Liberal Forum
Archive
‹
Political Chat Rooms
‹
No Holds Barred Political Forum
‹
WHY is it that DEMOCRATS are the ones OPPOSING "DOGE"... which is UNCOVERING $$Billions$$ in WASTED taxpayer money?
WHY is it that DEMOCRATS are the ones OPPOSING "DOGE"... which is UNCOVERING $$Billions$$ in WASTED taxpayer money?
By ConservativeWave
12 Feb 2025 8:49 am in No Holds Barred Political Forum
13 Feb 2025 6:51 am
You have to be this tall to get on Putin's Tilt-a-Whirl.....platform shoes are not allowed.
13 Feb 2025 9:11 am
I prove that I posted two examples already and you take off a year.
Deal?
Retarded Horse's view on women.
JohnEdgarSlowHorses » Today, 7:28 pm » wrote: ↑Today, 7:28 pm
JohnEdgarSlowHorses » Today, 7:28 pm » wrote: ↑Today, 7:28 pm
- I LOVE IT WHEN A CRACK WHORE GETS BEAT UP Image
- I WANT TO WATCH YOU BEAT YOUR CRACK WHORE WIFE Image Image Image
- PUT THAT WIFE BEATER ON AND GET BUSY
13 Feb 2025 9:19 am
I prove both are not and you disembowel yourself on your uncle's porch.Vegas » 11 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ I prove that I posted two examples already and you take off a year.
Deal?
13 Feb 2025 9:21 am
Blackvegetable » 2 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ I prove both are not and you disembowel yourself on your uncle's porch.
Ok, sure. Deal.
Cannon judges.
And you have to actually provide evidence , not your useless stupid opinions.
I'll get the examples. hang on.
Retarded Horse's view on women.
JohnEdgarSlowHorses » Today, 7:28 pm » wrote: ↑Today, 7:28 pm
JohnEdgarSlowHorses » Today, 7:28 pm » wrote: ↑Today, 7:28 pm
- I LOVE IT WHEN A CRACK WHORE GETS BEAT UP Image
- I WANT TO WATCH YOU BEAT YOUR CRACK WHORE WIFE Image Image Image
- PUT THAT WIFE BEATER ON AND GET BUSY
13 Feb 2025 9:23 am
I judge.Vegas » 6 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ Ok, sure. Deal.
Cannon judges.
And you have to actually provide evidence , not your useless stupid opinions.
I'll get the examples. hang on.
Neither you nor the Syphilitic Cumbucket have any idea what the term means.
You don't even understand the notion of "net".
Because you are an idiot
13 Feb 2025 9:32 am
Blackvegetable » 13 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ I judge.
Neither you nor the Syphilitic Cumbucket have any idea what the term means.
You don't even understand the notion of "net".
Because you are an idiot
Of course you want to judge. You are dishonest. Duh. No, Cannon judges. period.
**** your cowardice.
@Cannonpointer any chance you want to judge something? Veghead said that he could prove that both of these examples are not examples of survivorship bias. If he can, then I have to disembowel myself on my uncle's porch. I agreed. BTW, the idiot only read the first 5 words, he never read the whole **** thing. He will do it again. he will only talk about the first 5 words, and then claim that he debunked it.
Survivorship bias in economic statistics is when the reported data focused on only the data that have "survived" , while ignoring those that have failed or dropped out, which can lead to a skewed interpretation of the data.
Two big claims that the dims/Biden/Harris love to flaunt is their creation of 300k jobs and low inflation.
Here is the problem with their data that reflects a survivorship bias for each:
1. Job Creation:
The numbers from the Senile Pedo and the Ho didn't reflect the gross, only the net job creation. Their job creation figure typically reflects net jobs added only. The problem with that is that this figure does not account for jobs that were lost during the same period or workers who exited the labor market entirely. Some industries have experienced significant job losses that are overshadowed by growth in other areas. AI being one example of the growth that overshadowed the loss of manufacturing jobs. However, only the AI jobs were counted, while not accounting for the loss of manufacturing jobs. That's just one example uthat happened under the senile pedo and Ho. A focus on job creation without accounting for the quality or sustainability of these jobs skews the perception of the labor market's true health.
2. INflation:
Targeted Data Focus: In short, the senile Pedo and the Ho didn't account for the people who were effected the most like the lower middle class to low income earners. The industry prices that they struggle with were not included in their numbers. Only the entities whose prices decreased were counted. Inflation rates are usually measured through aggregate indices such as the Consumer Price Index (CPI), but inflation can vary widely across different sectors. While overall inflation may have decreased, certain essentials, such as housing, food, and healthcare, still experienced higher-than-average price increases. This uneven inflation impact disproportionately affects the middle class and lower-income households. By focusing on overall inflation without focusing on these variations, the statistic can overlook the "survival" of the people or sectors still struggling...which is most of America.
