So How Many Times Were There More Jobs Than People During The Obama Years?

[Harpy Eagle]

Yeah, I wasn't even gonna bother responding to that idiocy.

Yeah, I wasn't even gonna bother responding to that idiocy.

Ok, take out the people under 16 and do the math again, its not an insignificant number.

Statistically, yes it is


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

LOL, but "statistically" a poll of 1000 people out of 330,000,000 is significant to you? Hypocrisy is your strong suit, golfer. or maybe your only suit.

You are comparing apples to land mines.

You are just too stupid to understand such topics


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

BS, statistically significant is a term of art in the science of statistics. I suggest that you go to your local library and check out a stat 101 textbook. A sample of 1000 out of 330,000,000 does not meet the criteria of statistically significant no matter what lies the pollsters have told you.

I am quite sure that I understand this topic much better than you do. Try to educate yourself so that you don't look so foolish in the future.

Holy fuck you are stupid!

Statistical significance does not apply to the sampling, but to the results.

The only thing you understand better than I do is the correct temperature for the oil to cook the fries at Wendy’s in.

I have educated myself on the topic to the tune of a Masters degree in Applied Analytics and a current career as a statistician.

Now, go back to your fries and leave the adults to have a discussion.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[danielpalos]

Unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed removes that friction from our economy.

 

[edward37]

Ok, take out the people under 16 and do the math again, its not an insignificant number.

Statistically, yes it is


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

LOL, but "statistically" a poll of 1000 people out of 330,000,000 is significant to you? Hypocrisy is your strong suit, golfer. or maybe your only suit.

You are comparing apples to land mines.

You are just too stupid to understand such topics


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

BS, statistically significant is a term of art in the science of statistics. I suggest that you go to your local library and check out a stat 101 textbook. A sample of 1000 out of 330,000,000 does not meet the criteria of statistically significant no matter what lies the pollsters have told you.

I am quite sure that I understand this topic much better than you do. Try to educate yourself so that you don't look so foolish in the future.

Holy fuck you are stupid!

Statistical significance does not apply to the sampling, but to the results.

The only thing you understand better than I do is the correct temperature for the oil to cook the fries at Wendy’s in.

I have educated myself on the topic to the tune of a Masters degree in Applied Analytics and a current career as a statistician.

Now, go back to your fries and leave the adults to have a discussion.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

I have to say Gator,you crack me up

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Statistically, yes it is


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

LOL, but "statistically" a poll of 1000 people out of 330,000,000 is significant to you? Hypocrisy is your strong suit, golfer. or maybe your only suit.

You are comparing apples to land mines.

You are just too stupid to understand such topics


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

BS, statistically significant is a term of art in the science of statistics. I suggest that you go to your local library and check out a stat 101 textbook. A sample of 1000 out of 330,000,000 does not meet the criteria of statistically significant no matter what lies the pollsters have told you.

I am quite sure that I understand this topic much better than you do. Try to educate yourself so that you don't look so foolish in the future.

Holy fuck you are stupid!

Statistical significance does not apply to the sampling, but to the results.

The only thing you understand better than I do is the correct temperature for the oil to cook the fries at Wendy’s in.

I have educated myself on the topic to the tune of a Masters degree in Applied Analytics and a current career as a statistician.

Now, go back to your fries and leave the adults to have a discussion.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

I have to say Gator,you crack me up

Glad to hear it. This place should be entertaining


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Redfish]

someone is providing food, water, transportation, tents, etc. Who do you think it is? this is not just some random exodus, its being orchestrated by someone, and it has to be someone with a lot of money, Soros fits the bill.

Actually Tramp fits the bill better. He needed an issue to try to save the GOP in the midterms, and thus himself from criminal prosecution, so he financed Trump's Convoy and presto he has an issue to motivate his base.

please provide some proof of that stupid claim.

 

[Redfish]

Ok, take out the people under 16 and do the math again, its not an insignificant number.

Statistically, yes it is


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

LOL, but "statistically" a poll of 1000 people out of 330,000,000 is significant to you? Hypocrisy is your strong suit, golfer. or maybe your only suit.

