by Plantagenet » Wed 07 Sep 2016, 23:00:03
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('copious.abundance', 'I')ncidentally, the
work force participation rate for males has been going down steadily since the end of WWII, so you can't blame Obama or any other politician for that matter.

You don't know how to read a graph, do you? Lets examine your claim that Obama bears no blame for the collapse in the work force during his presidency. First of all, find the year 2009 on the graph---this is the year Obama took office. Now examine the graph for a few years before 2009. See how the graph is almost flat? That means the work force participation rate was about steady. Now see what happens after 2009? The line turns steeply downward. The means the work force numbers suddenly dropped dramatically during the Obama administration, i.e. the work force participation rate plunged on Obama's watch.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('copious.abundance', ' ')now that I've given an intelligent, detailed answer, complete with links to sources and graphs, I wonder if I'm going to get an intelligent reply.
Considering that you can't read a graph, I hope you'll be appreciative of the help I've given you in understanding the collapse in labor force participation during the Obama administration. You went wrong when you said the work force participation rate has been "steadily" decreasing. Actually, there have been periods of stability, and periods when it declined. Far from there being no link between Obama and the decline, the Obama years correspond to the most precipitous decline in Labour Force participation in the last 65 years.
CHEERS!
Never underestimate the ability of Joe Biden to f#@% things up---Barack Obama
-----------------------------------------------------------
Keep running between the raindrops.
by ennui2 » Wed 07 Sep 2016, 23:06:14
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')I wonder if I'm going to get an intelligent reply.
Nope, you got the usual equivalent of "Damn you Obummer!" from Planty.
This is, of course, OT.
It's about "Reports of US Economic Demise Are Greatly Exaggerated"
And guess who gets the
credit for keeping the US economy from meeting its demise?
Our two-term Nobel-winning president!
OBUMMER!!!!!!

"If the oil price crosses above the Etp maximum oil price curve within the next month, I will leave the forum." --SumYunGai (9/21/2016)
-

ennui2
- Permanently Banned
-
- Posts: 3920
- Joined: Tue 20 Sep 2011, 10:37:02
- Location: Not on Homeworld
-
by Plantagenet » Wed 07 Sep 2016, 23:48:22
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ennui2', ' ')"Damn you Obummer!"
Why do you put quotation marks around things that you yourself say?
Cheers!
Never underestimate the ability of Joe Biden to f#@% things up---Barack Obama
-----------------------------------------------------------
Keep running between the raindrops.
-

Plantagenet
- Expert

-
- Posts: 26765
- Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
- Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).
-
by Plantagenet » Wed 07 Sep 2016, 23:59:17
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ennui2', 'A')pparently Planty knows it's a glut
Of course I know its a glut, eenie. I was the first person at this site to argue we were in oil glut way back in late 2014, when I observed the huge number of oil tankers parked and storing oil in the harbor at Gibraltar just as oil prices started to plunge.
By the way, I appreciate the fact that you've belatedly come to recognize the world is in an oil glut. There are still some unreconstructed folks at this site who can't accept that fact but I'm happy to see you are not among them.
Cheers!
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ennui2', ' ')sarcasm...
Quoting yourself isn't sarcasm. Its just dumb. You don't have to quote yourself whenever you post---just say whatever it is you want to say.
Cheers!
Never underestimate the ability of Joe Biden to f#@% things up---Barack Obama
-----------------------------------------------------------
Keep running between the raindrops.
by copious.abundance » Thu 08 Sep 2016, 21:00:36
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('copious.abundance', 'S')o now that I've given an intelligent, detailed answer, complete with links to sources and graphs, I wonder if I'm going to get an intelligent reply.

As I expected, only Planty could look at a trend that began more than 60 years ago, and somehow place the blame on the whole thing to someone who's been president for less than 8 years.

Stuff for doomers to contemplate:
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1190117.html#p1190117
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1193930.html#p1193930
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1206767.html#p1206767
-

copious.abundance
- Fission

-
- Posts: 9589
- Joined: Wed 26 Mar 2008, 03:00:00
- Location: Cornucopia
-
by copious.abundance » Thu 08 Sep 2016, 21:09:05
Furthermore, notice he even had to change the topic of his question. This was the original request:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', 'P')lease explain---why are so many men in their prime working years not working?
Notice there is no mention of Obama. Even the NPR article discussed on Zerobrains went back to 1990. Next, notice the new qualification in his supposed reiteration of his original question:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', 'L')ets examine your claim that Obama bears no blame for the collapse in the work force during his presidency.
This is the hallmark of a patently dishonest debater. When one answers his question, and he has no real rebuttal, he pretends he originally asked something else.
Finally, it's real funny he accused me of not being able to read a chart, because ...
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')ctually, there have been periods of stability, and periods when it declined.
... if he actually had looked at the chart, he would have noticed yet another one of those periods of stability in the last year or so.

