Before Biden spins the jobs numbers?

[Concart]

STRAWMAN...AGAIN!!!

The ZH article was quoting ONLY numbers from the BLS...you IDIOT!!!

Okay you senile, old fart?

Show us all EXACTLY...how the numbers that the article used, are erroneous.
You know?
The numbers from the BLS?

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/s...llion-jobs-gap-emerges-broken-payrolls-report

You chastised your ‘students’ for using biased website and then quote a far right pro Putin conspiracy theory website. I would no more read your article than I would something from gateway pundit. You just made a complete fool of yourself. No need for me to pile on. Are you gonna hump my leg again tomorrow? It’s kinda cute. As for ever taking you seriously well….you lost all of your credibility. Have a nice day son.

Btw thanks for proving my point by posting that chart. Try reading it again and apply math. Have fun. Maybe it’ll keep you busy.

 

[Concart]

Strawman.

The numbers ZH used - that I was referring to - were from the BLS.
That is the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Which is a government department under the DOL.
Or is that too 'right wing' for you.
You senile, old goat.


Oh...and it's Tyler Durden.
Not Tyler Durdin.

Durden, Durdin who the fuck cares? Every byline is a fictional character. Guess that went right over your head.

It isn’t the.numbers that are wrong it’s the spin. Those numbers are apples and oranges. One is to measure job creation one is to measure the employment status of the population by various demographics. They teach you that in Econ 101. Guess you flunked that too. I didn’t.

 

[RB 60]

You chastised your ‘students’ for using biased website and then quote a far right pro Putin conspiracy theory website. I would no more read your article than I would something from gateway pundit. You just made a complete fool of yourself. No need for me to pile on. Are you gonna hump my leg again tomorrow? It’s kinda cute. As for ever taking you seriously well….you lost all of your credibility. Have a nice day son.

Btw thanks for proving my point by posting that chart. Try reading it again and apply math. Have fun. Maybe it’ll keep you busy.

^ This is why most of us (at least those of us with a bit of acumen) think you're a fucking idiot.

 

[Concart]

^ This is why most of us (at least those of us with a bit of acumen) think you're a fucking idiot.

really? What part of the post is wrong. Be specific.

 

[RB 60]

really? What part of the post is wrong. Be specific.

All of it. Every last word.

 

[Concart]

All of it. Every last word.

Zero hedge is a far right website. Fact based on their content. Tyler Durden is a fictional character. Fact. Every single article on Zero Hedge is written under the name ‘Tyler Durden’. Fact. The website is consistently inaccurate or false. It is run by Pro Putin Bulgarians. Fact. The fed chart on labor participation begins to drop around 2015 which is when Boomers began to retire. Fact.

Try again.

 

[McRocket]

You chastised your ‘students’ for using biased website and then quote a far right pro Putin conspiracy theory website. I would no more read your article than I would something from gateway pundit. You just made a complete fool of yourself. No need for me to pile on. Are you gonna hump my leg again tomorrow? It’s kinda cute. As for ever taking you seriously well….you lost all of your credibility. Have a nice day son.

Btw thanks for proving my point by posting that chart. Try reading it again and apply math. Have fun. Maybe it’ll keep you busy.

Typical, pathetic, strawman excuse from a loser like you.

So...you NEVER even read the article.
And the article was SOLELY about statistics from the BLS.

Yes or no, you trolling piece of excrement?
Are the statistics from the BLS invalid?
Yes or no?

Or are you going to keep running away...like BidenPresident did?

 

[McRocket]

Durden, Durdin who the fuck cares? Every byline is a fictional character. Guess that went right over your head.

No idiot.
Tyler Durden was a character from a famous film - Fight Club.
That is why they use it on ZH.

It isn’t the.numbers that are wrong it’s the spin. Those numbers are apples and oranges. One is to measure job creation one is to measure the employment status of the population by various demographics. They teach you that in Econ 101. Guess you flunked that too. I didn’t.

You are actually saying that the Establishment Survey and the Household Survey do not BOTH measure job creation?

Hello idiot?

This is from the BLS:

'The household survey provides information
on the labor force, employment, and unemployment that appears in the "A" tables,
marked HOUSEHOLD DATA. It is a sample survey of about 60,000 eligible households
conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau for the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).

The establishment survey provides information on employment, hours, and
earnings of employees on nonfarm payrolls'

https://web.archive.org/web/20140712081411/http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.tn.htm

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.b.htm
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.a.htm


They BOTH provide information on EMPLOYMENT.
THEY BOTH LIST NEWLY EMPLOYED PERSONS FOR THE MONTH.

DUH!!!


They are not 'apples and oranges'.
They are more like two types of apples.


In all seriousness.
You are OUT OF YOUR LEAGUE.
And are making a fool of yourself.

 

[McRocket]

Btw thanks for proving my point by posting that chart. Try reading it again and apply math. Have fun. Maybe it’ll keep you busy.

And what exactly in the chart I provided does it prove your point?
And be specific...if you even can be.

You useless, trolling piece of shit?

 

[McRocket]

Yes...I am bored right now (obviously).

Zero hedge is a far right website. Fact based on their content. Tyler Durden is a fictional character. Fact. Every single article on Zero Hedge is written under the name ‘Tyler Durden’. Fact. The website is consistently inaccurate or false. It is run by Pro Putin Bulgarians. Fact. The fed chart on labor participation begins to drop around 2015 which is when Boomers began to retire. Fact.

Try again.

Here is the post in question:

'You chastised your ‘students’ for using biased website and then quote a far right pro Putin conspiracy theory website. I would no more read your article than I would something from gateway pundit. You just made a complete fool of yourself. No need for me to pile on. Are you gonna hump my leg again tomorrow? It’s kinda cute. As for ever taking you seriously well….you lost all of your credibility. Have a nice day son.

