RED-DOG
|
|
« Reply #23595 on: November 07, 2013, 10:05:50 AM » |
|
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.
|
|
|
Logged
|
The older I get, the better I was.
|
|
|
doubleup
|
|
« Reply #23596 on: November 07, 2013, 03:55:04 PM » |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
mondatoo
|
|
« Reply #23597 on: November 07, 2013, 04:05:13 PM » |
|
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.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
celtic
|
|
« Reply #23598 on: November 07, 2013, 04:18:17 PM » |
|
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
|
|
|
Logged
|
Keefy is back But for how long?
|
|
|
mondatoo
|
|
« Reply #23599 on: November 07, 2013, 06:15:03 PM » |
|
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
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
doubleup
|
|
« Reply #23600 on: November 08, 2013, 01:32:28 PM » |
|
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
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
RED-DOG
|
|
« Reply #23601 on: November 08, 2013, 01:44:21 PM » |
|
4/9, but I got the one that 92% of people get wrong right.
|
|
|
Logged
|
The older I get, the better I was.
|
|
|
kinboshi
|
|
« Reply #23602 on: November 08, 2013, 02:46:46 PM » |
|
Saw this on Facebook - probably already been posted on here, but worth watching:
|
|
|
Logged
|
'The meme for blind faith secures its own perpetuation by the simple unconscious expedient of discouraging rational inquiry.'
|
|
|
RED-DOG
|
|
« Reply #23603 on: November 08, 2013, 03:04:33 PM » |
|
I haven't seen that before. It's very sobering.
|
|
|
Logged
|
The older I get, the better I was.
|
|
|
dreenie
|
|
« Reply #23604 on: November 09, 2013, 11:44:30 AM » |
|
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 ?
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Jon MW
|
|
« Reply #23605 on: November 09, 2013, 01:04:11 PM » |
|
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.
|
|
« Last Edit: November 09, 2013, 01:08:01 PM by Jon MW »
|
Logged
|
Jon "the British cowboy" Woodfield
2011 blonde MTT League August Champion 2011 UK Team Championships: Black Belt Poker Team Captain - - runners up - - 5 Star HORSE Classic - 2007 Razz Champion 2007 WSOP Razz - 13/341
|
|
|
RED-DOG
|
|
« Reply #23606 on: November 09, 2013, 01:22:43 PM » |
|
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.
|
|
|
Logged
|
The older I get, the better I was.
|
|
|
RED-DOG
|
|
« Reply #23607 on: November 09, 2013, 03:18:31 PM » |
|
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.
|
|
|
Logged
|
The older I get, the better I was.
|
|
|
Jon MW
|
|
« Reply #23608 on: November 09, 2013, 03:25:10 PM » |
|
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.
|
|
|
Logged
|
Jon "the British cowboy" Woodfield
2011 blonde MTT League August Champion 2011 UK Team Championships: Black Belt Poker Team Captain - - runners up - - 5 Star HORSE Classic - 2007 Razz Champion 2007 WSOP Razz - 13/341
|
|
|
|
|