Recent content by BoomBoom

Is someone that chooses to teach for a living less 'fit' than someone who chooses a career as a corporate executive? ...just one small example. People's compensation levels rarely have anything to do with their genetic fitness.

I find it quite humorous that you would equate a persons income level to that of their genetic fitness. :smile:

Well, there is no way we will ever be able to have a completely accurate number, and the CBO estimates could be high (or they could also be low). But all the unemployment data I have seen seems to clearly indicate that the rate of job losses slowed right after the stimulus started going into...

C'mon, what we just went through (and are still recovering from) is hardly what I would call a "natural cycle". :rolleyes:

I can only assume that saving or creating millions of jobs had a positive impact, just as you can only assume it had no effect. You specifically asked what I thought, so I told you. I like your link though...it seems quite obvious from that chart that the unemployment rate stopped rising...

As is yours. ummm this statement: ...was a misrepresentation of the CBOs estimates plain and simple.

It depends on what your definition os "successful" is. Did it turn our economy around so that we are firing on all cylinders again and got unemployment back down to 5-6%? No. Did it have a big impact on avoiding an economic depression and start a slow turnaround that could have...

Perhaps, but in reality what you tried to do was completely misrepresent the CBO's numbers due what you apparently read in a conservative web site. If you look at 'summary table 1' in the actual CBO report, you will see that you were factually incorrect in your assumptions about the CBO...

Errr, according to the CBO? http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/108xx/doc10871/01-26-Outlook.pdf" It shows a deficit reduction through the year 2015 at least. And of course, cutting spending and raising taxes would improve things even more...which I assume will happen eventually. Which begs...

He took office when it was at 83%, so getting it down to 80% would be a reduction...but, yeah, 60% would be tremendous! :smile: Once the economy starts really clicking again, it should be all downhill.

Well, if Obama can get it down to below 80% by the end of his term (hopefully in 2016), then he will still be with the trend started in the 1970's of the debt/GDP ratio being lowered during Democratic presidents and being raised during Republican presidents. Here's another similar wiki page...

I really think there should be a Gay Pride Parade held every Sunday up and down the street in front of this church! ...and by all means, it should be as lewd as the law will allow!

Yes, but keep in mind that this method is rather antiquated and really no longer used. These days, the reactions are all done in a single tube with dye-labeled nucleotides.

What effects would a void have? Wouldn't said void, by definition, be empty of anything that would cause an effect that could be detected?

Well, I wouldn't consider $3/week to be a huge gambling problem. Lord knows, I waste much more $$ on far more frivolous things. To me, for that small price of admission, a slim chance is better than none...and besides, the money goes to a good cause IMO.