Posts by Alex Storey

1) Message boards : Politics : US Elections 2016 (Message 1836209)
Posted 16 Dec 2016 by Profile Alex Storey
Post:
...Meaning that around one in two eligible voters in the US simply don't care about democracy.


That's a pretty large leap in logic there janne. Any of the "scientists" in here agree with this hypothesis/conclusion? Can you find any holes/gaps in this?

I believe a more reasonable hypothesis is that about 1/2 Americans are either too busy producing/paying tax/raising their family to make it to the polls

Ah, yes the 47% who actually have a job, or two or three, and produce. This opposed to the rentiers, who sponge and like Mr. Trump pay no taxes.


Not only is the article pre-Trump & pre-Brexit... it's pre-Varoufakis.
But once economic liberalization took off in the 1980s, the struggle was won decisively by capital, and labor’s share of total income has shrunk everywhere.

Neo-liberalism. ""Founded" by Reagan & Thatcher, put on steroids by Bill Clinton & Larry Summers.

Good luck explaining to anybody that voted for either of the Clintons that they enabled and are largely responsible for the rise of a plethora of far-right wierdos all across the Western World :(

2) Message boards : Politics : We dA Clowns of America, to Form A More Perfect CIRCUS; Will Elect through Illegal Means and Help from EX & Present COMMIES...to Insure DIVISIVENESS; RIOTING; LOOTING; Post HATE, LIES, OBSTRUCTION, FAKE EVERYTHING fO Our & US of A DESTRUCTION. (Message 1835114)
Posted 10 Dec 2016 by Profile Alex Storey
Post:
No I'm the one that first used the word "interstate" and was going from memory.

You seem to speak legalese (it's Chinese to me... Greek I actually understand!) so... are you sure he's not right?

I just did a really quick search and...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marihuana_Tax_Act_of_1937
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_history_of_cannabis_in_the_United_States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_in_the_United_States


I didn't really read those links... just scanned through 'em.
And managed to trigger my own self!
"Some parties have argued that the aim of the Act was to reduce the size of the hemp industry largely as an effort of businessmen Andrew Mellon, Randolph Hearst, and the Du Pont family."
I don't think I know who that first guy is but those last two are on my blacklist.
3) Message boards : Politics : We dA Clowns of America, to Form A More Perfect CIRCUS; Will Elect through Illegal Means and Help from EX & Present COMMIES...to Insure DIVISIVENESS; RIOTING; LOOTING; Post HATE, LIES, OBSTRUCTION, FAKE EVERYTHING fO Our & US of A DESTRUCTION. (Message 1835104)
Posted 10 Dec 2016 by Profile Alex Storey
Post:
I give up :)
4) Message boards : Politics : US Elections 2016 (Message 1835102)
Posted 10 Dec 2016 by Profile Alex Storey
Post:
You guys are talking about "wingnuts" and "moonbats".

Just FYI as they say these days :)
5) Message boards : Politics : We dA Clowns of America, to Form A More Perfect CIRCUS; Will Elect through Illegal Means and Help from EX & Present COMMIES...to Insure DIVISIVENESS; RIOTING; LOOTING; Post HATE, LIES, OBSTRUCTION, FAKE EVERYTHING fO Our & US of A DESTRUCTION. (Message 1835097)
Posted 10 Dec 2016 by Profile Alex Storey
Post:
Gary's flippin' out about a tax-stamp

Never said anything about a tax-stamp.


No, but you sure were triggered by the mention of one!

IOW I'm implying you were in a bit of an ad-hominem-attack/post-truth-witch-hunt mode.
6) Message boards : Politics : We dA Clowns of America, to Form A More Perfect CIRCUS; Will Elect through Illegal Means and Help from EX & Present COMMIES...to Insure DIVISIVENESS; RIOTING; LOOTING; Post HATE, LIES, OBSTRUCTION, FAKE EVERYTHING fO Our & US of A DESTRUCTION. (Message 1835091)
Posted 10 Dec 2016 by Profile Alex Storey
Post:
@WK,

Ok, one last attempt at explaining this and then I'll just admit to myself I'm crap at explaining things to others and give up.

Here's another piece that says your claim of earning figures are questionable and that you need to consider age ranges when talking about income.

We are caught in some sort of parallel argument. I'm trying to explain WHY we are talking about 2 different things but I'm not getting through.

Original Argument:
Bobby posted a link that had the unemployment percentage @4.6%. I posted what I thought was the median remuneration of the 95.4% that ARE employed. Any attempt to exclude a subgroup - as you are - will automatically alter the 95.4% number. IOW you are moving the goalposts.

