Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > > >

Politics version 7.0 more politics.

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-29-2017, 05:00 AM   #7376
BroadwaySushy
banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: In a basket of deplorables
Posts: 3,237
Re: President Trump

So would I actually, come to think of it.

Not too much money though, and I would probably need a minder.
BroadwaySushy is offline  
Old 06-29-2017, 06:34 AM   #7377
adios
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Russian Troll
Posts: 22,417
Re: President Trump




Last edited by adios; 06-29-2017 at 06:45 AM.
adios is offline  
Old 06-29-2017, 09:15 AM   #7378
samsonh
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Belmont Alum
Posts: 3,524
Re: President Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466 View Post
Your posts are irrational garbage and not worth any serious thought but this post is particularly bad. It couldn't be more wrong. Everything about the left is based on feeling. The left is constantly the one talking about being scared, or trying to protect others from being scared. Everything is about worrying of another groups feelings on the left. To even attempt to defend your premise is hilarious.

Immigration? Feels. Gay marriage? Feels. Abortion? Feels. Transgender? Feels. Taxes? Feels. Welfare? Feels. Minimum wage? Feels. Affirmative action? Feels.

Everything about the left is based on emotion, not logic. Even when they lose an argument they use emotional based attacks on their opponents, calling them racists or bigots. Really, how could anyone argue against something life welfare or affirmative action in a logical manner and not eventually up being labelled a racist? Indeed, how many conservative thinkers can you name who isn't labelled as a racist or bigot or a misogynist?

It's absurdity at every level to believe what you're saying and only a fool could believe such utter nonsense.



Dude, PM me your address I'll send a box of kale chips to your house, on me.

Spoiler:
There are studies to backup everyone one of those issues William. You've said you don't like to read so I'm not shocked you haven't come across them.

Whereas most of your positions are based on anecdotes. It's amazing really.
Also can we get another lol at adios posting an obvious chain mail again.
samsonh is offline  
Old 06-29-2017, 09:31 AM   #7379
wil318466
banned
 
wil318466's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 19,155
Re: President Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by samsonh View Post
There are studies to backup everyone one of those issues William. You've said you don't like to read so I'm not shocked you haven't come across them.

Whereas most of your positions are based on anecdotes. It's amazing really.
Also can we get another lol at adios posting an obvious chain mail again.
Only an irrational fool would believe your cherry picked idiot studies. Look at your argument from a simple example - there are studies that show a 23 cent gender wage gap. Those studies actually exist. No one here believes that is accurate yet SOME people in this world believe it is true.

Your simpleton statement of "studies to back them up" is complete stupidity. How can any rational person take your position of believing in policies due to being able to back them up with these magical debateable '"studies"?

By no means am I saying they don't have value. Data and studies do have value, we all know this, but to focus solely on one position using situational data is stupid as ****.

Your statement is so infuriatingly stupid. How can any normal person believe that?

More importantly how can our educational system produce people as simple as you? You're an adult, educated and living in the United States of America and you think like a 15 year old high school student. It's a miracle we're all not dead.
wil318466 is offline  
Old 06-29-2017, 09:49 AM   #7380
FlyWf
It's the other way
 
FlyWf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: [ ] REGARD FOR HUMAN LIFE
Posts: 58,099
Re: President Trump

Hahaha wil got owned so badly for being racist against Serena Williams 3 years ago we've dunked his ***** ass to rejecting the ****ing scientific method.
FlyWf is offline  
Old 06-29-2017, 09:51 AM   #7381
wil318466
banned
 
wil318466's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 19,155
Re: President Trump

Fly you couldn't own me in any single thing in life. I'm sure you realize that.
wil318466 is offline  
Old 06-29-2017, 10:02 AM   #7382
Trolly McTrollson
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Trolly McTrollson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Winesburg, Ohio
Posts: 31,641
Re: President Trump

Yo, **** data.
Trolly McTrollson is offline  
Old 06-29-2017, 11:05 AM   #7383
5ive
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
5ive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Harvard, in a place like Africa
Posts: 6,751
Re: President Trump

5ive is offline  
Old 06-29-2017, 11:05 AM   #7384
wil318466
banned
 
wil318466's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 19,155
Re: President Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trolly McTrollson View Post
Yo, **** data.
We should have a discussion about it, actually. Data is important, but manipulating it or presenting it in a certain light to push an agenda seems downright evil.

