whirlwind Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 Peter_Puget said: J-B You left your newspaper at the coffee shop. J_B's Paper Oh yea, again I am sorry about the news that the economy grew at a 7.2% rate last quarter. Buck up I am sure a depression is right around the corner. PP what part of the economy the oil industry or the corpation, funded to "rebuild" Iraq seems how both are huge and it may be posible tha the numbers apear better. but my question is has the unempolment rate droped? has the average worker benifited in any way, oh and is it posible that the economy rose 7% due to the fact that last quarter the avg. person was paying about $2.oo a gallon on gas which is a 50% increase from the normal prices, oh and why did the prices go up in the first place in collilation with the war? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vegetablebelay Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 Man are you stoopid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al_Pine Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 Hey veggie your so dum you can't even spell "stupid" correctly! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whirlwind Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 (edited) maybe i should read the whole thread first the the point of the matter is that vegie can kiss my ass and i don't buy a word of the pro bush bs. of course things are going to start looking better, next yr is election and its going to take most of the yr "try" and win over the popular vote. Edited October 31, 2003 by wirlwind Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott_harpell Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 trask said: I think less of you for going to see the movie in the first place. moore is a fucking disgrace to 'documentaries" everywhere... using unethical tactics and blatent blatent editing skewing. utterly pathetic... he is lambasted in every film making class i have ever been in that covered documertay style. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whirlwind Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 scott_harpell said: trask said: I think less of you for going to see the movie in the first place. moore is a fucking disgrace to 'documentaries" everywhere... using unethical tactics and blatent blatent editing skewing. utterly pathetic... he is lambasted in every film making class i have ever been in that covered documertay style. futher prof that he thinks out side the box that dosn't Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 Employment is a lagging indicator. Plug Econ101 into Google and learn why. Or maybe PLC will chime in and give everyone a brief once over on the topic. But I agree that the stats don't mean a whole lot to anyone who has been out of a job for a while and is still looking for one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chelle Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 Thanks JayB, but I knew that one. If the economy is truly recovering then yes, the jobs will come. I still don't think that the average American is going to believe that the economy is improving until: (not in any specific order...) 1) more people who are looking for reasonably paying work find it 2) state and city governments stop cutting services and begging the national government for funding 3) the federal government stops high levels of deficit spending 4) capital market returns actually benefit the average 401k participant, meaning they start seeing positive returns each quarter on their statements for awhile 5) gas prices at the pump return to "reasonable" levels 6) layoffs and fear of layoffs become rare events Sorry you're just not going to convince me. Maybe I'm ignorant, but I do understand my economic situation and the situation of most people I care about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott_harpell Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 wirlwind said: scott_harpell said: trask said: I think less of you for going to see the movie in the first place. moore is a fucking disgrace to 'documentaries" everywhere... using unethical tactics and blatent blatent editing skewing. utterly pathetic... he is lambasted in every film making class i have ever been in that covered documertay style. futher prof that he thinks out side the box that dosn't if outside of the box means using unethical means to skew the depictions in his 'documentaries' then yeah he is outside the box. he fabricated many of his scenes and many of the people in it. it was a political drama withteh facade of a documentary. look up your facts before you spout hommes... i have read his actual story boards and seen unedited sections of his 'films' and it is pathetic and unremarkable until he splices in bullshit post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 ehmmic said: Thanks JayB, but I knew that one. If the economy is truly recovering then yes, the jobs will come. I still don't think that the average American is going to believe that the economy is improving until: (not in any specific order...) 1) more people who are looking for reasonably paying work find it 2) state and city governments stop cutting services and begging the national government for funding 3) the federal government stops high levels of deficit spending 4) capital market returns actually benefit the average 401k participant, meaning they start seeing positive returns each quarter on their statements for awhile 5) gas prices at the pump return to "reasonable" levels 6) layoffs and fear of layoffs become rare events Sorry you're just not going to convince me. Maybe I'm ignorant, but I do understand my economic situation and the situation of most people I care about. Agreed on most of those things needing to happen before folks start to feel more positive about the direction of the economy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobBob Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 actually s&p and nasdaq are more useful indices (they both went down slightly) oh really, j_b? Please enlighten us further on this subject. Are you a Harvard-case man, or a Chicago-theorist? Don't take it personally when I say that I believe that your understanding of financial markets is probably close to nil. