If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Ignorant: Juliana Holm and Frank Matthews
Back in February we had a thread titled "Five million Germans out
of work" where I posted that approximately 150,000 jobs needed to be created each month in the USA to keep up with population growth. Both Juliana Holm and Frank Matthews forced their ignorance upon us and claimed that this number needed to be radically reduced due to deaths and retirements. I waited until I saw another news article that proved my original premise. Here is a BBC article from today on the subject of the job creation figures from March (for the USA). Note that the article states "Many economists estimate that about 200,000 jobs need to be created each month simply to keep employment stable, given population growth." So if anything, my original figure was too low. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4401171.stm And here is a Money/CNN background article: http://money.cnn.com/2005/02/14/news...ex.htm?cnn=yes And back to the subject of the original post, here is a BBC article on the extremely weak German economy and unemployment: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4397701.stm |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
If you will look back at the posts dumb **** I simply asked if you were
claiming that 150,000 were entering the work force each month or that 150,000 new jobs were needed. Here is your silly statement. "Here's your homework assignment: take the number of people entering the workforce during dubya's first reign (150,000 x 48 months) and subtract from it the number of jobs created " You will note that you simply claimed that 150,000 were entering the work force. That in no way would drive a requirement that 150,000 jobs needed to be created. If you would simply learn to state your argument clearly you might not have such problems. spamfree wrote: Back in February we had a thread titled "Five million Germans out of work" where I posted that approximately 150,000 jobs needed to be created each month in the USA to keep up with population growth. Both Juliana Holm and Frank Matthews forced their ignorance upon us and claimed that this number needed to be radically reduced due to deaths and retirements. I waited until I saw another news article that proved my original premise. Here is a BBC article from today on the subject of the job creation figures from March (for the USA). Note that the article states "Many economists estimate that about 200,000 jobs need to be created each month simply to keep employment stable, given population growth." So if anything, my original figure was too low. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4401171.stm And here is a Money/CNN background article: http://money.cnn.com/2005/02/14/news...ex.htm?cnn=yes And back to the subject of the original post, here is a BBC article on the extremely weak German economy and unemployment: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4397701.stm |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 15:52:22 GMT, "spamfree"
wrote: Back in February we had a thread titled "Five million Germans out of work" where I posted that approximately 150,000 jobs needed to be created each month in the USA to keep up with population growth. Both Juliana Holm and Frank Matthews forced their ignorance upon us and claimed that this number needed to be radically reduced due to deaths and retirements. I waited until I saw another news article that proved my original premise. Here is a BBC article from today on the subject of the job creation figures from March (for the USA). Note that the article states "Many economists estimate that about 200,000 jobs need to be created each month simply to keep employment stable, given population growth." So if anything, my original figure was too low. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4401171.stm And here is a Money/CNN background article: http://money.cnn.com/2005/02/14/news...ex.htm?cnn=yes And back to the subject of the original post, here is a BBC article on the extremely weak German economy and unemployment: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4397701.stm Most people would forget a petty usenet argument after a few days, but it appears to have really ****ed you off. Well done JH and Frank! You have gotten a superb reaction! -- --- DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com --- -- |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 15:52:22 GMT, "spamfree"
wrote: Back in February we had a thread titled "Five million Germans out of work" where I posted that approximately 150,000 jobs needed to be created each month in the USA to keep up with population growth. Both Juliana Holm and Frank Matthews forced their ignorance upon us and claimed that this number needed to be radically reduced due to deaths and retirements. I waited until I saw another news article that proved my original premise. Here is a BBC article from today on the subject of the job creation figures from March (for the USA). Note that the article states "Many economists estimate that about 200,000 jobs need to be created each month simply to keep employment stable, given population growth." So if anything, my original figure was too low. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4401171.stm And here is a Money/CNN background article: http://money.cnn.com/2005/02/14/news...ex.htm?cnn=yes And back to the subject of the original post, here is a BBC article on the extremely weak German economy and unemployment: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4397701.stm Most people would forget a petty usenet argument after a few days, but it appears to have really ****ed you off. Well done JH and Frank! You have gotten a superb reaction! -- --- DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com --- -- |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"spamfree" wrote in message