By including all age ranges in your estimate...


It doesn't matter what I think I should include or what you think you should include. We are searching for the median of those 95.4%. Whatever people that number includes WE both HAVE to include in our calculation.

Now I'm going to pretend you actually understood me this time just so I can finally point out 2 things:
1) If you think the median remuneration of the 95.4% is a crap stat then you must also consider the 4.6% stat to be lacking for all the same reasons.
The two numbers are inexorably linked.
2) I already posted a graph that helps a bit to explain why teachers in San Fran can't afford to live in San Fran (didn't care much for your kneejerk answer to that one though). @Bobby the sudden divergence of the GDP to personal income helps explain the disparity between "the economy is looking fine" and "life in the real-world sucks". But what I haven't posted yet - because we can't agree on a simple median - is why the 4.6% unemployment number might be "gamed". Here's a chart from one of WK's links:



I'd say there's something rotten in Denmark.

Then there's the argument WK wants to have
Which is full employment numbers....

I get why that's useful and you like it so much. But in today's world that 40k number is useless without a minimum of two more charts:
- percentage of said full-time employment over time
- median remuneration over time

However there are also plenty of (completely) different charts like the one you posted on upward mobility that all paint the same picture.
And no, I don't have a link ;)
7) Message boards : Politics : The Way Ahead too... (Message 1835058)
Posted 9 Dec 2016 by Profile Alex Storey
Post:
Hex it on the cards?


The Big 3 upcoming Euro elections reminded me of an old UK ad that was annoyingly popular when I was a student :)

There may be trouble ahead...

(Or have you used that line Sirius, somewhere in these threads and my subconscious finally had it register?)
8) Message boards : Politics : We dA Clowns of America, to Form A More Perfect CIRCUS; Will Elect through Illegal Means and Help from EX & Present COMMIES...to Insure DIVISIVENESS; RIOTING; LOOTING; Post HATE, LIES, OBSTRUCTION, FAKE EVERYTHING fO Our & US of A DESTRUCTION. (Message 1834916)
Posted 9 Dec 2016 by Profile Alex Storey
Post:
Could it be that, for some reason, like people wanting their old manufacturing jobs back, that some parts of the US are not evolving fast enough.
conservative - definition - averse to change or innovation and holding traditional values.


Yeah, that narrative and its graph are slowly turning into an internet meme :)



Seriously though, neoliberalism is just another hokey idea. Personally I like to call it Kissinger's utopia.

It's not unavoidable...
It's not inescapable...
It's not irreversible...

It's just another fad promoted by Very Serious People. I realize you guys are the majority for now, I just think you are gonna be on the wrong side of history.

Oh by the way... I really did like your last graph. No, seriously now.
That graph and many others show roughly when the neoliberal social experiment began.
If you really, really pay attention you'll hear a LOT of people saying "in the last 30 or 40yrs" and then some yada-yada and decline of whatever sector.
9) Message boards : Politics : We dA Clowns of America, to Form A More Perfect CIRCUS; Will Elect through Illegal Means and Help from EX & Present COMMIES...to Insure DIVISIVENESS; RIOTING; LOOTING; Post HATE, LIES, OBSTRUCTION, FAKE EVERYTHING fO Our & US of A DESTRUCTION. (Message 1834841)
Posted 8 Dec 2016 by Profile Alex Storey
Post:
Hmmm. I wonder why?

Just kidding :)

(Question above and the one you replied to were both rhetoric. And sarcastic!)
10) Message boards : Politics : We dA Clowns of America, to Form A More Perfect CIRCUS; Will Elect through Illegal Means and Help from EX & Present COMMIES...to Insure DIVISIVENESS; RIOTING; LOOTING; Post HATE, LIES, OBSTRUCTION, FAKE EVERYTHING fO Our & US of A DESTRUCTION. (Message 1834839)
Posted 8 Dec 2016 by Profile Alex Storey
Post:
"You can lead a horse to water............."


But you can't make WK or Bobby drink?

Horses need sources?

Jobs don't get outsourced?

Unemployment numbers don't get gamed?

Corporations always pay their fair share of taxes so Ozz has a road to drive on to go to work?

Shall I go on?
11) Message boards : Politics : The Way Ahead too... (Message 1834835)
Posted 8 Dec 2016 by Profile Alex Storey
Post:
VW in the news today and apparently Brussels threw me a curve ball I never thought possible.

So YAY for Brussels today. (I can't believe I just said that.)

Now about them pesky Trade Deals. I doubt any of the articles in the MSM will use those two words today and bother to explain this even though it's kinda their job to do so... Haven't got time to check right now, I only read Reuters & NYT and might check others later today.

