All anyone needs to know about you is that you claim to have all the receipts for the toilet paper you were never able to buy while Trump was in office.Bidencrimefamily » 11 Apr 2024, 9:15 am » wrote: ↑ Well I'm glad there are more jobs available for Americans under Biden.
Just think if americans needed employment and didnt have the options of getting one.
You're self-reporting.*rippy38 » 11 Apr 2024, 10:34 am » wrote: ↑ We are on page 8 and you have yet to refute the OP.
Newsflash... I'm not the one foundering on the rocks here.
Run Rico run...R.Suave » 11 Apr 2024, 10:53 am » wrote: ↑ You're self-reporting.
If +/- 600,000 is the threshold for statistical significance, with a 90% confidence interval, is 6,000 statistically significant?
Bidencrimefamily » 11 Apr 2024, 8:30 am » wrote: ↑ There are more jobs available because businesses are hiring people.
Prove it.Vegas » 11 Apr 2024, 11:10 am » wrote: ↑ Low paying **** jobs that pay min wage...yes, that is horrible.
I am glad that you admit it.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
R.Suave » 11 Apr 2024, 11:19 am » wrote: ↑ I don't see your answer.
That makes you the only one running.
Disprove it.
Vegas » 11 Apr 2024, 11:21 am » wrote: ↑ Look at you running from me again. What happened to the deal that you made for me?
That's what I thought.
I can safely assume that you will be hiding behind questions/demands to day, like you do daily.

You miss a lot...R.Suave » 11 Apr 2024, 11:19 am » wrote: ↑ I don't see your answer.
That makes you the only one running.
Then repost it, Rippie...
Where is your example of survivorship bias?Vegas » 11 Apr 2024, 11:27 am » wrote: ↑ Yeah, I thought you had nothing. You never anything.
Coward.
1. You know the rule and stipulations to abide by it. Would you like me to repost it?R.Suave » 11 Apr 2024, 11:29 am » wrote: ↑ Where is your example of survivorship bias?
I've posted two definitions.
1) I know it's not a rule because it doesn't apply to you.Vegas » 11 Apr 2024, 11:31 am » wrote: ↑ 1. You know the rule and stipulations to abide by it. Would you like me to repost it?
2. Stop lying. You said you would show me "both", you didn't. Lying sack of ****. You can't even post one correct definition.
R.Suave » 11 Apr 2024, 11:35 am » wrote: ↑ 1) I know it's not a rule because it doesn't apply to you.
2) I did. One even included a link to the source....that you can't distinguish one from the other proves I nailed it the first time.
You're a parking lot attendant....worthless...
Vegas » 11 Apr 2024, 11:48 am » wrote: ↑ 1) It does apply to me. It's a different rule that applies to this scenario. You never pay attention you dumb pos.
2) No you didn't. You have yet to show me "2 correct" definitions, which was your deal you made. Now produce it or stop lying.
Lying sack of ****. All you do is lie. LIE LIE LIE!!!!!
Does this "different rule" apply to you?1) It does apply to me. It's a different rule that applies to this scenario
Tell me which one you insist isn't "correct", and why...2) No you didn't. You have yet to show me "2 correct" definitions, which was your deal you made. Now produce it or stop lying
Jesus Christ. You illiterate dumb pos. I said yes. God man.
Next he's gonna dig up a two year old post of yours that has absolutely nothing to do with what y'all are currently discussing and call you a "liar" over it.Vegas » 11 Apr 2024, 12:59 pm » wrote: ↑ Jesus Christ. You illiterate dumb pos. I said yes. God man.
Rule: Acknowledge that you don't know, then you will get all the examples you want.
Fortunately for me, I already know , thus I already have the examples. Your turn.
1. You will continue to bluff, evade, and make every **** excuse under the sun.