Fact checking is a must today......
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Fact checking is as important as ever in today's fast paced news onslaught. Those that tell you it isn't are either liars working at trying to deceive you towards their agenda, or lying to themselves out of self-imposed ignorance. In some cases I fear it may be a bit of both.
I'm all for freedom of speech. Say what you want, anytime you want, but standby, because if I feel like wasting my time, I'm going to shove your lies back up your ass. All politicians run the gamut from stretching the truth to outright fabrications. What I can't understand is why seemingly good people are so willing to take up and beat the drum of their lies as well. I guess it just might come down to the difference in being raise in a household where data and facts were supported over beliefs and feelings.
I've attached a link to an article that is as relevant as it was two years ago prior to the 2016 election.
Tags
Who is online
291 visitors
In science and applied science (engineering) we constantly seek out facts and truths. Those that willingly peddle in non-truths and non-facts hold mankind back from what can truly achieve for the benefit of all.
You have to deal with facts in science and engineering. If you deal with "alternative" facts your bridge is going to come crashing down
Gravity...... She is thou a heartless bitch.
Murphy always works overtime.
Hell.... Murphy is an optimist!
LOL! And since you were a flyer, gravity and you were more than mere acquaintances
Kick the tire...light the fire!
It's important to specify that you seek out ALL the facts. Not just the convenient ones that support what you wish was the truth.
Why would anyone of any integrity do otherwise?
Belief and faith are for the intellectually lazy. That's why facts and truth have such a hard time gaining traction in our political system these days.
Asked and answered.
It is much easier to fixate on 1/4 of the facts and let one's emotions take over.
Interesting you'd say that Jack because when you're presented with the cold, hard facts (see 1.2 thread above) you fight them, then deny them until you can no longer do that at which point you just run away from them.
That's just ridiculous on a whole new level.
You were presented with the fact that conclusively proved you were wrong. You proved beyond a doubt you have no clue about the Affordable Care Act, and you're arguing with somebody who consults on it for a living.
Just stop. Walk away before you embarrass yourself further.
You wish.
But that’s what many progressives do....
Yet it seems that the right doesn't like fact checking, regardless of the source. Why is that?
It's their ideological imperative to refuse to accept facts. And it enrages them if you don't knuckle under to their ignorance and keep pushing those facts into the faces as all the comments in the 1.2 and 1.3 threads above illustrate.
because the fact checkers we have been exposed to flat out suck. They just lie to promote the msm and shield them from legitimate real competitors. Fact checkers support their own version of issues and have no redeeming value.
It's not as easy as you would think.
Years ago, there was a story I was trying to fact check since it just sounded too ridiculous. I went to Google as most do. Well, it took something like 37 pages to get to the truth, which was what I expected. The problem is that once a story is told, other news outlets start to carry the same story over and over. So if it is news of the day, good luck in trying to find out the truth. You have to be very patient.
My problem is when it comes to statistics. I think that the government organizations like the CBO, or the like would tend to be the most reliable when it comes to data. Outside of there I don't know what or who to trust since statistics can have so many nuances to them.
Hope you're well Perrie.
I have to agree with you that looking for solid sources is probably better than just going to google. When I look for information, I try to find original source material. So, for example, if I am looking for a criminal report, I will look at the FBI reports. I then just present what they have. The readers take away can be amazingly different, from what is actually in the report, that is personal bias.
I'm fine and I hope that you are. I have been enjoying the good discussion you have been engaged with. It is refreshing!
I use Wikipedia a lot, not as a primary source but because most of the articles have linked footnotes. That allows me to verify sources and often leads to additional and often original source material such as raw CBO data.
I find that GAO reports help to flesh out the 'nuances'. They cite their methodology, the history of the oversight of the agency being reported on, investigate from all sides of the issue, provide data and do a pretty good job of refuting BS.
As an example, here is the June, 2018 GAO report entitled:
SOUTHWEST BORDER SECURITY
CBP Is Evaluating Designs and Locations for Border Barriers but Is Proceeding Without Key Information
It's quite illuminating about what's really going on with CBP decision making and appropriations. It also makes it pretty clear that as of June 2018, the CBP had NO CLUE what best to build or how much any of it will cost. They still don't.
Here is an excerpt from page 30:
So as of April 2018, the CBP STILL had no clue how to integrate technologies like cameras and video displays into barriers. That was only one of the findings in that report that floored me.
There are a bunch more GAO reports on this subject that are being ignored by the GOP and Trump.
The goal is to get people out of their trenches to talk.
Kind of like the WWI Christmas ceasefire....... The ones that still want to throw grenades are easily spotted. They are to be ignored.
This is the most dangerous point...... people are willingly ignoring valid data.
When the truth is attacked, that's how democracy dies.
I see no talk on NT. Food-fights are not talk.
Talking requires a desire for exchange.
In order to talk, at some point we have to agree on the FACTS.
Sometimes grenades, 'truth bombs' if you will, are what's needed. I believe that every once in a blue moon an entrenched person can be 'blown' out of their trench by being enlightened by FACTS. Facts have a way of creeping under their skin and eventually, ever so slowly and slightly, they change their perspective.
Governmental organizations are often dependent on the data the Administration that supervises them provides which changes with every change of administrations. Some more honest than others
"Fact checking is as important as ever in today's fast paced news onslaught."
The REAL FACT (fact checking not needed here):
Once a story is put out there...… It's out there....no matter the "Fact Checking" that happens "After -the-fact" !
The media doesn't give a shit if something is correct or not anymore. They "MUST" get that friggin story out their first. They'll …… well …… maybe ….."Retract it LATER" !
Toooooo LATE !
It's already been embedded in the "Minds of the Simple" !
