i wish the media would make up their min ds.....

“Oops!

My cut & paste was from bloomberg.com


...and no strat - that's not what the thread is about.”

“am I the only one that find this phuckin funny as hell?:

it's the fact, i did not make it up, i am correct and ya'll aer wrong. if you had any integrity you would admit that you are either stupid or at least intelectually dishonest.


refute the fact that the media is composed of democrats over repubs 9-1.

9-1

9-1


please try to hold the childish insults adress my point which is ;”

“I know, I know. I really missed the boy wonder.”

“Boy Blunder, is more like it!






JIHAD CRITICAL THINKING!


JIHAD ANYONE THAT DOESN'T THINK LIKE ME!!


JIHAD CHILDISH REMARKS!!!”

“LOL!”

“My 4% figure for unemployment was a round number. My point is that there will always be unemployment and the 4% mark is almost a net zero unemployment mark.

Sorry for not being more specific. Any economist will say the same thing.”

“You see that it was 2.9% in 1953?

Pretty round figures you use.”

“hah ala! very funny and original....oh wait, it wasn't original at all was it.

critical thinking is just a way for liberals to muddy the watrers and cause doupt inn the minds of people who are trying to think for themselves.

pheaddy, i am no liar, and you calling me one makes you one.

9-1 liberals in the media. that's the real story that peter jennings will never tell you. brokaw doesn't want you to know and rather would rather you stay ignorant.

JIHAD TRUTH!”

“9-1 sounds like a pretty specific ratio. Lets see where you got it and take a look at it and figure out if it's right based on the evidence, rather than what you arbitrarily decide to believe.”

“Did I read that right?

Critical thinking is a liberal plot of some sort?”

“it's a fact . the media IS liberal. you can't deny it. proove that it isnt!


9-1 baybe



don't hate tha playah, hate tha game



JIHAD TRUTH, JIHAD BUSH”

“9:1 of people who own media businesses are republican, and will fire the democrat reporter if the Republican Party tells em' to..... ask Howard Stern.”

“Let me get this straight. The media is 9 - 1 ration liberal to conservative. Either I missed the source or one wasn't given. So, without the source, Phaedrus is told to prove it isn't. This comes from a good American who lives in the land where you are innocent until proven guilty. But, the statement makes an accusation and then the person accused is pressured to disprove it. Ok, I see! (shrug shoulders and walk away in bewilderment)”

“That's the way the IRS works, too.”

“Alright strat. I'll do your work for you.

According to a 1997 survey of 1,037 reporters at 61 newspapers of all sizes across the nation performed by the American Society of Newspaper Editors:


"What is your political orientation?"

Democrat or liberal 36%

Republican or conservative 8%

Lean to Democrat/liberal 25%

Lean to Republican/conservative 7%

Independent 24%



So... 61% identified themselves as either Democrat/liberal or leaning Democrat/liberal and 15% identified themselves as either Republican/conservative or leaning Republican/conservative.

That's about a 4 to 1 ratio, not 9 to 1.

Care to back up your assertion - or are you too stupid or intellectually dishonest? (Hold the childish insults, please.)”

“While I'm at it:

"...liberals in the media. that's the real story that peter jennings will never tell you."
- stratdewd
01:06:57 AM
03/09/04



"Most of the time I really think responsible journalists, of which I hope I'm counted as one, leave our bias at the side of the table. Now it is true, historically in the media, it has been more of a liberal persuasion for many years. It has taken us a long time, too long in my view, to have vigorous conservative voices heard as widely in the media as they now are. And so I think yes, on occasion, there is a liberal instinct in the media which we need to keep our eye on, if you will."
-- ABC anchor Peter Jennings appearing on CNN's Larry King Live, April 10, 2002”

“Will strat blame bad intelligence from the CIA?”

“Well, seeing as though both ABC and NBC are owned by other, bigger companies, than by Struts deduction, GE and Disney are liberial also......

Plus, FOX, being the big company it is, would make all of IT'S companies Repubs, right?”

“Can you all see the graphic - or is it a red x?

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/09/opinion/09KRUG.html”

“It's there, V!”

“Hey strat - How'd you miss this one? You're not hiding again are you?

4-1, not 9-1.

See the Jennings quote.”

