agip wrote:
Maserati wrote:agip, (and I mean this in the best way), you are a fool, a dupe, a chump. You are twisting in the wind. Surely you must have some insights from your own knowledge, from your own activities, from your own economic involvement and from those you know. Your constant recitation of, and faith in the meaning of, published numbers, is frankly an embarrassment.
yes, yes, I should use anecdote and hearsay instead. . Absolutely.
17 trillion of GDP is pretty much captureable by just looking around and listening.
And look at all the career government statisticians who have confessed to "manufacturing" numbers after being pressured by politicians. It's rampant. All over the place.
You want a battle of figures and sources?
http://www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/WTF are YOU talking about?
And just what makes you think that data collected by third parties is any more valid than that you discover personally? Your attempt to trivialize it as "anecdote" falls flat, and your characterization of it as "hearsay" is laughably incorrect. You apparently have no idea what hearsay is.
17 trillion? Do you really believe that your vaunted 3rd parties and gov't look at it all? Or, rather, do they sample?
Lastly, the bureaucrats work at the behest of politicians, not "the people". Surely you can't be so naive. Apparently you have never worked in government, or if you have, you were in a very low position and completely oblivious to the workings of the machine at higher levels.
You've gone completely off the rails. Seriously. I used to think that you were mostly rational, but that opinion is quickly changing.
Meanwhile, those of us involved in the ACTUAL economy await the Fed news today, because it affects our cost of doing business, while those of you who do essentially nothing but hand-wring and transfer things from the left pocket to the right pocket will be essentially totally unaffected.
You know, at least Flagpole is straight up about it--he doesn't even pretend to care about things. He just counts on history showing that, over longer terms, the markets have always risen. You, OTOH, seem to believe that you actually have some sort of handle on what's in fact going on at different levels and locations in the aggregate economy, because you believe in the veracity of the information you receive from the self-interested.
You are the perfect chump, the perfect dupe. Let me ask you this: when presented with conflicting evidence, facts, and figures about a particular economic condition, how do you resolve that conflict?