Bon Jour
LOL
Nailed it .
Fact Checking is always important. However, it is YOUR responsibility to do so. Allowing others, like the media, to fact check for you is lazy and can exacerbate misinformation as they insert a political spin into it. I don't trust the professional fact-checkers and I prefer to make up my own mind about things and not let someone else tell me what to think. Anyone relying on Snopes, Politifact, or any other fact-checking site is being told what to think about something by someone else and essentially is giving up on their responsibilities to themselves. That is part of the problem with today's society. We allow others to interpret the "facts" of claims.
For example, I saw an ad for a product the other day. The ad said to fact check their claims in "Good Housekeeping". Essentially what it was telling people to do is check the tv ad with their ad in "Good Housekeeping". That is absolute spin, since you only have one source pretending to be multiple sources to reinforce their product's value.
Tom, you're exactly right. Unless you have video and audio, you have to go to multiple sources to really try to boil down to facts. Me, if I do use news outlets, I use BBC and Reuters to start with. If it is a news source I'm not familiar with, I check it's reputation as being left or right leaning, and take that into account.
Thanks for your opinion. Regards.
I agree with your comment.
Which source(s) do you use for this?
Funny that you mention using the BBC and Reuters. I often go to the British press to check a story. The reason being is that they are not that invested in what happens here, and so the reporting is going to be more accurate. And yes I do take into consideration left or right leaning, but I often find, that no matter the source there, their actually reporting of events tend to be far more accurate.
Part of the reason for that is the strong libel and slander laws, where the news source has to document every single source otherwise they are easily found liable in British courts.
For straight up news reporting, I watch OANN. They seem to be more like CNN from back when it first came on air than even Fox News. Granted, I tend to watch The Daily Ledger more than anything as I happen to like Graham Ledger's take on most things. He tries to make an analysis of issues based on the US Constitution, which is something I wish everyone would do. Heck, he made the point that Congress needs to call the militia out on the border due to the immigration issue as Article I Section 8 Clause 15 and to fix the immigration issue as required by Article I Section 8 Clause 4. And, notice what the first clause in Article I Section 8 states:
and in the Preamble it says:
Britannica online, Worldbookonline, Wikipedia
All three can give you baseline data on sources, political leanings, Etc. The data is there for anyone who wants to get to the bottom of things. You have to go in with an open mind and be ready to have some of your preconceived notions exposed.
This is exactly why I like the BBC and AlJazeera for news because they don't have a dig in the fight. The BBC is publicly funded and have a very high standard of journalism that they need to protect to continue their current level of funding. The CBC(Canada) is the same and they also offer a good eyewitness of the US.
McClatchey is also a good news source that many people have not heard of.
Did you ever wonder why Al Jazeera was banned from countries like Canada?
I was not aware that they were banned in Canada.
All the more reason for fact checking...
They print and broadcast in Canada and their office is in Toronto.
I must have been confused.
Maybe even that story should be fact checked. Who fact checks the fact checkers?
The confusion I can understand. Why you linked to Israel's efforts to oust al jazeera I'll never know.
It was probably because I recalled that somewhere Al Jazeera was banned and thought it was Canada when it was Israel. I believe an Arab Gulf State has banned it as well even though it is from Qatar.
I am sure, though, that a number of years ago when I was living in Canada there was at least talk about banning it there.
Even when one does have that evidence there will always be those who will do anything they can to pervert it. The recent Nathan Phillips-Nick Sandmann imbroglio is a good example. Within a couple of days of the initial brief clips and pix were shown, the right had put out a myriad of different clips and pix that were claimed to be evidence that it was Phillips, not Sandmann, who was the cause of it all. Even when I produced a 90 min uninterrupted video clip of the entire event which backed-up Phillips' version exactly it was either ignored or dismissed as "fake." Never underestimate the ability of some people to never abandon a lie no matter how much evidence is against them.
It's awesome that every journalist who has apologized for their disgusting actions and the defenders of Sandmann rely on the unedited 90 minute video to prove Sandmann's innocence, and you are literally claiming it somehow indicts him. What a perfect encapsulation of your relationship to reality.
How accurate and true!
Kudos!
It's not. Buzz loves to drop BS bombs whenever he can. But here's list of countries that block Al Jazeera broadcasts:
Saudi Arabia
UAE
Egypt
Near as I can determine, Israel doesn't even block AJ broadcasts.
The lack of which in this country your Scumbag abuses --unsuccessfully--by threatening to sue people who print the ugly truth about him.
Another fun fact, I was looking at a website builder and as part of the package, they supply 20 free "endorsements" in the "customer comments".
Gets you off to a good start.
I agree that facts must be checked... and I am sickened by the idea.
Worse, some people have a very different idea of what fact-checking means. When a person's reality is determined by dogma rather than evidence, then "fact-checking" means "verification of conformity to dogma" rather than conformity to evidence.
Careful cherry-picking can confirm or infirm almost any proposition. It's hard to collect the evidence honestly... and some people don't even try.
The people that sicken me are those (while they are free to do it....) knowingly promulgate false stories/false data from debunked sources time and time again. Lies are still lies no matter how dogmatically you tell them.
I guess it goes back to one of my base philosophies....."We live in an infinite world with finite people."
We have some members who do this all the time. And I'm not sure they know they're doing it.
They are so attached to their dogmatic reality that they simply do not register contrary evidence. "Proving they are wrong" is meaningless. Their Truth is Truer than any evidence...
Indeed. Fact checking as presently decomposed is worse than useless. It is at best confirmation bias by msm sources to attack new and alternative media competition. At worst it’s a content control tool used to censor opinions and sources some would rather not be exposed to.