Here's the thing. Just one of a million serious problems with Trade Deals is that it gives politicians a "lawyery" free-pass to BS the planet that the deals are a "revolution" or a "landmark" in terms of environmental protection. Funny thing is though, there could 500 pages worth of regulations in any one of those deals yet essentially they are as good as non-existent.

Why?

No police.

"European Union law uses almost the same language as rules in the United States to ban carmakers from installing software intended to deceive regulators on emissions. But the 28-nation bloc has no counterpart to the Environmental Protection Agency to police the regulations."

Meanwhile the NYT will happily tell you that
"Enforcement is left to member states, which also determine the penalties, and there is no system for mandatory Europewide recalls of defective vehicles."
but that's not how troubleshooting works.

NYT is essentially saying that (for example)
Australia
Brunei
Canada
Chile
Japan
Malaysia
Mexico
New Zealand
Peru
Singapore
United States
Vietnam
would be required to have the same agencies. And technically this is correct... but only in theory.

In practice a few of those countries are going to turn a blind eye on environmental and other policing issues. And that's the whole point.
So corporations can play "musical chairs" until they (temporarily) land in the country with the less amount of pushback.

Oops.
12) Message boards : Politics : The Way Ahead too... (Message 1834739)
Posted 8 Dec 2016 by Profile Alex Storey
Post:
Not even.

Angela has rounded up all the losers and with those losers created a majority of MPs in the EU Parliament.

Ain't life a b*tch sometimes? :)
13) Message boards : Politics : The Way Ahead too... (Message 1834734)
Posted 8 Dec 2016 by Profile Alex Storey
Post:
Well after pretending to be a bleeding heart for a few years she just slipped into racist mode while announcing she'll be running again so...

Yeah, I think you're right! She has no intension of losing.
:)

Now how do we get rid of Shoebbels & Juncker?
14) Message boards : Politics : The Way Ahead too... (Message 1834731)
Posted 8 Dec 2016 by Profile Alex Storey
Post:
Goodbye:)


Love that pic :)

You know, my brain had a funny thought when it saw those 5.

A few of those there have essentially said, "I'll give you same-sex marriage so you think I'm a nice guy, just let me sell a little bit more of the country off to the corporations & banks".
15) Message boards : Politics : We dA Clowns of America, to Form A More Perfect CIRCUS; Will Elect through Illegal Means and Help from EX & Present COMMIES...to Insure DIVISIVENESS; RIOTING; LOOTING; Post HATE, LIES, OBSTRUCTION, FAKE EVERYTHING fO Our & US of A DESTRUCTION. (Message 1834730)
Posted 8 Dec 2016 by Profile Alex Storey
Post:
Right.

You guys let me know when this post truth witch-hunt is over because it's messing with everybody's ability to think straight.

You guys are flipping out I didn't add an "IIRC" which I thought was obvious and would never had added anyway. I trust my brain.

(And as turns out... I DID remember correctly.)

Bobby's asking a million questions about what doesn't seem to qualify as a paragraph even.

WK is going on about me going all "apples and oranges" and 'round & 'round in circles when all I did was state a simple fact. Then he pulls a stat out of nowhere as I'm pretty damn sure the percentage of full time employed people is NOWHERE in this thread so... I'm also pretty sure he's mixed up the meanings of "mean" and "median", as median will always be lower in these stats. I can't even be bothered to trace back and look why he thinks I ever said "average" anywhere.

Gary's flippin' out about a tax-stamp when all my brain can access is "killer weed", "dodgy Mexicans" and a blanket ban of other obscure substances like "hashish" when it was really cocaine and morphine that were all the rage way back when. Considering this is probably one of those "interstate" things I'm guessing more Tax-Stamp and less DoA/customs. But we can't have that discussion when he's in post-truth-hunting mode.

And pretty much everybody beside a few Trump fans in here are going all California Über Alles when one look at how counties voted across the States should be enough to tell you "thank f' each State doesn't get 10 electors and that's it". Popular vote? Terrible f'in idea for The States. And if that means Trump then so be it.

Most of you are also oblivious to the fact that left & right have been moaning about the same things all across the Western World. Meanwhile the centrist, adorable, and cool POTUS was bombing 7 different countries up until VERY recently. I guess that means y'all think Hillary would go for 10 seeing as the only thing everybody here agreed on is that she's a warmonger. So that means the only way Trump is going to out-war those two is if he really DOES start a nuclear war. And how many people think that? Personally I consider the chances of him building a wall to be higher (and the chances of that happening are pretty close to zero).