“the jennings quote-yes. that incredible......wonder why that never made any fanfair....


the survey....that was only newspaper reporters. the study i saw was tv and everything. it was soemthing like 87%. the study you showed only had 15% with republican leanings or more. that leaves 85% unrepublican so maybe it is the one i say abuot 5 years ago. i'll look it up sometime but i have a real life so not now. i know i won't miss anything important.....hopefully i'll be back in town by 10 tonight so ya'll will have all day to rip me a new one, so enjoy....buh bye lefties.....


jobs? dang man, stay on task violin. aren't there like 7 threads already about that?”

“Violin proved his point. There is a liberal media bias. That was his point wasn't it?”

“Stay on task? Do you remember what this thread was about? Go read the first post.


So adding cable TV and AM radio will make the media more liberal? I'll believe it when I see it.”

“January stats say a whopping 8.9% unemployment rate in New York

On a side issue, I read an article this morning in the paper (am New York). Assemblyman Richard Brodsky (D- Westchester) has proposed a bill that would prohibit companies that receive state funded corporate welfare from outsourcing even a single job. State Senator Nicholas Spano (R-Westchester) has introduced the bill in the Senate, giving the item a credible chance to become law.

The thinking is that tax incentives are common lures to businesses to locate or expand. Businesses can receive grants, land or chepaer electricity in exchange for producing jobs. These men ( and kudos to them for thinking this way) are proposing that these jobs should go to the potential work force that are looking for work in the area. If they do not comply, all subsidies must be paid back. No state has yet to enact legislation of this kind, although it has been proposed in several places.

Companies that have moved jobs out of state or overseas:

General Electric - 11,000 jobs
Kodak - 6,000 to 8,000 jobs
Citigroup - 3,000 jobs
Bank of America - 1,000 jobs
Kraft - 300 to 600 jobs”

“i'd move too if hillary was my senator...”

“treebeard, while i may not question the fact, i have many friends that live in new york state, i question the accuracy of your exiting job numbers. how can they say kodak 6000-8000. it appears they are allowing for a 33% margin of error? that would lead me to ask how accurate the other numbers are.”

“also, what is the date span of those numbers. i grew up in pennsylvania, about 3 miles from the northern penn/ny state line, and i know for a fact that the economy of new york state has been in dire straits for much longer than the last 3 years.”

“now baume....don't be gettin all rational”

“I've been re-examining a lot of my free trade beliefs and was thinking a national law along the lines of the NY State bill treebeard referenced above is the way to go. The only legitimate argument for corporate subsidies is to protect jobs. If a manufacturer (or service company) wants to save money by sending jobs overseas -–fine, competitive advantage and all that – but they should give up every tax break or direct subsidy as a consequence.


Where did treebeard say anything about the last 3 years?”

“i guess him posting the numbers along with the current unemployment rate of the state led me to believe he was tying the two together and it was being blamed on the current administration. i'll be sure to take everything at face value in the future.

as far as free trade, i would tend to agree along the lines of "no breaks if you send jobs away, breaks if you don't" line of thinking.”

“It sounds like we may all actually be in agreement! HOLY #&%!$!”

“what the hell kind of president signed the damn nafta agreement anyway? and how did he get it by congress before he did it?”

“Err. That was fun while it lasted.”

“well, us centralists can agree with you liberals on some issues.



mmmmmmooooooooooooooooooooooaoaooaaooaaoaoaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa”

“what's that giant sucking sound?”

“Dunno, did you take your earplugs out again?”

“Yes, Baume. I think your question was cleared up by Violin. I was relating a newspaper article and the figures were tacked on. The point was exactly as stated. This wasn't a party bickering issue. It was about local people working, or not working, asa the case may be, and whether corporate subsidies should be ended for not keeping up their end of the bargain. If you noticed, Brodsky is a Dem and Spano a Rep. So, they are both on the same page here...”

“Why is the currant 5% unemployment rate so unacceptable in '04 but when it was 5% in '98 it was considered great?”

“Published on Wednesday, March 17, 2004 by the Boston Globe
Statistics Lie on the True Cost of Living
by Robert Kuttner

WHAT IS THE MATTER with the whiny American voters? They keep telling pollsters that they think America is on the "wrong path." But don't they read the statistics? Don't they know that unemployment is at a comfortable 5.6 percent, that inflation is almost nonexistent, that the economy is growing smartly at around 4 percent?

These happy statistics, alas, don't accurately capture the economic reality of ordinary people. Take inflation. It's true that measured inflation is very low, but look at all that's left out.

