|
|
Post by "The Visionary" Eldniw on Oct 11, 2012 18:04:13 GMT -5
No it inflates the numbers needlessly, as Hulk said. That means the 13 year olds who stumble on this board should be counted. They don't have a job, so by your deduction, they should be counted. And that sounds ridiculous. Or the 65 year old who, after 50 years of breaking their back, working every single day, they retired. But they don't have a job. They just retired because it's that age, and they're financially set. They should be counted. Do you see how ridiculous this sounds yet? I hope so....
|
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Oct 11, 2012 18:20:17 GMT -5
Or it accurately represents the number of people who don't have jobs. Either/or. But the college student or the retiree aren't looking for work so they have no impact on the workforce. Sent from my ADR6350 using proboards |
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Oct 11, 2012 21:30:25 GMT -5
Again, unless you can prove that they would not accept ANY job, that is not true.
Remember the potential carbuyer example?
|
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Oct 11, 2012 21:50:42 GMT -5
And why are we counting the people who are not looking for work? That makes no sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Oct 11, 2012 22:20:03 GMT -5
No it inflates the numbers needlessly, as Hulk said. That means the 13 year olds who stumble on this board should be counted. They don't have a job, so by your deduction, they should be counted. And that sounds ridiculous. Or the 65 year old who, after 50 years of breaking their back, working every single day, they retired. But they don't have a job. They just retired because it's that age, and they're financially set. They should be counted. Do you see how ridiculous this sounds yet? I hope so.... Obviously they wouldn't be counted. That's ridiculous. Anyone 18-retirement age who does not have a job should be counted. |
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Oct 11, 2012 22:32:52 GMT -5
And Slap', that's really what I'm advocating for, but for the sake of my point, I'd be willing to count the healthy old folk if it'd give us a more accurate representation of the number of people who are unemployed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Oct 12, 2012 8:13:09 GMT -5
For what purpose? There's no point to it in most cases. Those who are unemployed and not looking for work have no impact on the economy. Do you not think there should be a differentiation between those who are voluntarily unemployed and those who are involuntarily unemployed?
|
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Oct 12, 2012 10:18:32 GMT -5
For what purpose? There's no point to it in most cases. Those who are unemployed and not looking for work have no impact on the economy. Do you not think there should be a differentiation between those who are voluntarily unemployed and those who are involuntarily unemployed? Sure, but an accurate representation of the TOTAL "unemployment" would include both. |
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Oct 12, 2012 10:44:02 GMT -5
For what purpose? There's no point to it in most cases. Those who are unemployed and not looking for work have no impact on the economy. Do you not think there should be a differentiation between those who are voluntarily unemployed and those who are involuntarily unemployed? Sure, but an accurate representation of the TOTAL "unemployment" would include both. Why report those who are voluntarily unemployed? |
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Oct 12, 2012 11:05:41 GMT -5
Because your definition of "voluntarily unemployed" includes people who aren't necessarily voluntarily unemployed. You just call them voluntarily unemployed because they don't meet your criteria of actively searching for a job. It doesn't necessarily mean they wouldn't work.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Oct 12, 2012 13:08:24 GMT -5
How  in' epic this speech is... And how much it applies to TODAY, despite being it being delivered nearly 250 years ago. Also:  |
|
|
|
Post by Quanthor on Oct 13, 2012 14:41:00 GMT -5