[Deleted]
I was really enjoying the way the non acrimonious conversations were going here. A shame it had to get personal.
And when it comes to C4P Doc...... Lets just leave it at waste of time as I see the purple pen is out and active.
Oh bullshit!
Your seeds in particulr have been debunked so much there's a rythm to it.
Gets proven wrong and it's ignored.
"Physician, heal thyself!"
Where did I ever say I was a physician?
In your heart you know I’m right!
Sorry, too many facts of your seeds being blatant lies. And the fact that your comments for the most part are proven wrong or proven to be outright and deliberate lies is factual history that you ignore when the proof is presented. You've abandoned seeds for this very reason.
I demand honesty from myself, I do not expect any less from anyone else. It has served me successfully for over 40 years. You will never see anywhere in my history where someone has accused me of being dishonest and being accurate.
Have I made mistakes? Plenty. But I will admit to them and learn.
I honestly cannot say that about you.
That's what is in my heart, not what you try to say what's in there.
Wrong on every count.
You disagreeing with my seeds or my posts does not make them wrong or lies. Posting an opposing POV does not debunk or make a lie out of mine. What I seed is very vanilla mainstream Christian conservative that has to run a censorship gauntlet to even appear here.
That's ironic, isn't it?
You routinely post subjective seeds, declaring those mostly conservatively sourced seeds to be
"the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth" while declaring everything secular, liberal and progressive to be lies.
And yes, you declare opposing views as lies, wrongheaded, unpatriotic and or the unAmerican work of Satan.
You really cannot have it both ways and not have your credibility questioned.
What's the "Doc" part of your handle mean,, then?
But his brain knows otherwise.
Only Navy Corpsmen are assigned to USMC forward units or on humanitarian missions
and are traditionally referred to as "Doc"by all Marines.
While still in the Navy they are attached to the USMC 1st Medical Battalion...
I had a feeling he was a corpsman so he is "medical" in the general sense. Which means my comment applied.
Fact checking is becoming nigh impossible, unless you want to spend an inordinate amount of time at it.....
Even then you have to be wary of who's facts you choose to accept.....
No ones facts are immune from bias anymore, just look at Dan Rather not tell the truth.....
Been this way for decades.
Many of the people here can't get past their ideology or in their dogmas reject any fact or truth that goes against their dogmas....
The facts that upset some people they do not want to deal with, it is easier to ideologically excuse without knowing the actual facts....
Big part of the emotional division of hate we see today.....
And I have to add my opinion, it is the liberal side that refuses to accept facts, and is the most strident in claiming it is the opposition that is refusing to see the facts. My experience leads me to the truth that the ones claiming the loudest are the most guilty.....
Although it is an issue both sides need to get over...
"Refusing to accept facts......."
Funny, I have the exact problem with those with conservative bents.
Care to venture to guess what percentages individuals trained in the scientific method (scientists, engineers, mathematicians) consider themselves conservative? I'll let you have the same enjoyment that I had in researching this point.
Take care.
Care to explain how you fact checked the percentage of engineers that are conservative?
Engineers cannot operate on beliefs and faith because people get hurt when they reject facts in favor of opinions. Facts and science are the holy grail and those who don't obey don't last long in the industry. Most engineer tend to be pragmatists and want proof. You don't stick your neck far outside of the lines because people's lives and our reputation is riding on it.
If someone tries to sell me a new parts with claims of stronger/better/lighter....... I have an automatic 25% BS factor that I subtract from all claims until I can prove them to be true because people in marketing and sales aren't engineers and their name aren't on the prints.
No, and I'm not prepared to do the research either. {chuckle}
Engineers within their professions cannot indulge in opinion or speculation, the risks are too great. outside their fields.... another story.
Scientists? when doing research? probably are conservative but not entirely. just the research I've done on the gun issue alone tells me there are way too many of them willing to shade their research with their opinions.....
Mathematicians, again, within their mathematical fields there are rules by which the game is played, but just taking a look at the stats guys tells me there is some leeway there for opinion to effect the outcomes....
I always come back to the level of absolutism in the opinions of the specific individual. And scientists are the least able to claim absolute factual rendition, Mathematicians are next and Engineers are the closest when specifically working in their specific field.
And holding to absolute fealty to scientific discipline as fact is laughable at best....
Those that do are over all other sources are very short sighted....
What..... and deprive you of the learning experience of doing your own research for a change?
I love FEA and CFD but I also know nit to rely on it if it is possible to build a full scale prototype that can be tested before it goes into production or into the customers hands for review.
I'm old school enough to wish that I could run a few politicians or others though a mechanical test battery, but there are definite human rights violations that would happen if you subjected the human body to torsion or impact testing.
Electro-shock might be a hoot-n-a-half though......!
We could Magnaflux a partisan pundit or a Senator, but it would only be embarrassing with the dye.
I've not magnafluxed anything in decades.... That could be fun.
Hmmmm, I could swear I've been in your office before...
You were the PA that wanted astm results.....
I was a manufacturers rep many moons ago. My specialty was Civil. Anywhere above ground I backed away. Same reason, I wouldn't want to pitch a bridge fixture and live with deaths if I was wrong.
People can have their own opinions but, they can't have their own facts. Facts can be proven, where opinions, for the most part, cannot. When someone says they have their own facts to back up a claim that goes against a set of facts that have been proven, then I must take their claims with a grain of salt and, check out the facts for myself, the real facts, not the ones that are formed by opinion and, then "proven" to form the opinion as fact.
Spot on target GMR!
Simple apply your logic to all the different scientists on the gun issue.... there are lots of liberal scientists that do studies based upon incomplete information, yet still give opinions they claim are based upon fact.... there are other scientists that do the same that agree with the conservative side....
