4Q numbers up when you spouted off upthread - you wouldn't be so desperately trying to cover your ass, now. QuoteQuotePost 3, this thread - can't make it easier for ya. Can't answer a simple question: IS THE 1ST Q OF 2009 OBAMA'S DOING OR NOT? Can't answer a simple question: DOES THE BEA HAVE 4Q NUMBERS UP OR NOT? Oh, wait - you did and they DON'T. Looks like the "3 huge Q's you were talking about was Q1, Q2 and Q3. I offer, again, the First Rule of Holes: When you find you're in one...STOP DIGGING.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #29 January 23, 2010 Quote At least you're finally admitting you've been talking out of your ass. And you're scared to make the bet; you've just been pwned . Make the bet or crawl away. Quote Where's the BEA statement that the recession is over, Lucky? Another lie? That's an aspect of the NBER, not teh BEA, so they wouldn't have it. And again, I never said the recovery was complete even tho the recession is by technical terms over. Quote Too bad they didn't have the 4Q numbers up when you spouted off upthread - you wouldn't have spent umpteen posts desperately trying to cover your ass. Too bad you're too scared to bet. Quote Can't answer a simple question: DOES THE BEA HAVE 4Q NUMBERS UP OR NOT? Nope, and you're scared to bet that the projections are far off. Here I thought Texans were tough. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #30 January 23, 2010 Quote Quote At least you're finally admitting you've been talking out of your ass. And you're scared to make the bet; you've just been pwned . Make the bet or crawl away. You've been pwned this whole thread. Quote Quote Where's the BEA statement that the recession is over, Lucky? Another lie? That's an aspect of the NBER, not teh BEA, so they wouldn't have it. And again, I never said the recovery was complete even tho the recession is by technical terms over. So where's the announcement? Quote Quote Too bad they didn't have the 4Q numbers up when you spouted off upthread - you wouldn't have spent umpteen posts desperately trying to cover your ass. Too bad you're too scared to bet. Too bad you can't learn to quit shooting your mouth off. Quote Quote Can't answer a simple question: DOES THE BEA HAVE 4Q NUMBERS UP OR NOT? Nope, and you're scared to bet that the projections are far off. Here I thought Texans were tough. You know, that might work better on the rest of your 3rd grade class - in the adult world, not so much. Again, some friendly advice - stop digging.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #31 January 23, 2010 QuoteQuotePost #3 "3 huge Q's in a row" You said it, so own it. It's ok...Obama still loves you. Yep, 3 Q's: - 2009 2nd Q took it from -6.4 to -.7 = 5.7 in the + direction - 2009 3rd Q took it from -.7 to +2.2 = 2.9 in the + direction - 2009 4th Q took it from +2.2 to +4.0 (est) = 1.8 in the + direction Not sure if math is not your suit or what, but those are big gains: >12% in 1 year. I do own it, you are either real bad at math or in denial. If you had consulted wiki and the Onion, you would realize that you can't add up GDP growth numbers and say, that equals 12% in a year...first of all, 5.7+2.9+1.8=10.4. Second of all, that still does not reflect overall GDP growth or recession. 2Q09, the GDP still shrank. 3Q09, it grew. 4Q09, estimates say it grew. It means that in 2Q09, it shrank 0.7% from the beginning of the quarter. In 3Q09, it grew 2.2% from where it left off from 2Q. I'm surprised you couldn't find this information from wiki or the vast financial pages of the Onion. I'm going to write their editors a nasty email to let them know they're letting you down...total set-up for failure.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #32 January 23, 2010 QuoteIf you had consulted wiki and the Onion, you would realize that you can't add up GDP growth numbers and say, that equals 12% in a year The transition from -6.4 to est +6 = a 12 point swing. Quotefirst of all, 5.7+2.9+1.8=10.4. True, but the start and end point of the early recovery span a 12 point range. QuoteSecond of all, that still does not reflect overall GDP growth or recession. 