You are comparing apples to land mines.

You are just too stupid to understand such topics


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

BS, statistically significant is a term of art in the science of statistics. I suggest that you go to your local library and check out a stat 101 textbook. A sample of 1000 out of 330,000,000 does not meet the criteria of statistically significant no matter what lies the pollsters have told you.

I am quite sure that I understand this topic much better than you do. Try to educate yourself so that you don't look so foolish in the future.

Holy fuck you are stupid!

Statistical significance does not apply to the sampling, but to the results.

The only thing you understand better than I do is the correct temperature for the oil to cook the fries at Wendy’s in.

I have educated myself on the topic to the tune of a Masters degree in Applied Analytics and a current career as a statistician.

Now, go back to your fries and leave the adults to have a discussion.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

where do you get this crap? If you are a career statistician you must be struggling to find work because you don't know the very basics of statistical theory and calculations.

In order to be statistically significant the sample has to be at least 5% of the total population. I fully understand how the pollsters claim to overcome that by carefully selecting their samples to proportionately represent every demographic that exists in our 300 million population, but give that a few seconds of thought. Really? every demographic proportionately represented? How many of the 1000 sampled represent transgender native americans with one leg? ( Exaggeration for effect)

 

[Redfish]

LOL, but "statistically" a poll of 1000 people out of 330,000,000 is significant to you? Hypocrisy is your strong suit, golfer. or maybe your only suit.

You are comparing apples to land mines.

You are just too stupid to understand such topics


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

BS, statistically significant is a term of art in the science of statistics. I suggest that you go to your local library and check out a stat 101 textbook. A sample of 1000 out of 330,000,000 does not meet the criteria of statistically significant no matter what lies the pollsters have told you.

I am quite sure that I understand this topic much better than you do. Try to educate yourself so that you don't look so foolish in the future.

Holy fuck you are stupid!

Statistical significance does not apply to the sampling, but to the results.

The only thing you understand better than I do is the correct temperature for the oil to cook the fries at Wendy’s in.

I have educated myself on the topic to the tune of a Masters degree in Applied Analytics and a current career as a statistician.

Now, go back to your fries and leave the adults to have a discussion.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

I have to say Gator,you crack me up

Glad to hear it. This place should be entertaining


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

your position as court jester is only challenged by rightwinger (or his sock Jake starkey)

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Statistically, yes it is


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

LOL, but "statistically" a poll of 1000 people out of 330,000,000 is significant to you? Hypocrisy is your strong suit, golfer. or maybe your only suit.

You are comparing apples to land mines.

You are just too stupid to understand such topics


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

BS, statistically significant is a term of art in the science of statistics. I suggest that you go to your local library and check out a stat 101 textbook. A sample of 1000 out of 330,000,000 does not meet the criteria of statistically significant no matter what lies the pollsters have told you.

I am quite sure that I understand this topic much better than you do. Try to educate yourself so that you don't look so foolish in the future.

Holy fuck you are stupid!

Statistical significance does not apply to the sampling, but to the results.

The only thing you understand better than I do is the correct temperature for the oil to cook the fries at Wendy’s in.

I have educated myself on the topic to the tune of a Masters degree in Applied Analytics and a current career as a statistician.

Now, go back to your fries and leave the adults to have a discussion.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

where do you get this crap? If you are a career statistician you must be struggling to find work because you don't know the very basics of statistical theory and calculations.

In order to be statistically significant the sample has to be at least 5% of the total population. I fully understand how the pollsters claim to overcome that by carefully selecting their samples to proportionately represent every demographic that exists in our 300 million population, but give that a few seconds of thought. Really? every demographic proportionately represented? How many of the 1000 sampled represent transgender native americans with one leg? ( Exaggeration for effect)

Nope, being paid very well as a matter of a fact.

And you are wrong one more time, statistical significance does not apply to sampling.

Statistical significance | Institute for Work & Health

Researchers never claim to cover every demographic, you are just making that shit up also.