How you decide the veracity of the study is dependent on which sides facts you agree with....
So as far as veracity of fact? you lost the scientists right there.
Your down to engineers and mathematicians.....
Anyone remember Galloping Gertie? Hartford Civic Center Roof Collapse? and any number of other newly minted engineering projects that turned out not so well? They also had a lot of engineering studies that claimed in the opinion of the engineering reviewer they shouldn't have collapsed..... what about their facts?
Lost the engineers right there...
Now your down to mathematicians?...... How bout mathematical theories.....
The one example that jumped immediately to mind, Lamé’s famous incorrect proof, using factorization in the ring of cyclotomic integers, of that result; the error was the assumption of unique factorization in a ring that did not (necessarily) have it, and that error is directly related to the development of algebraic number theory.
That not good enough?
Chevalier de Méré’s mistaken idea that the probability of tossing a six on four tosses of a single die is the same as the probability of tossing a double-six on 24 tosses of a pair of dice. This mistake actually did prompt serious mathematical discussion and helped advance the modern theory of probability.
Another you say?
The Hyatt Regency in Kansas City? the walkway collapse? killing over 200 people? During the ensuing lawsuits, it came out that neither the steel company nor the engineering firm in charge of construction had even bothered to do a back-of-the-envelope calculation that would have shown them the glaring flaw.
So there you go, you've lost all three disciplines....
You have no one to look at for absolute perfection on their facts.....
So again I state with absolute logical certainty in this truth......
....you have to be wary of who's facts you choose to accept.....
Thank you 1.
Th new San Francisco bus terminal could have been a disaster except for 2 people who saw something and told the engineers. I wonder if it was a design mistake or a fabrication mistake that cause a very large beam to fail. If that beam would have collapsed when the building was full of people at rush hour the loss of life could have exceeded the Hyatt Regency.
Without realizing it, you have proven my statement above, you can have your own opinions but, not your own facts, the examples that you provided show that somewhere along the line someone had an opinion before seeking the facts and, they formed the facts to fit an opinion rather than looking for the facts with an open mind and, then forming an opinion around the facts.
The KC Hyatt was one that struck close to home. My girlfriend and I were suppose to be there, and in the end, we decided to stay at her place and watch old movies.....
Given the examples (especially the Hiatt) you are confusing human error as malicious intent. When a person lies, they know what they are doing. True to nature scientists, mathematicians, and engineers never intentionally look to deceive. But liars do. Can you find scientists, and mathematicians, and engineers that have lied? Sure you can. Look at those bought off by the cigarette and oil industries. That would indicate a link between greed and lying would it not?
Was not the church responsible for pressuring Galileo? The pressures being put on the sciences today are coming from all directions.
Regards my friend.
The main problem is with every single one of those examples I gave above, the facts used were understood as the best facts available at that time....... Subsequently after the mistake took it's usual course and the assumptions based upon incorrect facts, investigations were done and new facts emerged.....
So much for the "Open Mind" approach to facts.... In actual practice the "Open Mind" usually isn't applied until AFTER the disaster based upon known facts....
The only way to avoid disaster is if all factual knowledge is known beforehand. Are you claiming that all factual knowledge is already known? Cause if not, then we will continue to have to accept that every scientific, mathematical and engineering conclusion is an opinion based upon known facts.....
This is not philosophy here or even logic, it is common sense....
Facts are but one part of the knowledge equation...... Basing ones outlook solely upon known facts is a course that will cause disaster eventually.
AS we have already gave ample examples of....
Life is messy, and one learns nothing until one experiments. Failures are usually better teachers than successes as well.
Yes, I'm a big fan of the Darwin Awards!
I for one am glad you weren't......
I never mentioned intent at all, didn't bring it into the discussion for a reason. Intent, especially egregious intent changes everything..... at that point fact has no bearing at all......
I agree that there have been over the years, decades and centuries much external pressures to reject fact and factual conclusion based upon known fact. Profit is one motive, lying to cover ones ass is another, lying to preserve an ideal is also another.... and there are many many more..... No arguments there....
Truth is always subject to the appreciation of those that do not understand it.....
Regards to you too my friend.... Good seeing you post regularly again, I enjoy our little mental exercises....
Ditto!!!
"Truth is always subject to the appreciation of those that do not understand it....."
I like that one! Mind if I use it from time to time?
Go for it.....
It was once a "known fact" that suspension bridges and, bridges in general couldn't be put across the Mississippi river because of its size but, a steel magnate managed to do it using steel and, then supported the strength of his bridge by having an elephant cross it first, the bridge is still standing today.
It was a "known fact" that men couldn't go beyond the "breakneck speed" of 45 miles an hour without dying, well, we know now that we can at least go faster than the speed of sound.
It was a "known fact" that man couldn't fly but, today planes take off from airports every second.
The point here is, that in engineering and, a lot of the sciences new things are learned everyday but, that's science and, science is relatively young compared to some other things, especially engineering, to base everything we consider facts as somehow science based is a mistake.
Fact checking Trump and, other politicians and, yes, Trump can now be considered a politician and, news stories is a known, there can't be two sets of facts when you can use what they say with what is known. When Trump says that all the economic good being done right now is because of him and, him alone, we can fact check that and, we find that under Obama is when all of this economic boom started under him and, because of things he did while he was in office. When Trump says his wall will keep immigrants out we must ask ourselves were in history a wall managed to keep anyone out, the facts are there, we just have to look them up. Think about this, Trump boasted that the stock market hit 25k twice during his presidency, that means that it hit 25k and, then dropped which it did, we can look at the stock charts and, see that for ourselves, that means that the stock market since Trump took office hasn't really gone anywhere, under Obama the stock market did really well and, we can prove that with the same stock charts.