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter_Puget Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 "My purpose is not to denigrate the impressive estimated 7.2 percent growth rate for the third quarter of 2003. It is, rather, to stress the obvious: we've had our hopes dashed in the past, and it remains to be seen whether this is just another one-hit wonder." Krugman Today It's a lot of work to always look on the dark side of life. PP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catbirdseat Posted October 31, 2003 Author Share Posted October 31, 2003 When the Leading Index takes a sharp downturn, the Federal Reserve Board doesn't rush to lower interest rates. They don't call a recession a recession until there have been three or four quarters of poor numbers. By the same token, we should not call this a recovery until we have seen three quarters of positive growth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rr666 Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 catbirdseat said: When the Leading Index takes a sharp downturn, the Federal Reserve Board doesn't rush to lower interest rates. They don't call a recession a recession until there have been three or four quarters of poor numbers. By the same token, we should not call this a recovery until we have seen three quarters of positive growth. We have now seen 8 quarters of positive growth in the GDP, per data from the commerce department. So does that mean we are in a recovery? or do we have to wait until everyone is happy to call it a recovery? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 scott_harpell said: if outside of the box means using unethical means to skew the depictions in his 'documentaries' then yeah he is outside the box. he fabricated many of his scenes and many of the people in it. it was a political drama withteh facade of a documentary. look up your facts before you spout hommes... i have read his actual story boards and seen unedited sections of his 'films' and it is pathetic and unremarkable until he splices in bullshit post. by opposition to what? a reporter (screened by the military) standing behind an m1, telling us about the progress and circumstances of the iraq war that he/she cannot see for fear of having his head blown off and after he spent days/weeks sharing food, shelter and anxieties with us troops? how is what m.moore does any different than another documentary film maker/photographer in the face of the subjects he is reporting on? the discourse that documentaries or reporting are objective while moore's work isn't, is deceitful. moore does not lie about facts and that's all that matters to this discussion. he only chooses to present facts in the way that fits his story line like everybody else in the business. call him biased if you will but show me who isn't. whether it is the 'truth' for you, depends on your own sensibilities and everyone should be aware of that. now if you have proof that m.moore lies about facts, show us the goods. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allthumbs Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 j-b tool, doesn't it bother you to defend an asshole that is loathed by 95% of the population? Why take a stand with a communist dicksmoker like moore? You suck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catbirdseat Posted October 31, 2003 Author Share Posted October 31, 2003 Trask, show me where you got that 95% figure. I think that should be "loathed by 95% of NRA life members". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allthumbs Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 just take my word for it - I have my sources Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott_harpell Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 how is what m.moore does any different than another documentary film maker/photographer in the face of the subjects he is reporting on? most doc makers dont use actors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott_harpell Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 he only chooses to present facts in the way that fits his story line like everybody else in the business. call him biased if you will but show me who isn't. if he were making a feature film, i wouldn't care, but the 'doc' is masqueraded as a 'doc'. he was shunned by everyone i have ever met in the documentary film circle. using actors and having it be called a documentary is not just biased, it is deceitfull. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott_harpell Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 now if you have proof that m.moore lies about facts, show us the goods. mt proff has uneditied film that didn't make it into the movie... did you ever get a kinda of surreal feeling when hommies were in wall-mart headquarters? there is a good reason for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 scott_harpell said: most doc makers dont use actors. if he were making a feature film, i wouldn't care, but the 'doc' is masqueraded as a 'doc'. he was shunned by everyone i have ever met in the documentary film circle. using actors and having it be called a documentary is not just biased, it is deceitfull. mt proff has uneditied film that didn't make it into the movie... did you ever get a kinda of surreal feeling when hommies were in wall-mart headquarters? there is a good reason for that. i said proof, like in evidence, not innuendos or hearsay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott_harpell Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 i have seen it... if you wanna come up here... you can see it too... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattp Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 Scott, I don't dispute that Moore may be unethical. However, his movies are quite obviously a blend of documentary and drama and I don't think he is really trying to pass them off as otherwise. Now the Jessica Lynch story - that is pure fiction presented as truth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobBob Posted October 31, 2003 Share Posted October 31, 2003 the discourse that documentaries or reporting are objective while moore's work isn't, is deceitful. j_b, I must say that usually you are this over-the-top wrong about stuff. All you have to do is listen to Moore himself talk about his work. The guy is an unethical bullshit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.