You need to stay in your lane, statistics is clearly above your intellect level.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Brain357]

So now Obama comes back from vacation to brag about how this is his economy? The Trump economic wonder was created by him?
Really? Does anyone ever recall a time during that 8 year horror when we hit 20,000 in the stock market and we had 7 million job openings?

Stagnant wages is a wonder.

 

[Meathead]

LOL, but "statistically" a poll of 1000 people out of 330,000,000 is significant to you? Hypocrisy is your strong suit, golfer. or maybe your only suit.

You are comparing apples to land mines.

You are just too stupid to understand such topics


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

BS, statistically significant is a term of art in the science of statistics. I suggest that you go to your local library and check out a stat 101 textbook. A sample of 1000 out of 330,000,000 does not meet the criteria of statistically significant no matter what lies the pollsters have told you.

I am quite sure that I understand this topic much better than you do. Try to educate yourself so that you don't look so foolish in the future.

Holy fuck you are stupid!

Statistical significance does not apply to the sampling, but to the results.

The only thing you understand better than I do is the correct temperature for the oil to cook the fries at Wendy’s in.

I have educated myself on the topic to the tune of a Masters degree in Applied Analytics and a current career as a statistician.

Now, go back to your fries and leave the adults to have a discussion.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

where do you get this crap? If you are a career statistician you must be struggling to find work because you don't know the very basics of statistical theory and calculations.

In order to be statistically significant the sample has to be at least 5% of the total population. I fully understand how the pollsters claim to overcome that by carefully selecting their samples to proportionately represent every demographic that exists in our 300 million population, but give that a few seconds of thought. Really? every demographic proportionately represented? How many of the 1000 sampled represent transgender native americans with one leg? ( Exaggeration for effect)

Nope, being paid very well as a matter of a fact.

And you are wrong one more time, statistical significance does not apply to sampling.

Statistical significance | Institute for Work & Health

Researchers never claim to cover every demographic, you are just making that shit up also.

You need to stay in your lane, statistics is clearly above your intellect level.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

So let me get this straight. You're a career gay Marine millionaire with a Masters in Applied Analytics, right? ... hmm

 

[Harpy Eagle]

You are comparing apples to land mines.

You are just too stupid to understand such topics


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

BS, statistically significant is a term of art in the science of statistics. I suggest that you go to your local library and check out a stat 101 textbook. A sample of 1000 out of 330,000,000 does not meet the criteria of statistically significant no matter what lies the pollsters have told you.

I am quite sure that I understand this topic much better than you do. Try to educate yourself so that you don't look so foolish in the future.

Holy fuck you are stupid!

Statistical significance does not apply to the sampling, but to the results.

The only thing you understand better than I do is the correct temperature for the oil to cook the fries at Wendy’s in.

I have educated myself on the topic to the tune of a Masters degree in Applied Analytics and a current career as a statistician.

Now, go back to your fries and leave the adults to have a discussion.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

where do you get this crap? If you are a career statistician you must be struggling to find work because you don't know the very basics of statistical theory and calculations.

In order to be statistically significant the sample has to be at least 5% of the total population. I fully understand how the pollsters claim to overcome that by carefully selecting their samples to proportionately represent every demographic that exists in our 300 million population, but give that a few seconds of thought. Really? every demographic proportionately represented? How many of the 1000 sampled represent transgender native americans with one leg? ( Exaggeration for effect)

Nope, being paid very well as a matter of a fact.

And you are wrong one more time, statistical significance does not apply to sampling.

Statistical significance | Institute for Work & Health

Researchers never claim to cover every demographic, you are just making that shit up also.

You need to stay in your lane, statistics is clearly above your intellect level.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

So let me get this straight. You're a career gay Marine millionaire with a Masters in Applied Analytics, right? ... hmm

Well, you got it just about half right, not bad for a moron.

I did 20 years in the Marines, retiring about 9.5 years ago. At which time I used my GI Bill to finish my bachelors and get my Masters as well as two certificates along the way.

Between the wife and I we make enough to be categorized as the top 10%.

If I were a millionaire I would not be working.