And you just left fact behind and devolved into all types and classes of personal opinion......
POLITICS IS NOTHING BUT OPINION AS COMPARED TO ANOTHER'S.....
And you hate T-rump.... That is all I need to know about your political rant to completely ignore it....
You have to let go of your politics....
This is part of the problem, you go from making a fairly well reasoned argument that facts are important, then equate democrat politics/policies with and as facts....
Everyone is entitled to go off the deep end any time he likes, that is also a fact.....
Enjoy your fact.
And here we go..... scurrying off to our respective bunkers and lose the opportunity to converse.
This seed is about fact checking being needed to get to the truth and facts.
It is true that the more painful the truth is to someone, the more likely it is to be ignored....disregarded?
Left/Right I don't care for the most part. What seems to keep us apart is the getting to the truths and facts we as individual are willing to accept as a basis for the conversation to even start. As we can't seem to agree with those, we then move on to villainize each other.
You should probably go ahead and look at that chart before you get too certain about this. You know....since you're talking about the importance of facts and all.....
I think probably so.
Thank u, for the unsigned permission slip,
as i will N Joy my perception of de fax,
N
i will go deeper than most post
patterns, in the end
middle
beginning to look alot like Christmas
as i fly off the handle
that most can't,
or even grasp.
.
The 'Truth' is the 'Truth'
;\
So who's Truth is real ?
The Liar in office, the repeater, or the receiver, of the Lies ?
wherein Lies the Truth?
appears to me, the 'Truth' is "Lying" everywhere
"and that's all i've gotta say about that"
I guess you and I were the only ones having a fun conversation there...
Shame... Yes, It could have been so much more without the politics or political slant....
Agreed, but then I can't help those that feel it is a win/lose situation and that they must win at all times....
Proves the statement......
Truth is always subject to the appreciation of those that do not understand it.....
......is absolutely valid.
The point being that all the great and wonderful engineers and materials scientists for the steel producer couldn't take one scrap of paper and make the simple calculation that there was insufficient material in the joint as redesigned to hold both walkways.....
The steel company had liability cause in providing the steel for the project, they have to review the plans and make sure the product they supply is sufficient for all structural joints in the entire project.... In fact it was the Steel company that suggested the change from the original plans cause it would have been much more difficult to provide the originally called for part. The supervising engineers were liable cause they approved the change on the basis that it made the walkways much easier to assemble... A basic simple five minute calculation at any time would have shown the resulting joint to be woefully insufficient to hold within the original design parameters.
The architects were exonerated from all liability in the structural failure itself, but were liable for failing to supervise...
It's not like trotting down to the steel store and asking for this and that sized product......
Ok Jack, let's look at it together,
All I see is a comparable market correction in 2018 the same as the one in 2010, 2011, 2015, (after a similar leveling off) 2016 (while continuing to hold level)
The uptick starting after he was elected is similar to the uptick after Obama was elected....
Looks like after the end of 2018 it's recovered over half of what it lost and is going up again....
The chart doesn't prove what your claiming at all.... Unless you can predict the future....
What your claiming is an opinion I'm afraid, not a fact... The chart actually proves it.
Anyone want to notice something else about the chart?
the graphic representation itself, the lines get closer the higher you get in the chart, makes the charted line swing less at the top (T-rumps years) than at the bottom (Obama's years)....
In essence the chart is deceptive in the manner you are choosing to explain it/use it as fact....
The support rods were designed correctly but the contractor made a construction change on the fly that didn't use one continuous rod but instead used two rods. The problem was that the connection where the two rods came together wasnt strong enough and it ripped out under load, allowing the walkway collapse. A couple of double plates welded on at the new connection would have prevented the failure.
Do not allow fabricators to make design changes on the fly without double checking them!
Yep, a policy I've always held to when I've designed buildings, ALL design changes have to be approved by the designer....
Best practice.....
I had a house that I designed that pushed the materials to the safe limit to achieve what the client wanted, so I drew pages of details of exactly how it was to be constructed and then forced all of the subs to attend a meeting where I laid out the design in detail. They were all forced to sign a statement that they had been informed and would obey the prints to the letter at the close of the meeting. I was doing an inspection and caught one of the framing subs willfully ignoring the prints. I told him he could not do it and he said it was done and that I would have to live with it. I picked up a reciprocating saw and cut 3 posts in half because it would force them to remove them and built it according to my design. The site boss physically threatened me but I responded by calling my boss who said that either he apologize and do as I said or he had 10 minutes to vacate the site and he would not get any business from us in the future. His business needed us far more than we needed him...........
You are either blind or, deliberately using Trump blinders to make your point. You want a prediction? I'll give you one, by November 2020 we will be starting into a recession, the stock market will fall to the 2012 levels by that time and, people will begin to be laid off from their jobs, if two things don't happen, one the tariffs don't end and, two Trump quits treating our allies like enemies, if Trump doesn't change his trade policies things will get worse with our economy, not better.
Galen, there isn't any way to argue that the market is not up during the Trump presidency. Look at your own chart.
The numbers are what they are. The S&P 500 was at 2271 on inauguration day and closed at 2708 today. The Dow was at 19827 when Trump took office and closed at 25106 today. The growth is even more pronounced when you track it back to election day.
But this is perfect example of the problem. We have lots of people who absolutely can't stand Trump. I'm not judging, BTW. I'm personally not a fan.
But lots of those people let their emotional feelings about Trump obscure the actual facts. Like when they pretend that the stock market "hasn't really gone anywhere", when it's actually up over 20%.