2Q09, the GDP still shrank. If you look at shrinking at .7 as compared to 6.4 yes it did, it shrank both quarters, but it's unrealistic to think the economy could go from -6.4 to +2 in one quarter. See, this is how your side calls Obama a failure by saying he hasn't parted the Red Sea in 2 weeks so he's the same as Bush. It's ridiculous but it's all you have so what are ya gonna do? QuoteIt means that in 2Q09, it shrank 0.7% from the beginning of the quarter. Yes, from a previous -6.4 so a massive transitional gain. QuoteIn 3Q09, it grew 2.2% from where it left off from 2Q. No, it grew from a previous -.7 to +2.2% in a transitional sense. See, we're getting hung up on semantics and abstract mathematics, to depart from that and use mean, median and mode type data to see where we're going vs where we cam from you can look at the data in a visual sense and see that. http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdp_glance.htm So we can spar over semantics, 2.2 vs 2.9, or we can say, "your party fucked things up, mine fixd things on deficit stimulus. I would have preferred tax-derrived stimulus, but the righties would cry. I'm surprised your party doesn't have the character to praise Obama for not just raising taxes as he should do like Clinton did. Taxes are not at all-time lows since WWI, but not far from it. QuoteI'm surprised you couldn't find this information from wiki or the vast financial pages of the Onion. I'm going to write their editors a nasty email to let them know they're letting you down...total set-up for failure. It's tired, let it go. Esp from a party that thinks the Heritage Foundation and the Cato institute are reliable and honest. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #33 January 23, 2010 QuoteYou've been pwned this whole thread. A) Immitation = flattery B) You're scared to bet meaning you agree, the GDP will within 20% of 4% in 2009 4th Q QuoteSo where's the announcement? What announcement? QuoteToo bad you can't learn to quit shooting your mouth off. Why should I, I'm willing to back my belief in the estimates. You would be the one shooting the mouth off when you won't back your beliefs. QuoteYou know, that might work better on the rest of your 3rd grade class - in the adult world, not so much. Again, some friendly advice - stop digging. It works on people willing to back their beliefs rather than just using trickery, decsption, denial, etc. So tell me, who's fault was the 1st Q 2009? Even Gawain isn't blaming Obama. No one is, not even you. It would be retarded to blame a guy who came in during a period that is already fucked, has been fucked for 1.5 years + and to say it's his mess and his fault. Just as Clinton pulled yoru tired ideology out of the shitter, so will Obama and the idiot American voter will reinstall another spendy Nazi piece of trash in the name of patriotism. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LyraM45 0 #34 January 23, 2010 QuoteSeriously...what has been accomplished? Gitmo? Fail Stimulus keeps unemp under 8%? Fail Foriegn policy? Do we have one? War on Terror? Shhh Transparency? Fail Immigration? Nope Health care? On life support Where's the change? Are you Dems getting a little antsy? Antsy? No, considering I'm one of the many intelligent people who voted for Obama and didn't expect him to flip a switch over night and magically fix everything. A year is really not that long in the grand scheme of things. All in due time my friends, all in due time. Let the man have ample time to prove himself one way or the other. What exactly is "ample time," you might ask? Well, I am not certain but I am certain it is not 1 year, IMO.Apologies for the spelling (and grammar).... I got a B.S, not a B.A. :) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,156 #35 January 23, 2010 QuoteQuoteSeriously...what has been accomplished? Gitmo? Fail Stimulus keeps unemp under 8%? Fail Foriegn policy? Do we have one? War on Terror? Shhh Transparency? Fail Immigration? Nope Health care? On life support Where's the change? Are you Dems getting a little antsy? Antsy? No, considering I'm one of the many intelligent people who voted for Obama and didn't expect him to flip a switch over night and magically fix everything. A year is really not that long in the grand scheme of things. All in due time my friends, all in due time. Let the man have ample time to prove himself one way or the other. What exactly is "ample time," you might ask? Well, I am not certain but I am certain it is not 1 year, IMO. It took Saint Ronald Reagan well over a year to reverse his recession.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #36 January 23, 2010 QuoteQuoteIf you had consulted wiki and the Onion, you would realize that you can't add up GDP growth numbers and say, that equals 12% in a year The transition from -6.4 to est +6 = a 12 point swing. That is correct, even though you did not cite a +6 number in your addition. A twelve point swing based on numbers does not translate to a 12% actual change in GDP. QuoteQuotefirst of all, 5.7+2.9+1.8=10.4. True, but the start and end point of the early recovery span a 12 point range. Again, no they don't, you lined up quarterly numbers and said they equal a 12 point range, when, in fact, they don't, and it still does not equate to a 12 point growth in GDP. QuoteQuoteSecond of all, that still does not reflect overall GDP growth or recession. 