Btw thanks for proving my point by posting that chart. Try reading it again and apply math. Have fun. Maybe it’ll keep you busy.'

You chastised your ‘students’ for using biased website

I do not recall doing that.
And since you won't prove it...your point means nothing.
PLUS - what 'students' are you blathering about?

and then quote a far right pro Putin conspiracy theory website.

They are libertarian...idiot.
They are not pro a dictatorial-like ruler.
Duh.

I would no more read your article than I would something from gateway pundit.

My point was about the statistics from the BLS that were in the article.
Not the article itself.
Again...DUH!!!

You just made a complete fool of yourself.

And how EXACTLY did I do that?

'fool
1: a person lacking in judgment or prudence'

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fool

No need for me to pile on. Are you gonna hump my leg again tomorrow? It’s kinda cute.

Pure ad hominem's.

As for ever taking you seriously well….you lost all of your credibility. Have a nice day son.

Where EXACTLY did I say that i care in the remotest sense of the word if you 'respect me' or not?
Why would I care whether one of the biggest trolls on this site...respects me or not?

Btw thanks for proving my point by posting that chart. Try reading it again and apply math. Have fun. Maybe it’ll keep you busy.'

Again.
What specifically about the chart I posted 'proves your point'?

 

[Concart]

Yes...I am bored right now (obviously).



Here is the post in question:

'You chastised your ‘students’ for using biased website and then quote a far right pro Putin conspiracy theory website. I would no more read your article than I would something from gateway pundit. You just made a complete fool of yourself. No need for me to pile on. Are you gonna hump my leg again tomorrow? It’s kinda cute. As for ever taking you seriously well….you lost all of your credibility. Have a nice day son.

Btw thanks for proving my point by posting that chart. Try reading it again and apply math. Have fun. Maybe it’ll keep you busy.'


I do not recall doing that.
And since you won't prove it...your point means nothing.
PLUS - what 'students' are you blathering about?


They are libertarian...idiot.
They are not pro a dictatorial-like ruler.
Duh.


My point was about the statistics from the BLS that were in the article.
Not the article itself.
Again...DUH!!!



And how EXACTLY did I do that?

'fool
1: a person lacking in judgment or prudence'

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fool


Pure ad hominem's.



Where EXACTLY did I say that i care in the remotest sense of the word if you 'respect me' or not?
Why would I care whether one of the biggest trolls on this site...respects me or not?



Again.
What specifically about the chart I posted 'proves your point'?

https://www.businessinsider.com/who...that-spread-coronavirus-misinformation-2020-2

Oops

 

[McRocket]

https://www.businessinsider.com/who...that-spread-coronavirus-misinformation-2020-2

Oops

Your link has NOTHING to do with my point.
Or even yours.

ZH is a fringe site.
I find it annoying, most of the time.
And the people who comment on it are largely WEIRD!!!
But they do a great job of posting statistics.
And analyzing, said statistics.

And considering you do not read their articles?
You have NO WAY of knowing if that is true or not.


Now..stop dodging my question.
For the THIRD time:

You typed:
'Btw thanks for proving my point by posting that chart. Try reading it again and apply math. Have fun. Maybe it’ll keep you busy.'

Again.
What specifically about the chart I posted 'proves your point'?

 

[Concart]

Your link has NOTHING to do with my point.
Or even yours.

ZH is a fringe site.
I find it annoying, most of the time.
And the people who comment on it are largely WEIRD!!!
But they do a great job of posting statistics.
And analyzing, said statistics.

And considering you do not read their articles?
You have NO WAY of knowing if that is true or not.


Now..stop dodging my question.
For the THIRD time:

You typed:
'Btw thanks for proving my point by posting that chart. Try reading it again and apply math. Have fun. Maybe it’ll keep you busy.'

Again.
What specifically about the chart I posted 'proves your point'?

Didn’t you say goodbye? I guess you really can’t quit me. I’ve read zerohedge enough to know their agenda. Did you know fight club wasn’t real? In other words…. Fiction.

 

[McRocket]

Didn’t you say goodbye? I guess you really can’t quit me. I’ve read zerohedge enough to know their agenda. Did you know fight club wasn’t real? In other words…. Fiction.

Now..stop dodging my question.
For the FOURTH time:

You typed:
'Btw thanks for proving my point by posting that chart. Try reading it again and apply math. Have fun. Maybe it’ll keep you busy.'

Again.
What specifically about the chart I posted 'proves your point'?


Watch folks!
He desperately tries to try and distract me from my question.
Because he KNOWS that he blew it...he cannot answer it properly.

 

[McRocket]

Actually, this number is ideal. Job growth has slowed. There is a much greater potential for a soft landing at this point. The labor participation rate is not terribly meaningful, it has changed little since a large drop as boomers began to retire. The OP is about 10% as smart as he thinks he is.

You ran from my question...YET AGAIN.

Tell us all EXACTLY - using unbiased links to data to backup your point - why a DROP of 321,000 jobs in October is 'ideal'?
I GUARANTEE that you cannot.

 

[McRocket]

Durden, Durdin who the fuck cares? Every byline is a fictional character. Guess that went right over your head.

It isn’t the.numbers that are wrong it’s the spin. Those numbers are apples and oranges. One is to measure job creation one is to measure the employment status of the population by various demographics. They teach you that in Econ 101. Guess you flunked that too. I didn’t.

Again...dodged my question.

You are actually saying that the Establishment Survey and the Household Survey do not, BOTH, measure job creation?

True or False?