No. I'm afraid he's not the one with Trump blinders on.
I'm blind?
Ok, if you say so....
BUT.....
I corrected the distortions of your chart..... the 2k delineation up the side are now the same height giving an accurate scale, and the year divisions along the bottom are now the same width giving an accurate time line....
Clearly, you can now see exactly what I was saying.... The market has performed twice as well from almost the instant that T-rump took office as compared against the entirety of Obama's administration....
Where did you get that chart? some liberal shill site? CNN? CBS? ABC? MSNBC? It was clearly deceptive.....
I submit it is you wearing the blinders to deliberately post such a distorted view of the facts....
Yep, today the DOW hit 25k, last month it hit 25k and, a year ago it hit 25k, hmmmm, notice a pattern here yet? In the past year, the DOW has basically been stagnant, yes, it has gone up and, down but, it can't get very far past the 25k line before it drops to 23k, investors aren't confident in Trump anymore, they see what is going on and, it scares them.
Look at your own chart, actually, the chart I provided that you have darkened. Look at 2017 to 2018, the line hits 25K in January 2017, it does it again in November of 2017 and, it did it again today. Now, I don't know about you but, to me that suggests that it could not have hit 25k three times in a year unless it dropped below 25k at least twice in that year. During Obama's time in office yes, there were times the market dropped but, it immediately rose again and, continued to rise, there was a steady rise in the market over his eight years in office, Trump isn't seeing that happen during his two years, what he is seeing is, in the first year, the year that the Obama policies were still in effect the market continued to rise but, when Trumps policies were put in place the market stagnated.
Now your changing the goal posts, your original claim......
The corrected chart shows that to be a complete falsehood......
Your own chart... Now you want to claim something else based upon that chart that still doesn't make sense but is completely different than your original claim....
Who has the hate blinders on?
I think some people are just mad that Krugman's predictions on the economy under Trump have been so wrong.
When one of their heroes is proven wrong publicly, they must saddle up and defend his honor!
When has Krugman NOT been wrong.....
It is said that even a broken clock is right at least twice a day, so what's Krugman's problem?
Krugman is the most celebrated economist in Democratic circle history.
Even if he is so wrong, or is it because he is so wrong?
I would lay money on Because
BELIEF PERSEVERANCE
We see all too much of that here.
The first thing that ideologues need to do is admit that facts are non-partisan. Yes, question the source. Yes question the author. But if it holds up to scrutiny and there are multiple sources that support it, especially if they contain data and studies, it's probably true.
There are a lot of good journalists/writers that base their articles on facts from multiple sources and they provide links for reference. It doesn't matter if they are conservative or liberal as long as they have integrity and ethics.
It's because he is better at creating ridiculous rationalizations about why batshit liberal ideology supposedly isn't batshit.
One other part, and although not a "fact" I have seen engineers get pressured by end users, contractors, and their own ego into disasterous conclusions.
Again, many moons ago I was helping the developer that my wife worked for to develop a shopping center in Birmingham. The engineer disagreed with me and agreed with the contractor to blast the side of a hill rather than digging and using gabions.
The night after blasting we got a call with her orders to get the corporate checkbook and meet the jet to go to Birmingham because the other side of the mountain lost 9 apartment houses sliding down.
Engineer blamed the contractor, contractor blamed the engineer...I blamed them both.
Real facts absolutely are, no question..... What is anathema to real facts?
A real fact has no room for probably, or maybe's, if's, kinda's, etc. etc.........
A phoney fact?
I think T-rump is a dick, no matter how many people think like that, it doesn't mean he is.
A real fact?
Light has weight, scientifically proven, extrapolated yes, but scientific none the less.
Oh stop. That's just a ridiculously over simplified conclusion.
Did you blame Barack Obama when the market was flat in 2011 or 2015? No? Was it Clinton's fault when the market dropped 10%? No?
If Trump is responsible for the flat market, is he also responsible for the rally that preceeded it? No?
Just stop the nonsense.
Things that affect the market:
1) The Fed and it's economic policies including interest rates
2) Trade policies including tariffs
3) Daytrading
4) Hedge Funds
5) Actions of businesses and in particular sectors of business
6) Profits
7) Return on Investment
8) Economies throughout the world not just the USA's economy
9) Government policies outside of international trade
All of these are just examples that I can think of off the top of my head and probably only scratch the surface of the entire complex system of all the things that affect the Stock Markets. The big ones out of those examples are everything other than Daytrading. When the Hedge Funds make moves, they have a ripple effect due to the shear volume of shares they either acquire or divest. Daytrading is a small segment of the population that are trying to get rich quick through making bets on stocks on a daily basis and hoping to hit a massive rise to sell high while hoping for a massive fall to buy low throughout the day.
Is it? I don't think so and, neither do a lot of economists. Obama's policies were being killed by Trump almost as soon as he was sworn in, Trump started in 2017 talking about tariffs against nations that we did business with on a regular basis and, he started talking about killing NAFTA, all of which he did do. Just something else to consider is what tomwcraig says in the comment 7.2.46,
2) Trade policies including tariffs
8) Economies throughout the world not just the USA's economy
9) Government policies outside of international trade
No because I knew neither one was imposing tariffs on our allies.
Only in part, a lot of that were policies that were still in effect when Obama was in office, the rest was hope of the market investors that Trump was on their side and, knew what he was doing. That hope is now fading, just like the Obama policies.
It took 35 quarters of the Obama era to make the market grow 10k points.
It took 5 quarters of the T-rump era to make the market grow 9.5 k points.
Simple question, Which era is better?