I know people have said things like there are no solutions, only tradeoffs, and as time goes by I agree with that more and more.
wil318466 is offline  
Old 06-29-2017, 11:21 AM   #7385
well named
poorly undertitled
 
well named's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: esse est coesse
Posts: 78,088
Re: President Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466 View Post
Only an irrational fool would believe your cherry picked idiot studies. Look at your argument from a simple example - there are studies that show a 23 cent gender wage gap. Those studies actually exist. No one here believes that is accurate yet SOME people in this world believe it is true.
This is inaccurate, as I've tried to explain to you before. The ~20% statistic does not come from an academic study, it comes from Bureau of Labor Statistics data. That data shows that the median weekly wage for a woman employed full time (>35 hrs/wk) is about 80% of the median weekly wage for a man employed full time. A few years ago, the figure was 77%, which is the number you use. The preceding sentences are factual, supported by years of BLS data. The statistic is absolutely accurate.

Your problem is that you conflate factual claims, like the one above, with other claims about the causes of the gap, which you dispute, and pretend that people who assert the claim above are really asserting the other claims. Note that my statement about the BLS data says nothing about the cause of the 20% difference in median weekly wages. It makes no claims about controlling for various factors, not even hours worked, except that it only compares workers who are "full time". It makes no claim that the cause of the difference is exclusively discrimination.

Many academic studies of the wage gap will reference the BLS data. They also use other data sources to attempt to understand the causes of the difference in the median. I've previously cited this useful article which references most of the recent work. Neither that article, nor any other I've ever seen, cites the BLS data in support of the conclusion that the difference in median wages is solely the result of discrimination. I doubt you can find a single study that makes a claim like that. Your dismissal of scientific research on this basis is absolutely unwarranted, based in your continued refusal to understand what the various data mean.
well named is offline  
Old 06-29-2017, 11:30 AM   #7386
wil318466
banned
 
wil318466's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 19,155
Re: President Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by well named View Post
This is inaccurate, as I've tried to explain to you before. The ~20% statistic does not come from an academic study, it comes from Bureau of Labor Statistics data. That data shows that the median weekly wage for a woman employed full time (>35 hrs/wk) is about 80% of the median weekly wage for a man employed full time. A few years ago, the figure was 77%, which is the number you use. The preceding sentences are factual, supported by years of BLS data. The statistic is absolutely accurate.

Your problem is that you conflate factual claims, like the one above, with other claims about the causes of the gap, which you dispute, and pretend that people who assert the claim above are really asserting the other claims. Note that my statement about the BLS data says nothing about the cause of the 20% difference in median weekly wages. It makes no claims about controlling for various factors, not even hours worked, except that it only compares workers who are "full time". It makes no claim that the cause of the difference is exclusively discrimination.

Many academic studies of the wage gap will reference the BLS data. They also use other data sources to attempt to understand the causes of the difference in the median. I've previously cited this useful article which references most of the recent work. Neither that article, nor any other I've ever seen, cites the BLS data in support of the conclusion that the difference in median wages is solely the result of discrimination. I doubt you can find a single study that makes a claim like that. Your dismissal of scientific research on this basis is absolutely unwarranted, based in your continued refusal to understand what the various data mean.
I understand that the percentage is accurate. The reasons WHY is what is important, not the actual result! Women make less because they have children and it seems tend to prefer work-life balance over focusing on income. Men tend to do the opposite.

The government SHOULD NOT BE INVOLVED IN THIS.

Do you agree with the above statement or not? If you actually screwed around with the way men and women were paid then it would cause an issue the other way - women who were never married or had children would be overly compensated, creating yet another problem.

Jesus. Why can't we come to some sort of agreement in this argument? I KNOW the statistic is accurate. I'm saying using that in an argument for policy is an awful idea.
wil318466 is offline  
Old 06-29-2017, 11:35 AM   #7387
BitchiBee
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Anchorage, Alaska
Posts: 24,622
Re: President Trump

we can have a wage gap thread rather than talk about in the god emperors throne room
BitchiBee is offline  
Old 06-29-2017, 11:35 AM   #7388
well named
poorly undertitled
 
well named's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: esse est coesse
Posts: 78,088
Re: President Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466 View Post
Why can't we come to some sort of agreement in this argument? I KNOW the statistic is accurate. I'm saying using that in an argument for policy is an awful idea.
You are misrepresenting your own position. You wrote:

Quote:
Only an irrational fool would believe your cherry picked idiot studies. Look at your argument from a simple example - there are studies that show a 23 cent gender wage gap. Those studies actually exist. No one here believes that is accurate yet SOME people in this world believe it is true.
I am not making an argument about what kinds of policy responses may or may not be justified by the BLS data, I am responding to your assertion that scientific studies should be discounted because they make false claims. Your example of a supposedly false claim made by studies of the wage gap is entirely wrong, as you yourself are now acknowledging when you admit that the statistic is accurate. The entire point of your previous quote was to say that the statistic was not accurate!

