Vagueness and the Aftermath - A sporadic diary

[RED-DOG]

a really shit pic-a-mix at my local Odeon

Lol.

I recommend a quick visit to Aldi to stock up on munchies before going to the cinema and buying senior citizen tickets.

If you're over 30 and they are under 20, they will think you are at death's door anyway.

[doubleup]

Another of those bbc quizzes

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-24836917

[mondatoo]

I got 3/9

This bit caught my eye "but six billion do not (meaning that they earn more than $1.25 per day)"

$1.25 per day, should that really be the line for extreme poverty ffs.

[celtic]

I got 3/9

This bit caught my eye "but six billion do not (meaning that they earn more than $1.25 per day)"

$1.25 per day, should that really be the line for extreme poverty ffs.

Still more than you earn from 180 manners on stars per day though x

[mondatoo]

I got 3/9

This bit caught my eye "but six billion do not (meaning that they earn more than $1.25 per day)"

$1.25 per day, should that really be the line for extreme poverty ffs.

Still more than you earn from 180 manners on stars per day though x

Oioiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii 

[doubleup]

I got 3/9

This bit caught my eye "but six billion do not (meaning that they earn more than $1.25 per day)"

$1.25 per day, should that really be the line for extreme poverty ffs.

I got 5/9

The one that surprised me most was the worldwide distribution of wages

[RED-DOG]

4/9, but I got the one that 92% of people get wrong right.

[kinboshi]

Saw this on Facebook - probably already been posted on here, but worth watching:

[RED-DOG]

I haven't seen that before. It's very sobering.

[dreenie]

Hi Tom, how are you?

I clicked on the beginning of your diary by mistake and hadn't read the opening page which I then proceeded to do. You have a very professional way of writing, almost like I am re living the story if that makes sense?

P.S- do u really fold top top to a re raise ?

[Jon MW]

Saw this on Facebook - probably already been posted on here, but worth watching:

Immediately what stands out is that sometimes they're talking about income and sometimes they're talking about wealth, and they're talking about them as if they're the same thing which they clearly aren't.

After that I just went looking for somebody else's analysis because it's easier than looking up all the figure's myself.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/03/09/the-problem-with-the-wealth-inequality-in-america-video-it-commits-worstalls-fallacy/

Primarily some measurements it uses - such as the poverty line - are measurements you take before government aid; so if one of the results you want from such a presentation are (for example) more government aid - that won't actually effect what you show on a graph like that. Or more simply - the graph doesn't show the right figures for 'the poor' to start with.

More generally the problem is that it ignores the current wealth re-distribution the government does.

It's not an argument to say that their isn't a problem with wealth distribution or income distribution - just that if you're going to highlight it, it would have a lot more integrity if you used a more accurate representation.

EDIT: FWIW similar stats for the UK show a similar 'worrying' disparity; except if you cross reference if with age it actually primarily just shows there's a very high correlation between wealth and age.

[RED-DOG]

Hi Tom, how are you?

I clicked on the beginning of your diary by mistake and hadn't read the opening page which I then proceeded to do. You have a very professional way of writing, almost like I am re living the story if that makes sense?

P.S- do u really fold top top to a re raise ?

Bilmey! I haven't read that since I wrote it. I can't wait to see what happens next.

BTW- I deny all knowledge of folding top top.

[RED-DOG]

Saw this on Facebook - probably already been posted on here, but worth watching:

Immediately what stands out is that sometimes they're talking about income and sometimes they're talking about wealth, and they're talking about them as if they're the same thing which they clearly aren't.

After that I just went looking for somebody else's analysis because it's easier than looking up all the figure's myself.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/03/09/the-problem-with-the-wealth-inequality-in-america-video-it-commits-worstalls-fallacy/

Primarily some measurements it uses - such as the poverty line - are measurements you take before government aid; so if one of the results you want from such a presentation are (for example) more government aid - that won't actually effect what you show on a graph like that. Or more simply - the graph doesn't show the right figures for 'the poor' to start with.

More generally the problem is that it ignores the current wealth re-distribution the government does.

It's not an argument to say that their isn't a problem with wealth distribution or income distribution - just that if you're going to highlight it, it would have a lot more integrity if you used a more accurate representation.

EDIT: FWIW similar stats for the UK show a similar 'worrying' disparity; except if you cross reference if with age it actually primarily just shows there's a very high correlation between wealth and age.

You know what I like about you Jon? You always have an opinion.

I don't always agree with it, but I'm always interested to know what it is.

[Jon MW]

More accurately I only comment if I have an opinion on some discussion - hence the lack of posts on "other" threads when the discussion has turned to such subjects as concrete, for example.

[RED-DOG]

Over a million dollars worth of virtual money stolen.

I can't get my head around this. Is it a wind up?



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-24871444