Stupid World

[bogan]

Thanks Dad. I'm goin fushun.

Don't forget your water wings...

[Brian d marge]

We have a flat tax here in japan

Sent from my SC-01F using Tapatalk

[Brian d marge]

Russians mayhave big stupid hats but they dont fk around
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzsZ...e_gdata_player

Sent from my SC-01F using Tapatalk

[Ocean1]

Actual numbers? you mean it's a theory that has been accepoted as fact because the statistics used in the probability calculation came out at 51% or above right?

You didn't actually read the blog, did you? It wasn't anything to do with probability and there wasn't any theory discussed.

So wrong again.

No I'm not, not even close.

Being wrong about how wrong you are isn't unusual. Being continuously wrong about so many things in the face of overwhelming evidence about the factual vacuum you inhabit is a bit special though. I can only assume you practice a lot. Keep it up, you're on track to become the worlds largest source of anti-fact.

Yeah, but the have factual numbers to back up their position and you've made it clear that facts are facts on that basis. Are you changing your opinion?

The claim that there's a lot of poor people that rich people have somehow caused to be poor is an opinion. The UN, finding that their message was increasingly more difficult to believe decided to redefine "poor" using numbers.

That didn't make their message fact.

What the numbers did do is make the "poor" qualification transparent to analysis. The sort of analysis you'd have found in that blog, if you'd bothered to read it. As a result of which I don't think most literate people are any more convinced by their numerical description than they were about their previous opinion.

So no, no change of opinion is even vaguely indicated.

Awwww, poor NZ'ers, if only they knew.

I can assure you most of them are extremely aware of the cost.

[Ocean1]

We have a flat tax here in japan

Sent from my SC-01F using Tapatalk

With a minimum threshold?

[Ocean1]

My Grandfather was fond of saying "there are three classes of liars ... liars, damn liars and statistics" - wiser than most, he was. Should have been in politics but his parents were married.

From my own observation, no matter how pure your base data, how carefully collected, how systematically recorded, THERE IS NO STATISTICAL DATA that can't be twisted, pruned, obfuscated, and then presented in such a way as to 'prove' to the masses that a chestnut horse is actually a horse chestnut (that concept isn't original).

To the pure, all things are pure ... unfortunately to some out there 'fact' and 'truth' can be redefined at will to reflect whatever suits their current political or self-serving end.

Yeah, it's a saying used mostly by people who don't like the implications of those statistics.

It ain't difficult to spot bullshit, even bikers aren't taken in by LTNZ or ACC data, the fact that so much relevant data isn't actually collected is a bit of a giveaway to start with, and the spin on what is collected is pretty obvious.

If in doubt get ALL of the numbers and run a few "what if's" yourself, it's not difficult.

[Brian d marge]

With a minimum threshold?

5% and a citizens tax dependent on your situation not percentage based and different city to city
Because i have family i dont pay very much and i get money back per child etc

Sent from my SC-01F using Tapatalk

[Ocean1]

5% and a citizens tax dependent on your situation not percentage based and different city to city
Because i have family i dont pay very much and i get money back per child etc

Sent from my SC-01F using Tapatalk

Interesting...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/stephenh...e-or-collapse/

[Brian d marge]

Interesting...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/stephenh...e-or-collapse/

Yes that right
The oldies . Just like in new zealand wont let the pension be cut
So japan will have to cash up
Us bond will have to be sold or...................... drum roll
Assets
And thats going to make a hell of a mess

They tried to privatise the post office about 5 year ago , went down like a ton of lead bricks and is still nationalised and over staffed and over paid

The japanese may just dump american debt, bonds and say sod ya

Or just keep printing money

In the 15 years ive been here the cost of living has increased about 1 or 2 percent not that much as one would notice

Ship may be sinking but it seems ok from steerage

Stephen

Sent from my SC-01F using Tapatalk

[mashman]

Don't forget your water wings...

I caught a fish with wings.

[mashman]

You didn't actually read the blog, did you? It wasn't anything to do with probability and there wasn't any theory discussed.

So wrong again.

Yes I did... but we had moved on from the blog and were discussing facts backed by numbers.

Being wrong about how wrong you are isn't unusual. Being continuously wrong about so many things in the face of overwhelming evidence about the factual vacuum you inhabit is a bit special though. I can only assume you practice a lot. Keep it up, you're on track to become the worlds largest source of anti-fact.

Given your facts are nothing more than flakey models, definitions and calculations, I'll happily take the anti-fact crown.

The claim that there's a lot of poor people that rich people have somehow caused to be poor is an opinion. The UN, finding that their message was increasingly more difficult to believe decided to redefine "poor" using numbers.