Last edited by well named; 06-29-2017 at 11:43 AM.
well named is offline  
Old 06-29-2017, 11:43 AM   #7389
wil318466
banned
 
wil318466's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 19,155
Re: President Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by well named View Post
You are misrepresenting your own position. You wrote:

I am not making an argument about what kinds of policy responses may or may not be justified by the BLS data, I am responding to your assertion that scientific studies should be discounted because they make false claims. Your example of a supposedly false claim made by studies of the wage gap is entirely wrong, as you yourself are now acknowledging when you admit that the statistic is accurate. The entire point of your previous quote was to say that the statistic was not accurate!
You are correct. Fine. I'm saying the data is being used in a way to paint a false narrative - that females are paid less due to discrimination.

Before we go on, do you agree with that statement?
wil318466 is offline  
Old 06-29-2017, 11:45 AM   #7390
dinopoker
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
dinopoker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Must...bet...more!
Posts: 9,334
Re: President Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by well named
I am not making an argument about what kinds of policy responses may or may not be justified by the BLS data, I am responding to your assertion that scientific studies should be discounted because they make false claims. Your example of a supposedly false claim made by studies of the wage gap is entirely wrong, as you yourself are now acknowledging when you admit that the statistic is accurate. The entire point of your previous quote was to say that the statistic was not accurate!
Ownage.
dinopoker is offline  
Old 06-29-2017, 11:47 AM   #7391
batair
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
batair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: idiocracy
Posts: 16,806
Re: President Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by adios View Post


I worked there in the 80's. They have been automating long before that.
batair is offline  
Old 06-29-2017, 11:49 AM   #7392
BitchiBee
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Anchorage, Alaska
Posts: 24,622
Re: President Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyWf View Post
Hahaha wil got owned so badly for being racist against Serena Williams 3 years ago we've dunked his ***** ass to rejecting the ****ing scientific method.
you the type of guy that thinks mcenroe was being racist and sexist?
BitchiBee is offline  
Old 06-29-2017, 11:50 AM   #7393
wil318466
banned
 
wil318466's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 19,155
Re: President Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by dinopoker View Post
Ownage.
There's no ownage here at all. Him being correct about something doesnt invalidate my overall argument. There is a very good reason why well named is doing what he's doing and I think anyone paying attention should realize it.

Last edited by wil318466; 06-29-2017 at 11:59 AM.
wil318466 is offline  
Old 06-29-2017, 11:53 AM   #7394
well named
poorly undertitled
 
well named's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: esse est coesse
Posts: 78,088
Re: President Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466 View Post
You are correct. Fine. I'm saying the data is being used in a way to paint a false narrative - that females are paid less due to discrimination.

Before we go on, do you agree with that statement?
I'm sure it's true that the BLS statistic is sometimes used to imply a stronger conclusion than is warranted by politicians and activists. This is not an uncommon occurrence in politics, on any issue. I don't believe that criticism applies to any actual study I've seen, however.

I'm not terribly interested in defending the honor of random other people making other claims about the wage gap. I've always tried to present the issue fairly as I understand it, and the only actual policy I've ever argued for was the UK policy requiring companies to disclose their wage gaps. Otherwise, I've pointed out repeatedly that I think the intent of a lot of feminist consciousness-raising is to change culture, not just government.
well named is offline  
Old 06-29-2017, 12:03 PM   #7395
wil318466
banned
 
wil318466's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 19,155
Re: President Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by well named View Post
I'm sure it's true that the BLS statistic is sometimes used to imply a stronger conclusion than is warranted by politicians and activists. This is not an uncommon occurrence in politics, on any issue. I don't believe that criticism applies to any actual study I've seen, however.

I'm not terribly interested in defending the honor of random other people making other claims about the wage gap. I've always tried to present the issue fairly as I understand it, and the only actual policy I've ever argued for was the UK policy requiring companies to disclose their wage gaps. Otherwise, I've pointed out repeatedly that I think the intent of a lot of feminist consciousness-raising is to change culture, not just government.
So... You admit the way the statistics are used in arguments is a bad thing, but you aren't interested in arguing it.

It would be the equivalent of me saying Asians are underrepresented in the NBA, and then suggesting we find ways to equal that out. The argument is absurd. The problem is many leftist arguments are exactly like that, except reversed.
wil318466 is offline  
Old 06-29-2017, 12:12 PM   #7396
well named
poorly undertitled
 
well named's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: esse est coesse
Posts: 78,088
Re: President Trump

Yes, I admit that sometimes people misuse statistical data, or the results of scientific studies, when making various arguments. Given that I'm conceding that point, what would I be arguing with you about on that topic?

If I see someone doing the above, I try to correct them. One of my motivations for writing longer posts on controversial topics in this forum, and trying to be rigorous in my use of research, is to provide information that might be helpful to people who want to understand these issues better in order to avoid those problems. Of course, my other motivation is to try to persuade yet other people that these issues are real and that they should care about them, but I expect I'm more likely to succeed on the first point.