What is the relevance of the stock market to most Americans?
unless in a hybrid zoo of fruit orbiting Space Station while stationary,
how is it,
U compare Apples to Orangutangs guzzlin Tang, while in spacecraft, headed to the moon "Alice" ?
.
I be leave you've left the impression you r knowledgeable of our past, losing a few hundred thousand jobs per month while the worlds entire economic balance had become UN, and turning the entire direction of the world economy around, (Granted, via means i did not agree with, such as following Bush's lead of b ailing out the too big to fail n jail corporations, but, i believe Obama did what he thought was best for All of US, unlike some others)
This produced a slow and steady growth that gave this "President", an easy foundation to continue growth.
Then throw in "Tax Cuts" named for the Middle Class my Ass, that gave corporations ridiculously new higher profits that don't end, while the crumbs to the middle class expire in a few years....
then, throw in his appointmeants to Not Benefit any said administration or cabinet with a perfect example of the antithesis of said department, along with science denial & oversight reduction of all oversighting, and $ signs spring to mind for those who don't give a fck about future mankind.
Reduced oversight, also known as blindness, leading the blind, increasing the poisoning of our Country via mining, "clean" coal technology (Thats pAthetically FUnny), the increase of emissions, the allowance of more poisons in our water, and water ways, all in concert with the poisoning of feeble little minds,
leads one to SEE, Y the blind follow the blindness, but,
for some, not speaking dumb, jest a tit tat with a toe knumb, cause no matter how you circle your X's,
Y
can't U C, that those formerly married, are now divorced from more than just their X spouses and reality,
R just that.?,./
.
Two incomparable an apple to an Orangatang , irregardless of the size of ones pear, sounds like shrunken sour grapes, so i raisin the question that in order to
blind date, are melons important enough to carry the buckets of water
when things pail in comparison
to Albino Black Panthers ?
Ore
is it the FeMale irony,
of color dyslexia
gone positively negative...
Imagine the image you pool, is a reflection of ones self from the pool,
but, don't let em pool the wool over the sheepish red eyes, cause blinded, is the only way they like to drive
over US hey Jorge, forget the tree, watchout for that
BUS
Ask GMR he thinks it's so relevant that he has to be right...... Obama's era was better in every way..... (except the one that counts, growth)
Of course, that has nothing to do with political slant.
I try to make it a principle not to get involved in others' spats.
Actually... growth has been fairly constant since the end of the 2008 crisis. That wasn't Obama's doing, nor is it Trump's. The Fed runs the economy, for better or for worse.
Psst,
please inform Trumpp
In French: A l'impossible, nul n'est tenu! : No one may be required to accomplish the impossible.
Absolutely.
Do find us an economist who denies "the Trump rally", or who states that the market "has gone nowhere" since his inauguration.
Yes. And you'll notice Tom lists that as one of many factors. He left off "taxation", BTW, but we'll assume that goes under "other govt policies".
But chief among all of those.... number one on Tom's list and correctly so... is "The Fed". Pretending a $200billion tariff decision impacts the markets with similar effect as a $90 trillion interest rate decision is embarrassingly ridiculous.
This is your emotion talking. I sure hope you're not basing actual investment decisions on this.
It is the engine that allows all the shit they buy to come to market.
I will say that. Look at this chart in link. The market peaked in in 2017 and has basically 'gone nowhere'.
Obama's. trumps era is stagnant.
Nope. Trucks do that.
The insanity never ends does it?
I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that most commenting haven't one lick of experience investing, Stock market, or business....
Just from the way they talk about it.....
To listen to them, you would think they can't make a move unless a democrat politician in the government tells them what is what.....
35 quarters under the Obama admin the market increased 10k...... 5 quarters under the T-rump administration the market increased 9.5 k.
The market was almost 7 times faster in growth. Yes it has had a couple of sell offs which is normal, so the same happened several times under the Obama Administration.... Yet they casually ignore those.....
That deliberate ignorance is what tells me they haven't a clue, and their commentary is colored by politics first before any other knowledge. Sad, very sad.....
Yeah, political people like those kind of charts..... Makes them feel better....
Quote....
Typical worthless information..... Both lines start from zero so of course the 36 quarters Obama was president will result in a much higher ending as a percentage of where they started.....
Feed that crap to someone who doesn't know basic math.....
You may not like it but it shows what the market did during their terms.
It is fact whether you like the results or not.
Also, One can look at where trump is now compared to Obama at the same time in their terms.
Know your math, do ya? How many years are 36 quarters?
And what difference does that make, but the truth is, it doesn't represent what you claim it to.....
Fine, nitpick the minor details, 32 quarters then.... Still doesn't change the actual fact does it......
Actually it proves exactly what I said.
Obama had a better stock market during his term when you compare the two at the same time in their presidency.
It also shows that for over the last year, during the trump presidency, it has been flat.
And, it has been stagnant since January 2018.
I haven't invested since 2004 when I bought bulk gold bars at 400 an ounce and, later sold them at a profit. I advised my friends to do the same and, to sell all their stocks before the 2007 crash of the market and, then advised them to buy into the stock market in 2009 while it was still low, I've been advising them to sell every time it hits 25k since that is the most the "balloon" can stomach. We will see the start of the collapse of the economy this year and, it will only get worse, for the workers, as we go into 2020, the rich will continue to get their tax breaks while we the workers will pay for it with an increase in taxes owed.
You're to the silly one-liners already.
Capitulating early on this one, I see. Probably just as well.
We are overdue for a recession. It's unlikely we'll see anything like 2008, because the financial system is much stronger. Calling a recession a "collapse" is as partisanly idiotic as calling the last 2 years "the greatest market in history".
How....exactly ....will working class Americans owe more taxes on lower tax brackets and rates? Oh...that's right....they would have to be making more money.