2Q09, the GDP still shrank. If you look at shrinking at .7 as compared to 6.4 yes it did, it shrank both quarters, but it's unrealistic to think the economy could go from -6.4 to +2 in one quarter. See, this is how your side calls Obama a failure by saying he hasn't parted the Red Sea in 2 weeks so he's the same as Bush. It's ridiculous but it's all you have so what are ya gonna do? When the GDP report came out for 2Q09, it shrank -0.7%. Baseline 100 - 0.7 = 99.3. When the third quarter number came out, it is referencing 99.3, not 100. To carry on the example: If it shrank another 3%, 99.3 - 3% (.03*99.3=2.979) = 96.321. Now, a booming quarter of 4% growth. From 96.321 + 4% (.04*96.321=3.85284) = 100.174. QuoteQuoteIt means that in 2Q09, it shrank 0.7% from the beginning of the quarter. Yes, from a previous -6.4 so a massive transitional gain. No, it's not a gain, it still shrank. Just less than the previous quarter. QuoteQuoteIn 3Q09, it grew 2.2% from where it left off from 2Q. No, it grew from a previous -.7 to +2.2% in a transitional sense. Wrong. http://www.bsu.edu/ibb/US/qtable.htm It's not a "sense" it's a hard number. It's rate of growth from the beginning of the quarter to the end of the quarter was measured at a rate of 2.2%. The beginning of the quarter started where the previous quarter had left off. QuoteSee, we're getting hung up on semantics and abstract mathematics, to depart from that and use mean, median and mode type data to see where we're going vs where we cam from you can look at the data in a visual sense and see that. http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdp_glance.htm A graph that show a percentage statistic is not a baseline reference. QuoteQuoteI'm surprised you couldn't find this information from wiki or the vast financial pages of the Onion. I'm going to write their editors a nasty email to let them know they're letting you down...total set-up for failure. It's tired, let it go. Esp from a party that thinks the Heritage Foundation and the Cato institute are reliable and honest. Why would I want you to let go of such credible sources of information? Even when you don't remember what you're saying to one person versus another (or even me for that matter), you need to have a steady, reliable source of information to keep track of all the garbage and lies you spew. "No!" I say, these resources will not let you down anymore.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #37 January 23, 2010 Quote Quote Seriously...what has been accomplished? Gitmo? Fail Stimulus keeps unemp under 8%? Fail Foriegn policy? Do we have one? War on Terror? Shhh Transparency? Fail Immigration? Nope Health care? On life support Where's the change? Are you Dems getting a little antsy? Antsy? No, considering I'm one of the many intelligent people who voted for Obama and didn't expect him to flip a switch over night and magically fix everything. A year is really not that long in the grand scheme of things. All in due time my friends, all in due time. Let the man have ample time to prove himself one way or the other. What exactly is "ample time," you might ask? Well, I am not certain but I am certain it is not 1 year, IMO. "America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 210 #38 January 23, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteSeriously...what has been accomplished? Gitmo? Fail Stimulus keeps unemp under 8%? Fail Foriegn policy? Do we have one? War on Terror? Shhh Transparency? Fail Immigration? Nope Health care? On life support Where's the change? Are you Dems getting a little antsy? Antsy? No, considering I'm one of the many intelligent people who voted for Obama and didn't expect him to flip a switch over night and magically fix everything. A year is really not that long in the grand scheme of things. All in due time my friends, all in due time. Let the man have ample time to prove himself one way or the other. What exactly is "ample time," you might ask? Well, I am not certain but I am certain it is not 1 year, IMO. It took Saint Ronald Reagan well over a year to reverse his recession. Republicans didn't control the hill either.