Most of the Left have been getting their stats from Piketty these past few years. And from people like Sanders & Warren. And everybody's so caught up in post-truth-finding that you forgot Trump sounded just like Sanders on a lot of things a few months ago. So his stats aren't wrong. It's just that he & his surrogates can't understand/memorize them to save their life!

So no Bobby & WK, unless you work for Goldman the economy ain't doin' fine.

Oh and fun-fact:
Post-truth? My brain says "technique perfected and heavily used by Putin". Betcha never heard THAT one before...
16) Message boards : Politics : We dA Clowns of America, to Form A More Perfect CIRCUS; Will Elect through Illegal Means and Help from EX & Present COMMIES...to Insure DIVISIVENESS; RIOTING; LOOTING; Post HATE, LIES, OBSTRUCTION, FAKE EVERYTHING fO Our & US of A DESTRUCTION. (Message 1834629)
Posted 7 Dec 2016 by Profile Alex Storey
Post:
Ah, thank you John. You just gave me a quick & easy way to get rid of Bobby & WinterNight in a language they might actually understand!
- - - - - - - -

"half of all working Americans ended up making less than 30k a year IIRC"
-Alex Storey

The statement is accurate and there’s nothing significant missing.
17) Message boards : Politics : We dA Clowns of America, to Form A More Perfect CIRCUS; Will Elect through Illegal Means and Help from EX & Present COMMIES...to Insure DIVISIVENESS; RIOTING; LOOTING; Post HATE, LIES, OBSTRUCTION, FAKE EVERYTHING fO Our & US of A DESTRUCTION. (Message 1834552)
Posted 7 Dec 2016 by Profile Alex Storey
Post:
I thought it was ""government of the people, by the people, for the people, "


It is. But via the States. And again, that's a good thing.

Unless y'all prefer the EU model where Germany rules the roost.

Food for thought.
18) Message boards : Politics : We dA Clowns of America, to Form A More Perfect CIRCUS; Will Elect through Illegal Means and Help from EX & Present COMMIES...to Insure DIVISIVENESS; RIOTING; LOOTING; Post HATE, LIES, OBSTRUCTION, FAKE EVERYTHING fO Our & US of A DESTRUCTION. (Message 1834549)
Posted 7 Dec 2016 by Profile Alex Storey
Post:
Fine. Two can play at that game.

So you are saying that the 95.4% that ARE employed have a remuneration median of $39,509?
19) Message boards : Politics : We dA Clowns of America, to Form A More Perfect CIRCUS; Will Elect through Illegal Means and Help from EX & Present COMMIES...to Insure DIVISIVENESS; RIOTING; LOOTING; Post HATE, LIES, OBSTRUCTION, FAKE EVERYTHING fO Our & US of A DESTRUCTION. (Message 1834533)
Posted 7 Dec 2016 by Profile Alex Storey
Post:
Oh FFS.

By definition, 50 percent of wage earners had net compensation less than or equal to the median wage, which is estimated to be $29,930.13 for 2015
.

And if you find a number that's 34k or whatever, fine we'll go with that one. I really, really, really don't care.

But it's always going to median employed when you are referring to unemployment numbers.

NEVER full-time.
NEVER household.

Do you guys understand that yet or not?

https://www.ssa.gov/cgi-bin/netcomp.cgi?year=2015
20) Message boards : Politics : We dA Clowns of America, to Form A More Perfect CIRCUS; Will Elect through Illegal Means and Help from EX & Present COMMIES...to Insure DIVISIVENESS; RIOTING; LOOTING; Post HATE, LIES, OBSTRUCTION, FAKE EVERYTHING fO Our & US of A DESTRUCTION. (Message 1834523)
Posted 7 Dec 2016 by Profile Alex Storey
Post:
Did not make this assumption - I had no idea what stat you picked, The only assumption I made was that you had a solid foundation for your statement, thus far it seems I was in error.


Ok, 3rd try at explaining this.

See bold above? As this is math, there is only one stat ANYONE can pick. There really is only one right answer.

If someone drops unemployment numbers on your lap that means you have X amount employed and Y unemployed. Now forget Y (which I'll remind you is the 4.6% stat). We're throwing 'em away because they made ZERO dollars.

Every one of those X made a specific amount of money in 365 days.
Now if you sort those X employed by annual income and try to find the guy in the middle, my MEMORY is saying Average Joe makes 30k.

(A wiki number I gave you earlier pretends that no-one aged 17-24 works for a living in the US so the median goes up obviously and it's the 32k previously posted. I think that's more than close enough to 30k considering the amount of low income earners you are chucking out of the equation.)

Is this understood by you and WK now?


Next 20


 
©2017 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.