I am not gay, I have never been attracted to men, way too much of a tits man for that.

 

[Meathead]

BS, statistically significant is a term of art in the science of statistics. I suggest that you go to your local library and check out a stat 101 textbook. A sample of 1000 out of 330,000,000 does not meet the criteria of statistically significant no matter what lies the pollsters have told you.

I am quite sure that I understand this topic much better than you do. Try to educate yourself so that you don't look so foolish in the future.

Holy fuck you are stupid!

Statistical significance does not apply to the sampling, but to the results.

The only thing you understand better than I do is the correct temperature for the oil to cook the fries at Wendy’s in.

I have educated myself on the topic to the tune of a Masters degree in Applied Analytics and a current career as a statistician.

Now, go back to your fries and leave the adults to have a discussion.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

where do you get this crap? If you are a career statistician you must be struggling to find work because you don't know the very basics of statistical theory and calculations.

In order to be statistically significant the sample has to be at least 5% of the total population. I fully understand how the pollsters claim to overcome that by carefully selecting their samples to proportionately represent every demographic that exists in our 300 million population, but give that a few seconds of thought. Really? every demographic proportionately represented? How many of the 1000 sampled represent transgender native americans with one leg? ( Exaggeration for effect)

Nope, being paid very well as a matter of a fact.

And you are wrong one more time, statistical significance does not apply to sampling.

Statistical significance | Institute for Work & Health

Researchers never claim to cover every demographic, you are just making that shit up also.

You need to stay in your lane, statistics is clearly above your intellect level.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

So let me get this straight. You're a career gay Marine millionaire with a Masters in Applied Analytics, right? ... hmm

Well, you got it just about half right, not bad for a moron.

I did 20 years in the Marines, retiring about 9.5 years ago. At which time I used my GI Bill to finish my bachelors and get my Masters as well as two certificates along the way.

Between the wife and I we make enough to be categorized as the top 10%.

If I were a millionaire I would not be working.

I am not gay, I have never been attracted to men, way too much of a tits man for that.

I was pretty dubious about most of it, but you blew it when you denied being gay. Nothing against fags, but bullshitters ... yeah.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Obama's argument is strained, given the fact that Trump is pursuing very different economic and regulatory polices than the ones Obama pursued. Obama did a decent job with the economy, better than Bush did, but for him to claim that he deserves most of the credit for the Trump economic boom is invalid.

 

[grainbely]

So now Obama comes back from vacation to brag about how this is his economy? The Trump economic wonder was created by him?
Really? Does anyone ever recall a time during that 8 year horror when we hit 20,000 in the stock market and we had 7 million job openings?

Lol, how many points has tRump dropped the unemployment rate?

Trump's Numbers - FactCheck.org

That was kinda my point. He hasn't even knocked a full point off of it. And his job creation numbers are lagging behind as well.

I will presume you serve food or work in a kitchen for a living.

all i remember during the Obama recession was about 35% unemployment with over 90 million people unemployed

35% unemployment? Wtf are you smoking?

 

[pinqy]

Nobody wants to answer the question.

How much change has tRump actually made in the unemployment numbers?

black, Hispanic, Asian, and female unemployment is the lowest ever recorded. Presidents get credit or blame for what happens during their terms.

Under Obama there was never a time when there were more available jobs than job seekers. That is happening today under Trump.

Why won't you answer the question?

How much change has tRump actually made in the unemployment numbers?

From like 4% under Obama to like 3% under Trump? For Obama when he started as president in his first month it grew to 10%. That’s what bush and the GOP handed him.

4.8 to 3.9.

0.9%.

and 0.9% of 330,000,000 is ?????

It’s not .9% of anything, that’s not how percentages work.

4.8% of 159,718,000 minus 3.9% of 161,776,000 are the actual numbers. Well, the September data have come out so it’s now 3.7% of 161,926,000

The unemployment rate is not percent of the total population...it’s percent of the labor force.

Unemployment rate
Labor Force level

 

[Faun]

Obama's argument is strained, given the fact that Trump is pursuing very different economic and regulatory polices than the ones Obama pursued. Obama did a decent job with the economy, better than Bush did, but for him to claim that he deserves most of the credit for the Trump economic boom is invalid.