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #39 January 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteSeriously...what has been accomplished? Gitmo? Fail Stimulus keeps unemp under 8%? Fail Foriegn policy? Do we have one? War on Terror? Shhh Transparency? Fail Immigration? Nope Health care? On life support Where's the change? Are you Dems getting a little antsy? Antsy? No, considering I'm one of the many intelligent people who voted for Obama and didn't expect him to flip a switch over night and magically fix everything. A year is really not that long in the grand scheme of things. All in due time my friends, all in due time. Let the man have ample time to prove himself one way or the other. What exactly is "ample time," you might ask? Well, I am not certain but I am certain it is not 1 year, IMO. It took Saint Ronald Reagan well over a year to reverse his recession. Yep, tax cuts and retracting the money supply was brilliant, it took a stagnant economy and turned it into a brief but bad recession. Once the "borrowed" billions hit the market that was repaired, of course the worst debt increase in peacetime was realized. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 210 #40 January 24, 2010 QuoteAntsy? No, considering I'm one of the many intelligent people who voted for Obama and didn't expect him to flip a switch over night and magically fix everything. A year is really not that long in the grand scheme of things. All in due time my friends, all in due time. Let the man have ample time to prove himself one way or the other. What exactly is "ample time," you might ask? Well, I am not certain but I am certain it is not 1 year, IMO. Try just one...Gitmo.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,156 #41 January 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteAntsy? No, considering I'm one of the many intelligent people who voted for Obama and didn't expect him to flip a switch over night and magically fix everything. A year is really not that long in the grand scheme of things. All in due time my friends, all in due time. Let the man have ample time to prove himself one way or the other. What exactly is "ample time," you might ask? Well, I am not certain but I am certain it is not 1 year, IMO. Try just one...Gitmo. Interesting you should bring that up. NPR aired a segment last week where one of the Gitmo task force who had been a member of the Bush administration (State Department) agreed that it took months just to assemble the prisoners' files because the previous administration had done such a poor job of record keeping.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 210 #42 January 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteAntsy? No, considering I'm one of the many intelligent people who voted for Obama and didn't expect him to flip a switch over night and magically fix everything. A year is really not that long in the grand scheme of things. All in due time my friends, all in due time. Let the man have ample time to prove himself one way or the other. What exactly is "ample time," you might ask? Well, I am not certain but I am certain it is not 1 year, IMO. Try just one...Gitmo. Interesting you should bring that up. NPR aired a segment last week where one of the Gitmo task force who had been a member of the Bush administration (State Department) agreed that it took months just to assemble the prisoners' files because the previous administration had done such a poor job of record keeping. I don't recall Barack's statement being "we're gonna get those files in order in 1 year's time." BTW, I have no doubt it would take government twats a year to find some files.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,156 #43 January 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteAntsy? No, considering I'm one of the many intelligent people who voted for Obama and didn't expect him to flip a switch over night and magically fix everything. A year is really not that long in the grand scheme of things. All in due time my friends, all in due time. Let the man have ample time to prove himself one way or the other. What exactly is "ample time," you might ask? Well, I am not certain but I am certain it is not 1 year, IMO. Try just one...Gitmo. Interesting you should bring that up. NPR aired a segment last week where one of the Gitmo task force who had been a member of the Bush administration (State Department) agreed that it took months just to assemble the prisoners' files because the previous administration had done such a poor job of record keeping. I don't recall Barack's statement being "we're gonna get those files in order in 1 year's time." BTW, I have no doubt it would take government twats a year to find some files. Indeed, clearly Obama is to blame for not realizing that the Bush administration could be so incredibly disorganized that their chaos would take months to unravel.