Then they'd also realize that the money is doing something else, too. Not just making jobs.
Let's get something straight - Yahoo answers is just not a source, period. Anyone can post there, just like this forum.
This is a side issue. I don't want to get dragged into it. I don't have time. You may conclude whatever you wish.
I wish that you'd conclude that your confidence in the the numbers that the administration is throwing out there about saved jobs is baseless. Instead you want to play the part of ignorance and just hope that they're right. Not exactly the intellectually superior position.
It's hardly intellectually superior to conclude they are baseless based on no information either, huh?
If you want to go find out the details of how they collect job data and prove it's worthless, nobody is stopping you. Instead, you keep asking me to go find out. Go look it up and make your case. Until you do that, you really ought to have nothing more to say about it.
The fact that such a "transparent" administration isn't telling you how they're getting these numbers should send up warning signs all over the place.
Yeah, far be it from me to ask someone how they got their numbers. :roll:
How do you know they aren't telling you how they are getting the numbers? Have you checked, or are you just assuming?
I didn't have any numbers in the first place. That's the point.
Recovery.gov, where you keep telling me the method is, has the numbers. I keep looking for the method there, but I can't find it. Can you?
Amazing, they were given money. Where is the method?
Data is not a method. How is that data collected? How is it interpreted?
^^No methodology there.
The link had no methodology. It's just a summary of their conclusions.
Then you have some more reading and research to do, don't you?
You should probably find a site that outlines the methodology, quote it, and post it here. I can't prove a negative.
I never asked you to prove anything. Nor did I claim proof of anything.
You should probably find a site that outlines the methodology, quote it, and post it here. I can't prove a negative.
In this case, with his track record of posting countering evidence to your claim, you have a chance to prove this negative. :lol:
I've made it clear that I make no claims about this and have no claims to back up. Don't take cheap shots.
You have no claims to back up? So then you think that the "jobs saved" statistic is baseless or at least a good guess and not empirical data?
No, because that would be YOUR claim that YOU would need to back up.
I think that nobody on this thread knows whether the jobs saved statistic is good or not. Not me, not you.
I can't prove a negative.
If I challenge you to provide the methodology behind the numbers and you can't provide it, then it casts a ton of doubt into the numbers.
I think everyone knows that it is bad because no one is jumping in to help defend you on this.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?