In the case of health care, the government's consumer price index tracks the cost of medical services. But it is less precise about tracking who pays for them. If your employer's health plan is increasing your share of premiums and cutting the company's contribution or if the plan is increasing out-of-pocket charges or reducing what drugs it will cover, this shift is accounted for indirectly, after a lag of two years. But it hits your pocketbook immediately. And if rising medical costs deter you from seeing the doctor, that doesn't show up in the index at all.

Or consider housing. There are parts of the country where housing prices have been declining for a decade because few people want to move there. Statistically, these declines get averaged with astronomical housing costs in major metropolitan areas to show only modest average housing inflation. Around big cities, prices have plateaued at very high levels that are plainly outstripping incomes. Try telling a young person in Greater Boston or New York or LA that there's no serious housing inflation or that rents have not increased faster than earnings.

Another case of hidden inflation: A great many people in late middle age find themselves subsidizing their newly launched young. The causes of this trend are multiple: low starting salaries, skyrocketing rents, and the high cost of college tuitions and health insurance. Is this a dent in the cost of living for the middle aged? You bet. Does it show up in government statistics? Nope.

The inflation numbers also fail to capture pocketbook realities for retired Americans. A low official inflation rate plays a cruel trick on seniors. For starters, it means that cost-of-living adjustments in Security Security checks are mere pocket change. One new prescription can more than eat up this year's Social Security increase.

Further, a low rate of inflation translates into a low interest rate on savings accounts, Treasury securities, and other prudent investments for the elderly. Moreover, older people on fixed incomes who are not homeowners are also at the mercy of rising rents.

And the same deficiencies in the consumer price index that fail to capture cost shifting in health care particularly affect the elderly, who spend a disproportionate share of their income on doctor's bills, hospital costs, and drugs.

Or take energy costs. Gasoline is near an all-time high. That doesn't affect the overall index much because energy costs are a relatively small share of average total consumer spending. But if you need your car for your business, you certainly feel it.

Then we have the unemployment numbers. Nominally, unemployment is a nice, manageable 5.6 percent -- about where it was during much of the booming 1990s. But that statistic leaves out all the people who left the labor force because they gave up on ever finding a job. If you include those, the real unemployment number is more like 7.7 percent. The proof of the soft job market is that earnings have not kept up with inflation. In 2003, the official inflation rate was 2.3 percent. The median wage increase was just 2 percent. And the 2004 statistics are likely to be worse.

The "average" voter got a tax decrease that the administration likes to put at around $1,000. But that artful statistic averages Joe Sixpack with Bill Gates. The typical voter got a federal income tax cut of more like $300, and in many cases that small federal tax cut was overwhelmed by local property tax increases that were caused by declining federal aid to states and cities.

President Bush may have gotten away with telling the voters things about Iraq that just aren't true. But he'd better watch out when the evidence against his rosy statistics is right in voters' pocketbooks.

Ordinary people may not be professional statisticians, but they are not fools. America's voters know better than the experts whether their own personal economy is thriving. Bogus economic optimism only reinforces the growing sense that this president speaks with a forked tongue.

Robert Kuttner is co-editor of The American Prospect.

© Copyright 2004 Globe Newspaper Company.”

“What is the matter with the whiny liberals? Spinning numbers seems to be their specialty.

I know how much my tax cut was, cause I know simple subtraction and addition.

My out of pocket health care has not gone up. I figured that out too.

Parents have always helped out their kids. This is not new and has nothing to do with inflation. A lie.

Housing around here is still $56 a square foot. Same as three yeas ago.

Gasoline has the lowest rate of inflation of any comodity. Another lie.

Pure bunk.”

“Housing around here is still $56 a square foot. Same as three yeas ago.

I could be wrong, but, somehow, I doubt that you live in a very populated area...”

“Housing prices here have climbed more than 40% over the last three years.

Gas is 25 - 35 percent more expensive than three years ago.

Certainly you don't dispute that there are fewer jobs to be had.”

“Treebeard, maybe its one of those "factory" hog farms.”

“"There are parts of the country where housing prices have been declining for a decade because few people want to move there."


Homes in my area are selling for at least double what they were a few years ago. I honestly don't know how first time buyers are doing it.”

“My company just passed along about a 10% raise in premium drug coverage to our clients.”

“Been in a supermarket lately? No inflation? Pure BS. Try using separate figures for that and the things the average person buys on a day-to-day basis and let's look at the numbers...”

“Treebeard, you must not be workin' hard enough.”

“Who is calculating the inflation numbers?

Evidently they need to check with Robert Kuttner. He seems to have a different formula than every other economist.”