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 210 #44 January 24, 2010 QuoteIndeed, clearly Obama is to blame for not realizing that the Bush administration could be so incredibly disorganized that their chaos would take months to unravel. C'mon John...even you know that's not what's holding up the closing. Since Mr. Obama took office a year ago, more than 40 detainees have been removed from the naval base in Cuba - sent off to their homelands or to other countries. If the administration cannot quicken that pace, it would take until a hypothetical second Obama term to actually empty the site.http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/01/22/politics/main6129494.shtml Seems they managed to find 40 files.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,156 #45 January 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteIndeed, clearly Obama is to blame for not realizing that the Bush administration could be so incredibly disorganized that their chaos would take months to unravel. C'mon John...even you know that's not what's holding up the closing. Since Mr. Obama took office a year ago, more than 40 detainees have been removed from the naval base in Cuba - sent off to their homelands or to other countries. If the administration cannot quicken that pace, it would take until a hypothetical second Obama term to actually empty the site.http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/01/22/politics/main6129494.shtml Seems they managed to find 40 files. And the others? From NPR, 1/22/2010 ARI SHAPIRO: The task force included people from agencies across the federal government: state, justice, the Pentagon, Homeland Security and more. First, the team took months assembling a file for each detainee. Those records were scattered in various departments during the last administration. Then the team went through the files one by one, deciding whether each prisoner was best suited for trial, release or indefinite detention. Now, an administration official says the task force is done. With almost 200 men left at Guantanamo, here's how the numbers break down: About 110 are designated for transfer to their home countries or another country, another 35 or so will be put on trial in either military or civilian court, and about 50 detainees will be held indefinitely without trial, most likely at a federal prison in Illinois. Mr. VIJAY PADMANABHAN (Cardozo Law School): It's fantastic that the government, after this many years, has finally completed the task of categorizing individuals into these three categories. SHAPIRO: Vijay Padmanabhan of Cardozo Law School worked on detainee issues at the State Department under President Bush. Mr. PADMANABHAN: I know that when the Bush administration was looking at this issue, we, for a long time, had the problem of not having a clear handle on how many individuals fell into which particular category. Cleaning up the mess left by someone else often takes awhile.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 210 #46 January 24, 2010 And it's official...we have our first BBB!Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hwt 0 #47 January 24, 2010 Quote How is it that having control of both houses and the executive branch has accomplished so little? Regardless of whether I agree with it or not my thoughts last year at this time were along the lines of seeing a ton of stuff I probably won't like buzzing through. What a difference a year makes. It was the independent voter that elected Obama and he made the mistake of turning his back on them by allowing Pelosi / Reid to draft the contents of the bill. These two are Progressive / Communist and was written by extreme left nuts who want to make us a socialist country . Capitalism has its faults , but it is what made this country so prosperous. No one can make a rational decision until you get feedback from both sides of the spec tram. Blue Skies Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
plorensen 0 #48 January 25, 2010 these numbers dont mean shit because im still unemployed.Should have focused on the unemployment issue a year ago instead of Obama care Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Royd 0 #49 January 25, 2010 QuoteIndeed, clearly Obama is to blame for not realizing that the Bush administration could be so incredibly disorganized that their chaos would take months to unravel. Maybe Obama should have added a but or an if, into his statement about closing Gitmo. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,156 #50 January 25, 2010 QuoteQuoteIndeed, clearly Obama is to blame for not realizing that the Bush administration could be so incredibly disorganized that their chaos would take months to unravel. Maybe Obama should have added a but or an if, into his statement about closing Gitmo. Maybe the Bush administration could have done a decent job instead of leaving a shambles.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