Retarded Horse's view on women.
JohnEdgarSlowHorses » Today, 7:28 pm » wrote: ↑Today, 7:28 pm
JohnEdgarSlowHorses » Today, 7:28 pm » wrote: ↑Today, 7:28 pm
- I LOVE IT WHEN A CRACK WHORE GETS BEAT UP Image
- I WANT TO WATCH YOU BEAT YOUR CRACK WHORE WIFE Image Image Image
- PUT THAT WIFE BEATER ON AND GET BUSY
13 Feb 2025 9:35 am
You don't even understand "net"....the Syphilitic Cumbucket may not either.Vegas » 4 minutes ago » wrote: ↑
No, Cannon judges. period.
**** your cowardice.
@Cannonpointer any chance you want to judge something? Veghead said that he could prove that both of these examples are not examples of survivorship bias. If he can, then I have to disembowel myself on my uncle's porch. I agreed. BTW, the idiot only read the first 5 words, he never read the whole **** thing. He will do it again. he will only talk about the first 5 words, and then claim that he debunked it.
13 Feb 2025 9:42 am
And there it is. I took away his stupid useless argument, and so now he has got nothing. QED. 100% accuracyBlackvegetable » 6 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ You don't even understand "net"....the Syphilitic Cumbucket may not either.
1. He will continue to turn it on me, while refusing to provide evidence to debunk them
2. More of the same ****.
3. Same stupid useless argument.
He will fulfill at least two of three ^^^
Retarded Horse's view on women.
JohnEdgarSlowHorses » Today, 7:28 pm » wrote: ↑Today, 7:28 pm
JohnEdgarSlowHorses » Today, 7:28 pm » wrote: ↑Today, 7:28 pm
- I LOVE IT WHEN A CRACK WHORE GETS BEAT UP Image
- I WANT TO WATCH YOU BEAT YOUR CRACK WHORE WIFE Image Image Image
- PUT THAT WIFE BEATER ON AND GET BUSY
13 Feb 2025 10:29 am
HELL, YOU can't even kill rag tag Ukrainians very well... THEY have killed something approaching a MILLION Russian soldiers SO FAR... HOW do you think you would fare against the U.S. Marines & Special Forces? HELL, Even the Trans-gender & DEI infested Military would TROUNCE your sorry asses ! ...Much less the MEN Trump is bringing back... THOUSANDS who were dismissed because they would not take the COVID vaccine, and THOUSANDS of others as enlistment rates are skyrocketing since Trump was elected !
YOU DO NOT seem to have a firm GRASP on REALITY !
They have places you can go to TREAT that condition, & you probably should GO... SOON !!!
13 Feb 2025 8:41 pm
It's what I live for.Vegas » Today, 10:32 am » wrote: ↑
No, Cannon judges. period.
**** your cowardice.
@Cannonpointer any chance you want to judge something?
With abated breath, I look forward to judging these things.Vegas » Today, 10:32 am » wrote: ↑ Veghead said that he could prove that both of these examples are not examples of survivorship bias. If he can, then I have to disembowel myself on my uncle's porch. I agreed. BTW, the idiot only read the first 5 words, he never read the whole **** thing. He will do it again. he will only talk about the first 5 words, and then claim that he debunked it.
It will give me a good reason to hastily google and immediately comprehend in minute detail every aspect of the concept "survivorship bias."
How hard can it be? I'm smaht. Not dumb, like people say. I'm smaht. And I want RESPECT!
"Because I SAY I am" is fallacy, not science
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not your friend
An opinion you won't defend is not yours. It's someone else's.
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe.
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge.
Only religions declare heresy; only lies require protection.
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not your friend
An opinion you won't defend is not yours. It's someone else's.
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe.
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge.
Only religions declare heresy; only lies require protection.
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
13 Feb 2025 8:42 pm
It's what the men in white clothing throw over people who cannot distinguish a cow from a bull. fruity.Blackvegetable » Today, 10:35 am » wrote: ↑ You don't even understand "net"....the Syphilitic Cumbucket may not either.
"Because I SAY I am" is fallacy, not science
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not your friend
An opinion you won't defend is not yours. It's someone else's.
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe.
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge.
Only religions declare heresy; only lies require protection.
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not your friend
An opinion you won't defend is not yours. It's someone else's.
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe.
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge.
Only religions declare heresy; only lies require protection.
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
13 Feb 2025 8:44 pm
Cannonpointer » 5 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ It's what the men in white clothing throw over people who cannot distinguish a cow from a bull. fruity.
Who is online
In total there are 1943 users online :: 5 registered, 14 bots, and 1924 guests
Bots: Moblie Safari, XenForo, proximic, app.hypefactors.com, CriteoBot, Mediapartners-Google, semantic-visions.com, ADmantX, DuckDuckGo, linkfluence.com, YandexBot, curl/7, Googlebot, bingbot