I disagree with your analogy and rejection of "many leftist arguments" as a general statement, but I think it's far more productive to focus on specific arguments than some general assessment of the quality of "leftist" political discourse. Although, on the general topic, I'll point out that you keep making statements like this (cf. this post). I'm happy to concede that liberals, leftists, Democrats, etc. don't always get everything right. But I roll my eyes at these posts because you seem oblivious to the fact that, by any objective standard, the state of the modern conservative movement is far, far, worse.
well named is offline  
Old 06-29-2017, 12:47 PM   #7397
jalfrezi
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
jalfrezi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Long gone, long long gone
Posts: 9,816
Re: President Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by well named View Post
This is inaccurate, as I've tried to explain to you before. The ~20% statistic does not come from an academic study, it comes from Bureau of Labor Statistics data. That data shows that the median weekly wage for a woman employed full time (>35 hrs/wk) is about 80% of the median weekly wage for a man employed full time. A few years ago, the figure was 77%, which is the number you use. The preceding sentences are factual, supported by years of BLS data. The statistic is absolutely accurate.

Your problem is that you conflate factual claims, like the one above, with other claims about the causes of the gap, which you dispute, and pretend that people who assert the claim above are really asserting the other claims. Note that my statement about the BLS data says nothing about the cause of the 20% difference in median weekly wages. It makes no claims about controlling for various factors, not even hours worked, except that it only compares workers who are "full time". It makes no claim that the cause of the difference is exclusively discrimination.

Many academic studies of the wage gap will reference the BLS data. They also use other data sources to attempt to understand the causes of the difference in the median. I've previously cited this useful article which references most of the recent work. Neither that article, nor any other I've ever seen, cites the BLS data in support of the conclusion that the difference in median wages is solely the result of discrimination. I doubt you can find a single study that makes a claim like that. Your dismissal of scientific research on this basis is absolutely unwarranted, based in your continued refusal to understand what the various data mean.
You need to learn to condense this to lolwil
jalfrezi is offline  
Old 06-29-2017, 12:53 PM   #7398
well named
poorly undertitled
 
well named's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: esse est coesse
Posts: 78,088
Re: President Trump

That's your job :P
well named is offline  
Old 06-29-2017, 12:55 PM   #7399
goofyballer
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
goofyballer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 70,901
Re: President Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466 View Post
There's no ownage here at all. Him being correct about something doesnt invalidate my overall argument.
"fact was wrong but the point is right mmmkay"

LOL the ghost of ikestoys' idiocy lives on. wil has never lost an argument in his life, you guys, even when the things he posts are blatantly untrue!
goofyballer is offline  
Old 06-29-2017, 01:07 PM   #7400
TiltedDonkey
veteran
 
TiltedDonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 2,977
Re: President Trump

Quote:
Originally Posted by spaceman Bryce View Post
tilted, ive decided i don't have time to get into it. sorry. I often say ill get back to it in posts like these but the truth is ill probably just forget about it.interesting post.
No worries.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466 View Post
Your posts are irrational garbage and not worth any serious thought but this post is particularly bad. It couldn't be more wrong. Everything about the left is based on feeling. The left is constantly the one talking about being scared, or trying to protect others from being scared. Everything is about worrying of another groups feelings on the left. To even attempt to defend your premise is hilarious.

Immigration? Feels. Gay marriage? Feels. Abortion? Feels. Transgender? Feels. Taxes? Feels. Welfare? Feels. Minimum wage? Feels. Affirmative action? Feels.

Everything about the left is based on emotion, not logic. Even when they lose an argument they use emotional based attacks on their opponents, calling them racists or bigots. Really, how could anyone argue against something life welfare or affirmative action in a logical manner and not eventually up being labelled a racist? Indeed, how many conservative thinkers can you name who isn't labelled as a racist or bigot or a misogynist?

It's absurdity at every level to believe what you're saying and only a fool could believe such utter nonsense.



Dude, PM me your address I'll send a box of kale chips to your house, on me.

Spoiler:
wil, caring about people's feelings is not the same as relying on feelings when data is available.

The argument "we should solve poverty because poor people are sad" is a different use of 'feels' than the argument "there is no poverty because I feel rich".

Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466 View Post
Only an irrational fool would believe your cherry picked idiot studies. Look at your argument from a simple example - there are studies that show a 23 cent gender wage gap. Those studies actually exist. No one here believes that is accurate
Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466 View Post
I understand that the percentage is accurate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466 View Post
I KNOW the statistic is accurate.
lolwil
TiltedDonkey is offline  

 
      

Thread Tools
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


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:57 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive