March Unemployment Rate: 4.7% - Page 8 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-10-2006, 02:14 PM   #106
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 08:40 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2

The US Defense Budget is a fraction of the annual government budget at around 20%. As a percentage of GDP, the defense budget alone is less than 4%. US military spending does not account for the lionshare of the US Budget!
Considering how many areas of expenditure form the budget, 20% is not just a fraction, I call that a rather sizeable chunk.

Quote:
Originally posted by STING2

Mediocre standard of living? The United States ranks at #10 when it comes to standard of living, that is NOT Mediocre.
It IS mediocre in the context of its relative overall wealth and relatively high level of poverty.

Can you not see that?
__________________

__________________
AliEnvy is offline  
Old 04-10-2006, 02:24 PM   #107
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 08:40 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2

The numbers I've presented are important and significant compared to the many unsubstantiated claims made about how poor the United States is
So placing #1 on GDP and #17 on the Human Poverty Index are not substantiated or significant?

Any statistic in isolation is meaningless on its own regardless of the underlying assumptions and measurements be it umemployment or HDI or anything else.
__________________

__________________
AliEnvy is offline  
Old 04-10-2006, 02:49 PM   #108
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,486
Local Time: 03:40 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
There is NO Civil War in Iraq at this point. A couple of militia groups and Insurgents groups planting bombs here and there, and killing a few dozen people from time to time does not constitute a Civil War. This is a country of 25 million people. Far worse violence occured under Saddam but no one claimed Iraq was in the middle of a civil war.

US military officials in Iraq have from the very start stated that there is no civil war and have correctly sited the fact that there have been hundreds of Mosque bombings and execution style killings since 2003.

Once again, if you want an example of a civil war between 3 ethnic groups, I refer you to Bosnia.


STING, this is for another thread.

killing a few dozen people from time to time? has it occured to you that the only reason we don't have a Bosnia is because of US troops on the ground?

but continue ... i'm checking out.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 04-10-2006, 06:53 PM   #109
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 08:40 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by AliEnvy


So placing #1 on GDP and #17 on the Human Poverty Index are not substantiated or significant?

Any statistic in isolation is meaningless on its own regardless of the underlying assumptions and measurements be it umemployment or HDI or anything else.
Its insignificant compared to the HDI which takes into account many other factors in addition to the poverty rate, which by the standard of most countries on the planet would not even be considered poverty. Your going off of one statistic only for OECD countries.

The most important statistic is the one that takes all these factors into account which is the HDI. The United States has the 10th highest standard of living in the world, higher than the Netherlands, Germany, Japan(who liberals claimed won the cold war) and the United Kingdom despite the fact that these countries scored better on the poverty index. A small number of people in all of the OECD countries live in poverty, even in Norway the poverty rate is not 0. But, what were looking at is what is the standard of living for the average person in all of these countries and that is shown in the HDI.

The fact remains that the United States has one of the highest standards of living in the world.


As for the Budget, US Defense spending was almost 30% of the federal budget during the peacetime of the 1980s. In addition back then, Defense Spending was 6% of GDP. Today even with the cost of fighting two wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and all the related and construction cost, it is only 4.5% of GDP. As a percentage of USA's total wealth, the United States currently spends 25% less than it did during the peacetime of the 1980s.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 04-10-2006, 07:04 PM   #110
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 08:40 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511




STING, this is for another thread.

killing a few dozen people from time to time? has it occured to you that the only reason we don't have a Bosnia is because of US troops on the ground?

but continue ... i'm checking out.
Has it occured to you the tremondous changes that have happened in Iraq in only 3 years time?

As for a few dozen people being killed in single incidents from time to time, if you think that figure is to low and is actually a few hundred, meaning 200+ per incident, please site them and let us know.

On one hot summer day in the summer of 1995, 7,000 plus men from one town were lined up and executed in minutes.

What I find even more absurd about media reports is that almost any violence conducted against an Iraqi is now considered to be an act of "Civil War". Yet, who conducted the attack is unknown, but the media naturally perpatuates the myth that if it was a Shia who was attacked, then it was a Sunni who attacked him, or if it was Sunni Mosque that was attacked it was done by Shia militias, with absolutely no proof at all.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 04-10-2006, 07:32 PM   #111
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,486
Local Time: 03:40 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2


Has it occured to you the tremondous changes that have happened in Iraq in only 3 years time?

As for a few dozen people being killed in single incidents from time to time, if you think that figure is to low and is actually a few hundred, meaning 200+ per incident, please site them and let us know.

On one hot summer day in the summer of 1995, 7,000 plus men from one town were lined up and executed in minutes.

What I find even more absurd about media reports is that almost any violence conducted against an Iraqi is now considered to be an act of "Civil War". Yet, who conducted the attack is unknown, but the media naturally perpatuates the myth that if it was a Shia who was attacked, then it was a Sunni who attacked him, or if it was Sunni Mosque that was attacked it was done by Shia militias, with absolutely no proof at all.


STING: start another thread, and i'll debate with you.

too bad the administration has given up, you haven't.

continue to blame the media. it's much easier.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 04-10-2006, 08:06 PM   #112
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 08:40 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511




STING: start another thread, and i'll debate with you.

too bad the administration has given up, you haven't.

continue to blame the media. it's much easier.
Continue to accept what the media says. Its easier to continue to just accept such media reports at face value then to actually look into the details to uncover the truth.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 04-10-2006, 09:57 PM   #113
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,486
Local Time: 03:40 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2


Continue to accept what the media says. Its easier to continue to just accept such media reports at face value then to actually look into the details to uncover the truth.

continue to drink the Kool-Aid; the administration is nervous that no one else is anymore. it's much easier to regurgitate what the military and the administration tells you and quote misleading, out-of-context statistics.

STING, reality has bodyslammed you, continuously, on this issue. from WMDs to the danger SH presented to the wording of 1441 to Abu Ghraib to the reality on the ground to the strength of the insurgency to the brewing civil war.

but you're tenacity is commendable.

again: start another thread.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 04-10-2006, 10:09 PM   #114
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 12:40 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon


Certainly not the Republican Party. They redefined everything from "inflation" to "unemployment" in the 1980s to create rosy numbers for themselves.

Melon
OK. Let's try to get back to the subject at hand.

Here, we have a dismissing of the news because of a 25 year old redefinition of the statistic.

Now, is there any evidence that the economy is worse off using the statistical methods employed prior to the change? I think it would be a necessary element of information to support the statement.

Also, the fact the methodology of measurment changed may have meant something in the years after it occurred (as you get improvement because of the change in measurement, not because of a change in the economy). After decades of use, the year to year measurement, consistently applied, gains far more significance. Now we are measuring changes in the economy, not changes in statistical measurement.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 04-10-2006, 11:42 PM   #115
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 08:40 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2

The most important statistic is the one that takes all these factors into account which is the HDI. The United States has the 10th highest standard of living in the world,
If you think placing 10th on HDI makes good sense and is purely a good news story when the US makes the MOST money, all the average power to you. Mediocrity rules!!!
__________________
AliEnvy is offline  
Old 04-10-2006, 11:49 PM   #116
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 12:40 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by AliEnvy


If you think placing 10th on HDI makes good sense and is purely a good news story when the US makes the MOST money, all the average power to you. Mediocrity rules!!!
I think you are mixing statistics here.

If the US population were far smaller, it would be easier to achieve a higher ranking on the HDI.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 04-10-2006, 11:59 PM   #117
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 08:40 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


I think you are mixing statistics here.

If the US population were far smaller, it would be easier to achieve a higher ranking on the HDI.
nbc, that comment demonstrates to me that you don't know about a) analyzing comparative statistics and b) how HDI is calculated.

Contrary to what you may think, size does not matter.
__________________
AliEnvy is offline  
Old 04-11-2006, 12:13 AM   #118
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 08:40 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511



continue to drink the Kool-Aid; the administration is nervous that no one else is anymore. it's much easier to regurgitate what the military and the administration tells you and quote misleading, out-of-context statistics.

STING, reality has bodyslammed you, continuously, on this issue. from WMDs to the danger SH presented to the wording of 1441 to Abu Ghraib to the reality on the ground to the strength of the insurgency to the brewing civil war.

but you're tenacity is commendable.

again: start another thread.
The fact that the insurgency has not grown since April 2004, is not an administration talking point, but something anyone could discover if they would simply take the time to do a little research. Same with the fact that US casualties have been falling for the past 5 months, the longest sustained decrease over the past 3 years, with the past record only being 2 months. March 2006 saw the 2nd lowest number of US deaths over the past 3 years. These are not estimates, but hard facts that the media and surprisingly the administration itself have not reported or trumped heavily. I did see a few articles at the end of March report this, but it is not something that is widely known. Instead, typical media reports paint a picture of a rising insurgency and increasing rate of US deaths which is in fact the opposite of what is happening.

Misleading reports and out context or inaccurate statistics are a chararistic of the media and many of the liberals that oppose the war. Its often said that every wounded in combat soldier or marine of the 17,469 that have been wounded has been seriously injured and crippled. That is not the case though. The number wounded covers the most horrific injurys to those with minor cuts from flying glass. Of the 17,469 wounded, 9,454 returned to full combat duty in less than 72 hours. But no one in the media or on both sides of the political debate actually reports that. In addition, no one reports that the number of wounded who were not able to return to full combat duty within 72 hours fell by 50% in 2005 from the 2004 figure and the rate continues to fall in 2006.

The danger that Saddam presented to the world is a simple fact. It is not simply based on certain weapons capability but first and for most his behavior over the past 24 years of his rule and his close proximity to the planets primary energy supply and the forces with which he could use to sieze or sabotage such supplies. Honestly, do you actually remember what Saddam did in 1990? Do you have any clue the annual cost of the containment strategy in the 1990s? Do you realize that sanctions by the year 2000 had pratically disappeared with Syria completely opening its border with Iraq? Do you realize Saddam was making 3 Billion dollars a year on the black market starting in 2000? Do you realize when the United Nations inspectors were forced to leave in 1998 that Saddam had failed to verifiably disarm of 1,000 Liters of Anthrax, 500 pounds of sarin gas, 500 pounds of mustard gas, over 20,000 shells with the ability to be filled with WMD agents, Ballistic Missiles that were in violation of the Ceacefire Agreement, as well programs related to the development of WMD that also violated the 1991 Gulf War Ceacefire Agreement?

But no, were supposed to believe that Kuwait would be able to defeat Saddam's 430,000 man military in combat. That there was no threat from the largest tank force in the Persian Gulf. Nevermind what happened to Iran in the 1980s or Kuwait in 1990. Nothing to worry about.

As far as compliance with UN resolutions, 17 of them to be exact passed under Chapter VII rules of the United Nations, who cares right? No one should really be worried about the non-compiance of a dictator that had invaded and attacked four different countries unprovoked in the past decade, threatened the planets key energy supply with siezure or sabotage and used WMD more times than any leader in history. Countries like South Africa, Kazakstan, Ukraine and even Belarus verifiably disarmed of all their WMD in under two years, despite the fact that these countries had never committed any international violations or used WMD. But when it comes to Saddam, he deserves more than 12 years to disarm right?

Saddam was presented with one last chance to comply with 1441 or face serious consequences. He did nothing to significantly comply, nor were any of the problems left from 1998 when the inspectors were kicked out resolved. This does not take a massive amount of time as any study of the full disarmament of countries like Ukraine or Belarus shows. Saddam was told he would face serious consequences if he did not comply and that is in fact what happened. In international relations, the only things more serious than the current UN approved sanctions regime and weapons embargo, is military action, plain and simple.

After the invasion the United Nations approved the occupation of Iraq with resolution 1483. If resolution 1441 did not approve the invasion of Iraq, why did it not call for the immediate withdrawal of coalition forces from Iraq instead approving their presense? Where is the UN resolution or attempt at one to condemn the coalition invasion if it was unauthorized? None of these things exist, but they were all present when Saddam invaded Kuwait in 1990 in regards to that invasion! This is ultimately the nail in the coffin for the belief that the invasion was illegal. The invasion was the obvious and necessary result of Saddam's non-compliance with UN Security Council resolutions passed under Chapter VII rules in regards to Saddam invasion of Kuwait and failure to meet the multitude of conditions of the 1991 Gulf War Ceacefire Agrement, necessary for the safety and security of the region and ultimately the entire planet.

The United States in regards to Iraq has adopted the right policies for the most part over the past 15 years, although it has been slow to react to some dangerous developments. To many people look at US policy towards Iraq only through the events of just the past 5 years of the Bush administration. They don't understand what happened in Iraq before Bush came into office, nor are they aware of operation Desert Fox, Operation Southern Watch, the experience of UN inspectors in Iraq and the 1991 Gulf War itself. The critical strategic importance and role that Persian Gulf oil plays in the everyday lives of people all around the world is not understood. All they see is the misleading image presented by much of the media which says, "Bush lied and they died".

Despite that all that, Persian Gulf oil is safer today from foreign siezure and sabotage than it has been in decades with the removal of Saddam's regime. Provided that the United States does not prematurely withdraw from Iraq, it will eventually develop into a stable country with a stable government that will not be a threat to its southern neighbors as Saddam's Iraq had been. Bush was successfully reelected by the a majority of Americans in 2004 despite the largest liberal campaign to defeat a Republican in history. Despite the Vote for Change tour, the Michael Moore type films and other "Bush Lied they died" crap, Bush won solidly.

Right now, its likely that President McCain will be taking over in the White House in January 2009 and will continue to steer the United States foreign policy in the right direction as Bush has done since taking office.

The policy of many liberals in regards to Iraq has not been the policy of the United States in the past, it is not the policy of the United States now, and it will not be the policy of the United States in the future.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 04-11-2006, 12:20 AM   #119
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 12:40 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by AliEnvy


nbc, that comment demonstrates to me that you don't know about a) analyzing comparative statistics and b) how HDI is calculated.

Contrary to what you may think, size does not matter.
Actually, I do understand statistics. I find the simple summaries of "mediocrity" to be lacking.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 04-11-2006, 12:48 AM   #120
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 08:40 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader

Actually, I do understand statistics. I find the simple summaries of "mediocrity" to be lacking.
Well alright then, you tell me why having the world's 10th best standard of living is NOT mediocre when you have the highest national income.

And please leave out comparisons to countries below 10 and reasons why 1-9 have the US to thank for their position. They are not relevant to my assertion of mediocrity.
__________________

__________________
AliEnvy is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com