Wrong again.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects
Collapse
X
-
All you're left with here is asserting something. Nothing to back it save for your own bluster. But by your logic any time the jobs report surprises to the upside that's a black mark on the credibility of the DOL, and any time Apple beats quarterly earnings estimates we should trust them less. Equities investors don't think much of your logic. Those are people who live and die by the numbers, and what they tell us about the future. And they have a realistic understanding of what economic forecasting means and does. Maybe you don't. Maybe you've never tried to project three decades into the future using a mix of reported data and various assumptions calibrated to multiple scenarios. I have. People who work with numbers for a living have. Honestly, everyone should. Or at least understand how the modelling process works and where to find its inherent limitations. That's better than using ideology or magical thinking as a litmus test for when we are skeptical of modelling and when we are not.
- Top
Comment
-
My vote is lets go ahead and avoid shocks to the system so great that people will vote it into a depression. Trump's trade policy shows the extent to which that's possible. People have, in some countries, voted themselves into a recession.
We are indeed relying on them for more than we do in those other examples. So it's a good thing the methodology is transparent, in case any serious critic of it wanted to take a real stab at giving magical thinking like yours some new life. But, nonetheless, the point stands. The methodology used to decide when to be skeptical of modelling is a shit methodology. It's for people who cannot move from denial to acceptance.
As for whether we're doomed or not, one thing that I think is interesting is that these projections of doom are based on a point-forward basis. In truth some people already are doomed. Ten years ago with Katrina there were people starting to suggest, maybe, a link between climate chance and major storms. Now, nobody but the dead-enders debate that. So the question isn't whether we're doomed or not. It's a matter of who is doomed at this point, and where, and whether they have money.
- Top
Comment
-
Originally posted by crashcourse View Postfrom real clear politics
OH2 Previous: Tossup. New Status: Leans GOP.
NY 27 Previous: Tossup. New Status: Leans GOP.
NC 2 Previous: Tossup. New Status: Leans GOP.
WV 3 Previous: Tossup. New Status: Leans GOP.
TX 23 Previous: Tossup. New Status: Leans GOP.
OH 1 Previous: Tossup. New Status: Leans GOP.
VA 2 Previous: Tossup. New Status: Leans GOP.
MTAL Previous: Tossup. New Status: Leans GOP.
WI 1 Previous: Tossup. New Status: Leans GOP.
CA 50 Previous: Tossup. New Status: Leans GOP.
CA 39 Previous: Tossup. New Status: Leans GOP.
PA 7: Previous: Lean Democrat. New Status: Tossup.
NC 9: Previous: Lean Democrat. New Status: Tossup.
- Top
Comment
-
If you understand the variables you're working with, it's a lot easier. If you know how much gold is in the vein, and how much capacity you have to truck it away, you can get a pretty clear picture of how much gold a gold mine would produce over the course of 50 years. You'd have a harder time predicting iPhone sales over 30 years because that's a product far more likely to be disrupted than gold mining.
As for the IPCC, I've no doubt they'll have updated those forecasts many times by 2030. That's the thing about numbers -- when you get fresh ones you refresh the projections. That's normal and good, if you want to have evidence-based policy. It's not something to complain about.
- Top
Comment
-
Supposedly a lawsuit has already begun over 53,000 disqualified registrations in Georgia that are overwhelmingly (70%) black people. The Republican candidate for Governor is the current Secretary of State who has instituted a policy of "perfect match" on registrations. Essentially if the person's name does not match what's in the driver's license database exactly, the registration is put on hold. A missing period or hyphen or misspelled name would be enough to deny their registrations. The race is expected to be pretty tight.
- Top
Comment
-
Trump keeps touting that we have $110 Billion worth of arms deals with the Saudis. They've actually committed to far less than that. Memorandums of intent are not the same thing as a sale, but Trump is treating them that way. Several of the 'commitments' have already lapsed. Nearly everything they've actually bought over the past year and half was negotiated during the...gulp...Obama presidency.
- Top
Comment
-
NYT/Siena poll has Cruz comfortably ahead of O'Rourke. This is a day after a Quinnipiac poll showed the same thing. I wonder if the breathless articles about Robert O'Rourke's chances will start to dwindle?
The NYT also has Blackburn up 14. The poll was conducted from October 8-11, so that includes the big Taylor Swift bump!Dan Patrick: What was your reaction to [Urban Meyer being hired]?
Brady Hoke: You know.....not....good.
- Top
Comment
-
Rasmussen is showing Rs and Ds pretty close to even on the generic ballot. Also, Trump's approval rating there has been steady at about 49% for a couple of weeks. Historically that would mean big wins for the Rs but historical precedents probably go out the window here.
Cruz will beat Beta O'Rourke but Texas is very much in danger of flipping to blue within the next decade or so because of demographics. It only took California two generations to go from a state that elected Ronald Reagan twice to one that decriminalized the spread of AIDS. If and when Texas goes blue it's never coming back. Turn out the lights, the party's over.
I have followed Tennessee just a little bit. It looks like the R in that race is very wisely running on Trump's agenda. If she can just stick to that and convince people that Bredesen will vote against Trump's agenda then she will win comfortably. The new Project Veritas video makes her job easier.Last edited by Hannibal; October 12, 2018, 09:20 AM.
- Top
Comment
Comment