That didn't make their message fact.

What the numbers did do is make the "poor" qualification transparent to analysis. The sort of analysis you'd have found in that blog, if you'd bothered to read it. As a result of which I don't think most literate people are any more convinced by their numerical description than they were about their previous opinion.

So no, no change of opinion is even vaguely indicated.

No, it's a fact. If there's a finite amount of money and rich people have most of it, then they are causing there to be poor people. I'm no fan of the UN, but there is poverty and in many parts of the world extreme poverty and it needs a voice, not feel good philanthropist charity from those with entitlement complexes.

Why not? You said as long as the numbers backed up a position that that position is fact. Make your mind up.

Why does anyone need to look at any numbers? There has been extreme poverty since forever. Band Aid, for me, was the first real glimpse into extreme poverty to me. That was 30 years ago. Why has that not changed? Go on, throw me the "but it's getting better" line. If we haven't sorted it after 30 years, it ain't gonna get sorted because there's no will to sort it. Unfortunately that's not for the want of individuals trying, but that in itself shows how preoccupied govts are with not addressing the problem is there's no money in it. It could be sorted within 5 years if we decided to do so. As I said, I'll take opinion, or direct observation in this case, as evidence over massaged numbers thanks.

I'd be surprised if you did... you're not the type.

I can assure you most of them are extremely aware of the cost.

Most? Is that a fact? pffft.

[mstriumph]

Bah, that's just a line from people who would rather cling to their own opinions than do a little reading into the facts. Yeh stats can be twisted, but they can be untwisted just as easily for anyone with a bit of grey matter.

in my honest opinion those with no credible counter-argument invariably descend to personal abuse ... as you just have

Opinions on the other hand, just like arseholes; everyones got em, and most are full of shit

thank you for your concise and incisive explanation of your post; nevertheless, I respect your opinion - I just don't like the way you've expressed it. 'Fraid I'm not prepared to descend to your level of 'debate' ... so play on without me, please.

[mstriumph]

Yeah, it's a saying used mostly by people who don't like the implications of those statistics.

or perhaps those who can spot flim flam and misdirection at a thousand yards and are making a wry comment on the situation? I know that I personally fall into that category.

It ain't difficult to spot bullshit, even bikers aren't taken in by LTNZ or ACC data, the fact that so much relevant data isn't actually collected is a bit of a giveaway to start with, and the spin on what is collected is pretty obvious.

If in doubt get ALL of the numbers and run a few "what if's" yourself, it's not difficult.

totally agree with you. Don't like the implication of 'even bikers' though ... think most of us are probably wiser than our fellows, if only for the swift and comprehensive 'take' we have to make of the changing situation surrounding us every moment we are riding?

[Brian d marge]

Yeah Ms Nuland , Yo, I'll tell you what u want, what u really really want,
So tell me what you want, what you really really want,
I'll tell you what u want, what u really really want,
So tell me what you want, what you really really want,
u wanna, u wanna, u wanna, u wanna, u wanna really really really wanna the Ukraines oil .

Stephen

[Ocean1]

Yes I did... but we had moved on from the blog and were discussing facts backed by numbers.

Wrong.

Given your facts are nothing more than flakey models, definitions and calculations, I'll happily take the anti-fact crown.

Wrong

No, it's a fact. If there's a finite amount of money and rich people have most of it, then they are causing there to be poor people. I'm no fan of the UN, but there is poverty and in many parts of the world extreme poverty and it needs a voice, not feel good philanthropist charity from those with entitlement complexes.

Wrong

Why not? You said as long as the numbers backed up a position that that position is fact. Make your mind up.

Wrong

Why does anyone need to look at any numbers? There has been extreme poverty since forever. Band Aid, for me, was the first real glimpse into extreme poverty to me. That was 30 years ago. Why has that not changed? Go on, throw me the "but it's getting better" line. If we haven't sorted it after 30 years, it ain't gonna get sorted because there's no will to sort it. Unfortunately that's not for the want of individuals trying, but that in itself shows how preoccupied govts are with not addressing the problem is there's no money in it. It could be sorted within 5 years if we decided to do so. As I said, I'll take opinion, or direct observation in this case, as evidence over massaged numbers thanks.

So for you poverty only happened 30 years ago. Whereas in fact extreme poverty has been normal for almost every single human ever born. And as I've said before the single common feature for those that managed something different is a stable productive economy.

So you're completely unsupported opinion that we need to arsehole that economic model is demonstrated as... wrong.

I'd be surprised if you did... you're not the type.



Most? Is that a fact? pffft.

Must be getting exhausting grasping at straws. Just give up and drown, dude, the world would be a better place without your interminable whining.