And yet the stars prove you’re an idiot. Go figger?

 

[Faun]

Lol, how many points has tRump dropped the unemployment rate?

Trump's Numbers - FactCheck.org

That was kinda my point. He hasn't even knocked a full point off of it. And his job creation numbers are lagging behind as well.

I will presume you serve food or work in a kitchen for a living.

all i remember during the Obama recession was about 35% unemployment with over 90 million people unemployed

35% unemployment? Wtf are you smoking?

Conservaganja.

 

[Redfish]

black, Hispanic, Asian, and female unemployment is the lowest ever recorded. Presidents get credit or blame for what happens during their terms.

Under Obama there was never a time when there were more available jobs than job seekers. That is happening today under Trump.

Why won't you answer the question?

How much change has tRump actually made in the unemployment numbers?

From like 4% under Obama to like 3% under Trump? For Obama when he started as president in his first month it grew to 10%. That’s what bush and the GOP handed him.

4.8 to 3.9.

0.9%.

and 0.9% of 330,000,000 is ?????

It’s not .9% of anything, that’s not how percentages work.

4.8% of 159,718,000 minus 3.9% of 161,776,000 are the actual numbers. Well, the September data have come out so it’s now 3.7% of 161,926,000

The unemployment rate is not percent of the total population...it’s percent of the labor force.

Unemployment rate
Labor Force level

yes, and the labor force is a fluid number. It is not a constant. The facts are that under Trump the UE is at record lows, especially for blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and women. We also know that people who stopped looking for work were removed from the calculation under Obama, I don't know is that has been corrected or not.

 

[Redfish]

LOL, but "statistically" a poll of 1000 people out of 330,000,000 is significant to you? Hypocrisy is your strong suit, golfer. or maybe your only suit.

You are comparing apples to land mines.

You are just too stupid to understand such topics


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

BS, statistically significant is a term of art in the science of statistics. I suggest that you go to your local library and check out a stat 101 textbook. A sample of 1000 out of 330,000,000 does not meet the criteria of statistically significant no matter what lies the pollsters have told you.

I am quite sure that I understand this topic much better than you do. Try to educate yourself so that you don't look so foolish in the future.

Holy fuck you are stupid!

Statistical significance does not apply to the sampling, but to the results.

The only thing you understand better than I do is the correct temperature for the oil to cook the fries at Wendy’s in.

I have educated myself on the topic to the tune of a Masters degree in Applied Analytics and a current career as a statistician.

Now, go back to your fries and leave the adults to have a discussion.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

where do you get this crap? If you are a career statistician you must be struggling to find work because you don't know the very basics of statistical theory and calculations.

In order to be statistically significant the sample has to be at least 5% of the total population. I fully understand how the pollsters claim to overcome that by carefully selecting their samples to proportionately represent every demographic that exists in our 300 million population, but give that a few seconds of thought. Really? every demographic proportionately represented? How many of the 1000 sampled represent transgender native americans with one leg? ( Exaggeration for effect)

Nope, being paid very well as a matter of a fact.

And you are wrong one more time, statistical significance does not apply to sampling.

Statistical significance | Institute for Work & Health

Researchers never claim to cover every demographic, you are just making that shit up also.

You need to stay in your lane, statistics is clearly above your intellect level.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

doesn't apply to sampling?????????? are you a complete fool? that is all it has to do with, the size of the sample and the size of the population being sampled. You are either quite stupid or a bald faced liar, or both.

the pollsters do claim validity for their tiny samples by claiming that they proportionately include every demographic in the sample. that is even more ridiculous when you see that most of the polls are taken from people in NY and Cal.

 

[g5000]

So now Obama comes back from vacation to brag about how this is his economy? The Trump economic wonder was created by him?
Really? Does anyone ever recall a time during that 8 year horror when we hit 20,000 in the stock market and we had 7 million job openings?

We clearly need more Mexicans to come here and fill those job openings.