I couldn't be less indifferent with the state of the race. I've honestly reached that point of being so disenfranchised that I just don't give a crapanymore. Usually people become more politically active and aware as they get older while I've taken the opposite approach and have become less. These past 10 years or so have so criminally appalling and gut wrenching to want more would make me a masochist. Obama is running a sh*tty campaign, I think he's been humbled and also realizes just how ed up everything is and has probably lost a great deal of desire to want to lead anymore. I know I would. That's not to say he's without blame, he probably doesn't deserve to be re-elected but most who have didn't either. Romney is just full of sh*t on every level. Does he have a plan? He's not a fiscal conservative, so what the is he? He's that new breed of big money spending republican we've come to know all to well. At least Democrats don't lie that they're going to spend money and even tax(though they often mislead here) for that matter. This guy is gonna spend like crazy without having anyway to pay for it. How many new defense programs or departments do you think we'll see under this guy? Also ..No MORE ING PERSONAL TAX CUTS!!! FOR ANYBODY!!! I'm not ever sure I'll vote this year. I don't live in a "battleground state", so my vote is pretty much worthless. I'll probably vote 3rd party, just cause. |
|
|
|
Post by "The Visionary" Eldniw on Oct 13, 2012 19:04:28 GMT -5
Also: Tell me one war President Obama started. And one war that he "continued". Because he pledged to end the war in Iraq and he did. |
|
The Stranger
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jul 21, 2007 1:09:47 GMT -5
Posts: 2,200
|
Post by The Stranger on Oct 13, 2012 19:25:47 GMT -5
Also: Tell me one war President Obama started. And one war that he "continued". Because he pledged to end the war in Iraq and he did. He's authorized 283 drone strikes in Pakistan, six times more than during Bush's terms. Also, dozens of drone strikes in Yemen and Libya. |
|
|
|
Post by "The Visionary" Eldniw on Oct 13, 2012 19:30:17 GMT -5
Tell me one war President Obama started. And one war that he "continued". Because he pledged to end the war in Iraq and he did. He's authorized 283 drone strikes in Pakistan, six times more than during Bush's terms. Also, dozens of drone strikes in Yemen and Libya. That's not starting a war. Those drone strikes were to protect us. You know, what the President is supposed to do? They weren't just out of the blue to kill a random civilian and laugh at the destruction. |
|
The Stranger
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jul 21, 2007 1:09:47 GMT -5
Posts: 2,200
|
Post by The Stranger on Oct 13, 2012 19:50:45 GMT -5
He's authorized 283 drone strikes in Pakistan, six times more than during Bush's terms. Also, dozens of drone strikes in Yemen and Libya. That's not starting a war. Those drone strikes were to protect us. You know, what the President is supposed to do? They weren't just out of the blue to kill a random civilian and laugh at the destruction. To protect us, right. Maybe to protect the Military-Industrial Complex. I feel so protected after killing innocent civilians! Whatever defines war to you, I guess. Think about this, how would drilling a place practically everyday, killing innocent people (while picking off a few "insurgents") NOT start a war? Let's not even talk about how much money is wasted on this. How pissed off would you and the people around your area feel if you were getting a drone strike on your street every day? Bottom line: We should not be policing the goddamn world. Let's police ourselves first. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 15, 2024 22:51:57 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 13, 2012 20:16:59 GMT -5
bought a mitt romney shirt today at rue 21....was surprised they had some. of course all the obama shirts mentioned swag.  |
|
Razor-toothed™
Superstar
I am Razor-toothed!
Joined on: Jun 1, 2012 2:05:43 GMT -5
Posts: 989
|
Post by Razor-toothed™ on Oct 13, 2012 21:14:47 GMT -5
bought a mitt romney shirt today at rue 21....was surprised they had some. of course all the obama shirts mentioned swag.  |
|
facemeat
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jul 24, 2011 0:38:10 GMT -5
Posts: 2,891
|
Post by facemeat on Oct 13, 2012 21:15:56 GMT -5
bought a mitt romney shirt today at rue 21....was surprised they had some. of course all the obama shirts mentioned swag. Should've waited a month...they'll be on clearance.  |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 15, 2024 22:51:57 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 13, 2012 21:22:02 GMT -5
bought a mitt romney shirt today at rue 21....was surprised they had some. of course all the obama shirts mentioned swag. Should've waited a month...they'll be on clearance. i was just surprised to see anything republican. |
|