k.net... Back in February we had a thread titled "Five million Germans out of work" where I posted that [...] Both Juliana Holm and Frank Matthews [...] claimed that [...] I waited until I saw another news article that proved my original premise. Here is a BBC article snip You take USENET _way_ too seriously. Richard |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Deep Foiled Malls wrote: On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 15:52:22 GMT, "spamfree" wrote: Back in February we had a thread titled "Five million Germans out of work" where I posted that approximately 150,000 jobs needed to be created each month in the USA to keep up with population growth. Both Juliana Holm and Frank Matthews forced their ignorance upon us and claimed that this number needed to be radically reduced due to deaths and retirements. I waited until I saw another news article that proved my original premise. Here is a BBC article from today on the subject of the job creation figures from March (for the USA). Note that the article states "Many economists estimate that about 200,000 jobs need to be created each month simply to keep employment stable, given population growth." So if anything, my original figure was too low. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4401171.stm And here is a Money/CNN background article: http://money.cnn.com/2005/02/14/news...ex.htm?cnn=yes And back to the subject of the original post, here is a BBC article on the extremely weak German economy and unemployment: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4397701.stm Most people would forget a petty usenet argument after a few days, but it appears to have really ****ed you off. Well done JH and Frank! You have gotten a superb reaction! The strange thing is that we weren't really disagreeing with him just with the justification that he was using for his argument. I suppose he really cannot abide disagreement of any kind. Ah well since he hides his identity he cannot be much of a problem. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Deep Foiled Malls wrote: On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 15:52:22 GMT, "spamfree" wrote: Back in February we had a thread titled "Five million Germans out of work" where I posted that approximately 150,000 jobs needed to be created each month in the USA to keep up with population growth. Both Juliana Holm and Frank Matthews forced their ignorance upon us and claimed that this number needed to be radically reduced due to deaths and retirements. I waited until I saw another news article that proved my original premise. Here is a BBC article from today on the subject of the job creation figures from March (for the USA). Note that the article states "Many economists estimate that about 200,000 jobs need to be created each month simply to keep employment stable, given population growth." So if anything, my original figure was too low. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4401171.stm And here is a Money/CNN background article: http://money.cnn.com/2005/02/14/news...ex.htm?cnn=yes And back to the subject of the original post, here is a BBC article on the extremely weak German economy and unemployment: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4397701.stm Most people would forget a petty usenet argument after a few days, but it appears to have really ****ed you off. Well done JH and Frank! You have gotten a superb reaction! The strange thing is that we weren't really disagreeing with him just with the justification that he was using for his argument. I suppose he really cannot abide disagreement of any kind. Ah well since he hides his identity he cannot be much of a problem. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Deep Foiled Malls wrote: Most people would forget a petty usenet argument after a few days, but it appears to have really ****ed you off. Well done JH and Frank! You have gotten a superb reaction! Sounds like the OP of this thread would be a fit mate for the silly woman on one of my music groups who keeps threatening to sue her fellow-posters for libel, when the flame wars heat up and the name calling begins! Sometimes folks CAN get rather nasty, but hey, what does it matter how someone you've never met (and aren't likely to) "speaks" to you on a Usenet newsgoup? (If one's "integrity" is THAT insecure, one has a far more serious problem, totally unconnected with the internet!) |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Deep Foiled Malls wrote: Most people would forget a petty usenet argument after a few days, but it appears to have really ****ed you off. Well done JH and Frank! You have gotten a superb reaction! Sounds like the OP of this thread would be a fit mate for the silly woman on one of my music groups who keeps threatening to sue her fellow-posters for libel, when the flame wars heat up and the name calling begins! Sometimes folks CAN get rather nasty, but hey, what does it matter how someone you've never met (and aren't likely to) "speaks" to you on a Usenet newsgoup? (If one's "integrity" is THAT insecure, one has a far more serious problem, totally unconnected with the internet!) |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Frank F. Matthews wrote: If you will look back at the posts dumb **** I simply asked if you were claiming that 150,000 were entering the work force each month or that 150,000 new jobs were needed. Here is your silly statement. Lol...don't you feel "special" to be singled out so, Frank? :-) -- Best Greg |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|