Liberal Forum

Huey » 04 Jun 2024, 12:19 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2024, 12:19 pm

You asked a question.  You were answered with one of your own sources.  Kinda sucks for ya.  Now you just lie, PK.

No, I wasn't.

Because you cannot be made to understand.
 

Blackvegetable » 04 Jun 2024, 12:31 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2024, 12:31 pm

Did you **** up your wage increase "offset", because you're an ignorant slack jawed twat?

Still evading...go **** yourself!
 

Blackvegetable » 04 Jun 2024, 12:32 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2024, 12:32 pm

No, I wasn't.

Because you cannot be made to understand.
 

 

Keep running.....

ConsRule » 04 Jun 2024, 12:36 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2024, 12:36 pm

Still evading...go **** yourself!

How is pointing out the flaw in your math "evasion"?

Don't evade....again.

Huey » 04 Jun 2024, 12:40 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2024, 12:40 pm

Keep running.....

Make your case...


Tell me how it addresses the question.
 

Blackvegetable » 04 Jun 2024, 12:41 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2024, 12:41 pm

Make your case...


Tell me how it addresses the question.
 

 

It addresses it perfectly.  It is up to you to tell us why it doesn't.  Plus, in  your eyes both of those sources are invalid.  Because I got the article off of Drudge.

Blackvegetable » 04 Jun 2024, 12:40 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2024, 12:40 pm

How is pointing out the flaw in your math "evasion"?

Don't evade....again.

Still evading...go **** yourself!

Until you PROVE the numbers wrong, with links to credible sources, that's all you get...remember?
 

Huey » 04 Jun 2024, 12:43 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2024, 12:43 pm

It addresses it perfectly.  It is up to you to tell us why it doesn't.  Plus, in  your eyes both of those sources are invalid.  Because I got the article off of Drudge.

That's an assertion.

About an irrelevant citation without a case.

Blackvegetable » 04 Jun 2024, 12:45 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2024, 12:45 pm

That's an assertion.

About an irrelevant citation without a case.

LMAO!  I did my part.  The article linked from Drudge stands, PK.  

ConsRule » 04 Jun 2024, 12:45 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2024, 12:45 pm

Still evading...go **** yourself!

Until you PROVE the numbers wrong, with links to credible sources, that's all you get...remember?

Don't presume to dictate to me, Coward.

I TOLD you you were making the same mistaken assumption. I've told you what part of your analysis is complete crap.

To show you how far off you are..

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CES0500000003

in feb 2021 it was 30.06

It is now 34.75

How large is the nominal increase?
 

Huey » 04 Jun 2024, 12:46 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2024, 12:46 pm

LMAO!  I did my part.  The article linked from Drudge stands, PK.

There's no case.

You just THINK it bears on my question.


 

Blackvegetable » 04 Jun 2024, 12:50 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2024, 12:50 pm

Don't presume to dictate to me, Coward.

I TOLD you you were making the same mistaken assumption. I've told you what part of your analysis is complete crap.

To show you how far off you are..

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CES0500000003

in feb 2021 it was 30.06

It is now 34.75

How large is the nominal increase?

I never mentioned hourly earnings.  I see you have turned to your usual ploy of changing the subject in hopes of diverting the conversation.  Prove the median household income numbers wrong, with a link to a credible source.  Until then, go **** yourself.

Mrkelly » 04 Jun 2024, 11:01 am » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2024, 11:01 am

tRump will use it for legal fees

that stimulates the economy 

Blackvegetable » 04 Jun 2024, 12:51 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2024, 12:51 pm

There's no case.

You just THINK it bears on my question.

Huey-12 minutes ago

Another whimper of " Victory!"

I’m considering voting for Trump because I am comparing everything that has occurred under plugs administration versus Trump’s administration. Just look at the two and compare the two.

ConsRule » 04 Jun 2024, 12:54 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2024, 12:54 pm

I never mentioned hourly earnings.  I see you have turned to your usual ploy of changing the subject in hopes of diverting the conversation.  Prove the median household income numbers wrong, with a link to a credible source.  Until then, go **** yourself.

If you're actually this stupid, we should stop now.

I told you what you used, and I told you you are an idiot for so doing.

To get a sense of your error I offered a better proxy.

Now do the **** math.

Blackvegetable » 04 Jun 2024, 1:17 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2024, 1:17 pm

If you're actually this stupid, we should stop now.

I told you what you used, and I told you you are an idiot for so doing.

To get a sense of your error I offered a better proxy.

Now do the **** math.

Still evading...go **** yourself.

You still have not proven any number I posted is wrong.

Diversion attempt: FAIL!

ConsRule » 04 Jun 2024, 1:20 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2024, 1:20 pm

Still evading...go **** yourself.

You still have not proven any number I posted is wrong.

Diversion attempt: FAIL!

This is what I said you would do.

It is what you always do.

You still have not proven any number I posted is wrong.

Did I tell you your number was wrong, or that your assumption was wrong?
 

Blackvegetable » 04 Jun 2024, 1:22 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2024, 1:22 pm

Did I tell you your number was wrong, or that your assumption was wrong?

You telling me you think they are wrong is completely irrelevant.  Prove, with a link to a credible source, the numbers I posted to be wrong.  No diversion to a different number...prove those numbers are wrong. Until then, go **** yourself.

 

ConsRule » 04 Jun 2024, 1:25 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2024, 1:25 pm

You telling me you think they are wrong is completely irrelevant.  Prove, with a link to a credible source, the numbers I posted to be wrong.  No diversion to a different number...prove those numbers are wrong. Until then, go **** yourself.

Answer the question.

Prove, with a link to a credible source, the numbers I posted to be wrong.

you are too stupid to understand the difference between "the number is wrong" and "it is the wrong number".

To understand why the latter, DO THE **** MATH.