So which is it? Will the economy collapse or will workers pay more taxes? Or will you admit this is really just about your emotions?
You do know, Jack, that 90% of stock market activity is just churn?
It has very little to do with getting stuff to market. Trucks do a lot more.
Do give us a link on that, Bob.
I'm sure you think so.
Google is your friend, Jack...
Well I doubt it will be yours.
Both, starting this year. Regular people will start paying taxes when their returns come in because, that "tax break" they got started ending this year, the tax cuts for the rich will continue well past 2021. We will start into a recession by the end of this year and, it will continue through next year to get worse. IMO.
[Removed]
Translations: "When science tells me things I don't like to hear, I ignore or attack it. Then I look for some political hack that agrees with me and I swallow everything he or she says--whole. "
And the Dow is up 650 points more in the last week since....
I may be wrong but wasn't you that told me you advise banks?
Here's exactly how that can happen.
An employee of a company is a commissioned sales rep.
They hop in their car every day and drive 90,000 miles a year, taking clients to lunch, etc. The company does not pay for the expenses opting to pay higher commissions instead.
The employee writes off $30,000 in travel and $5200/yr. For entertainment expenses. The rep earns $130-150,000 per year in commissions. The company offers him a position in a territory 1500 miles away.
Except this year he can't write off the miles, entertainment or moving expenses.
Now, he's paying taxes on $150,000 income instead of $104,000. Which is roughly $9500 more paid out to the IRS this year over last year.
fake news... the mileage deductions are still there... and bigger than last year.
fact checking is a must
A lot. Well over half of all Americans are invested in it. Many of us are wholly dependent upon its well being for our retirement savings, our heath and education accounts savings, savings for long term goals, own REIT funds because we can’t afford a second or more properties, and with interest rates so low in rainy day funds as well though those are in income corporate bond and dividend stock income funds. I’m on the edge of the working and middle class and my whole economic future well being is directly tied to the well being of corporate America and the stock market. I’d trust that before government any time every time.
Do you own an ETF of Trucking and or railroad companies? They do exist.
Participation through all possibilities is currently thought to be 54%
Let's see......I was talking about unreimbursed employee expenses....Wait! What's this??? From your own link even....
sorry but you said...
when in fact, yes they can write off those miles.
obviously, I did not question unreimbursed expenses... I was only speaking about mileage.
yes, you were right about unreimbursed expenses and yes, you were wrong about not being able to write off mileage.
just say thank you for clearing that up and move on.
cheers
The answer is simple. Don't believe anything you read or hear or see other than only half of what you actually see "live". Has anyone seen the movie "The Illusionist"?
I have, excellent exercise in fooling the mind, another good one is "Now you see Me".
We elected a man who already had a reputation as a serial liar long before the election. Clearly a sizable part of the public doesn't care about the truth or the facts.
The president's reported favorite television show , Fox and Friends, a show on which he has been a guest many times, has a long history of reporting erroneous 'facts'.
I'll bet there is no fact checking on that claim that his favorite show is Fox and Friends. The people that make these erroneous claims never back them up with fact.
That claim is pretty obvious based on what he tweets.
also, a little bird told me
it is true.
Half of his "ideas" come from FOX "news"
the other half
Planet Putin to his mind
I have a leather hat
made from cattle
calling
out cat calls , cause F TRump can grab em, I can blab em whatever it be asz TRump has changed the rules pertaining to Truth, n not just an opine, I. Produced from a tree. Son
ain’t gonna shine your shoes, but it will provide energy for your opine to grow.....
Start here:
That's embarrassing.
It's Trump.
now THAT'S
Embarrassing !
When you start using them it would be a shock...
Yes.
Yes. About 90%, apparently.
This earns, yet again a
. Some people just have a knack for continually stating the obvious as if it were a newly revealed truth just to them.
"Don't urinate on me and tell me it's raining.....!"
Kind of similar to trickle down economics, is it not?
Good one!
E.
It relates well to much that is going on in our political system, and has been for decades.
Supply side economics is the only true path to real economic growth and wealth accumulation across the board. A rising tide lifts all boats.
It has failed every time. Not once has sse ever worked.
What the fuck does your wife's family business to do with a Republican policy that hasn't worked each time it's implemented?
And besides, who do you think you're trying to teach about starting and growing a business?
You weren't around for the actual "hard work" OVER 80 years ago to make the leap of self confidence and determination. Please stop trying to bullshit me about your business prowess. I had my ass handed to me as a rookie long before you came out of your pampers.
Uh huh......
Sure you did!
You're going to tell me that afterall owning a marine sales and service company you started two other businesses that are marine related and jumped through all the regulatory and licensing as well as outrageous insurance platforms instead of just offering the services under the existing license and insurance.
Yeah, that makes sense....the only part of that comment that may even be believable is you cutting lawns on the side.
Knows nothing of taxes, accounting, regulatory, insurance....but claims to have started and operating two seperate entities.
It sure is hard to believe - 331 comments all about a situation where there isn't a person or an organization in the world that is honest and unbiased enough to even check the fact checking organizations and only a fool would even think that the fact checking organizations are honest and unbiased.
As I said above, don't believe anything you read or hear and only half of what you see with your own eyes.
Objectivity...... How do you teach it/maintain it....whatever.
I may put together a seed on it as a follow up to this one.
Hope you're doing well Buzz....
If YOU write it, it's an article, not a seed, and I would look forward to it if you do. There's a definite lack of objectivity to be exposed IMO.
I'm doing fine, thanks, and hope you and yours are okay as well. As long as I've got my movies, my camera and my photo editing program I'm happy.
And this article has helped to accentuate and amplify it by some in my opinion....