^
And if that weren't enough, notice there is another steep decline in the LFPR for males from about 1967-1976. Funny he's not accusing LBJ and Richard Nixon of anything. Then there's yet another steep decline from about 1992-96. Is he going to blame both George Bush and Bill Clinton for that?

by copious.abundance » Sun 11 Sep 2016, 23:01:53
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('copious.abundance', '[')url=http://www.marketwatch.com/story/ge-to-build-100-mln-jet-engine-plant-in-indiana-2014-03-26?link=MW_home_latest_news]
GE to build $100 mln jet engine plant in Indiana[/url]
BMW plans $1 billion expansion in South CarolinaGM to add 1,400 Michigan jobs with new Chevrolet Volt on the wayBoeing plans fast start to 777X buildings in EverettNew carpet plant in Carbondale, Ga., could be world's biggestGiti, a Singapore tire company, to bring 1,700 jobs to Chester County, S.C., invest $560 millionSolarCity plans world's largest solar panel plant in upstate N.Y.Chinese company to invest $2 billion, create 2,000 jobs in Chesterfield, VAVolkswagen to spend $900 million at Tennessee plant to build new SUV, add 2,000 jobs3,850 jobs may eventually come to South Jersey waterfrontEast Tennessee auto supplier creates 1,000 jobsTesla's Reno 'Gigafactory' would create jobs bonanzaWentzville GM plant adding third shift, 750 jobsFord to add 850 jobs at Dearborn factories for new F-150 truckFord will add 1,200 jobs at Claycomo plant for its new Transit vanVertex Rail to bring 1,300 jobs to Wilmington, invest $50 million in production facility21st Century Economy: Google could hire 30,000 in Bay Area based on tech titan's development spreeFuyao set to double hiring at Moraine plant to 1,500 jobs21st Century Economy: Cerner Corp Breaks Ground on $4.45B Campus With 16,000 Jobs in Kansas City, MissouriFord will add 900 workers at Claycomo plant to build the F-150 truckDaimler to build South Carolina plant, creating 1,300 jobsNissan to add 1,000 jobs in SmyrnaGM mulls expansion of SUV plant in TexasGM to add 2,500 jobs, invest $1B at Warren Tech CenterVolvo factory to bring 4,000 jobs to South CarolinaContinental Tire confirms it will create 2,500 jobs in Hinds County, MississippiFCA investing $1B, adding 1,000 jobs at Jeep plantsAnd yet another one of these. Even the Chinese are starting to build plants in the US.
Sentury Tire confirms plans for $530 million, 1,000-job plant in Georgia$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')b]
Georgia has landed Sentury Tire’s first U.S. manufacturing plant — a $530 million project that will create more than 1,000 jobs, Gov. Nathan Deal confirmed Thursday. It would be first major Chinese investment in Georgia.
The facility in LaGrange will support Quingdao, China-based Sentury Tire’s existing customer base in North America. Atlanta Business Chronicle first reported the deal in July.
Sentury had also considered a 4,000-acre industrial site about 25 miles east of Memphis, Tenn. Late last week, officials in West Tennessee were told Georgia would be the bid winner.
The first phase of the Sentury Tire expansion would involve a more than $500 million investment and the creation of more than 600 jobs, sources told the Chronicle in July. When fully built-out, the investment could rise to $1 billion and the workforce would swell to “several thousand.”
[...]
Stuff for doomers to contemplate:
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1190117.html#p1190117
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1193930.html#p1193930
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1206767.html#p1206767
by Plantagenet » Tue 13 Sep 2016, 12:54:51
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('copious.abundance', ' ')he accused me of not being able to read a chart, because ...
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')ctually, there have been periods of stability, and periods when it declined.
... if he actually had looked at the chart, he would have noticed yet another one of those periods of stability in the last year or so.

Again you are showing you don't how to read a graph. You can't read too much into a single data point, i.e. a single year does not constitute a "period of stability." The graph shows several obvious plateaus---you can tell how long they last by referring to the timeline shown along the abscissa of the graph. Got it? Now measure the duration of the obvious periods of stability----note that they all last at least 5 years---some of them more. Yes we may be in a new period stability now, following the very rapid decline at the start of Obama's watch, but its also possible that this is just a brief pause in a prolonged period of decline.
The main take-away here is that your claim that worker participation has been continuously declining is clearly wrong. The graph shows there have been periods of stability separated by periods of decline in worker participation. Do you understand that now?
^
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('copious.abundance', ' ')he's not accusing LBJ ... Richard Nixon ... George Bush ... Bill Clinton
I'm not making any accusations about anyone---I'm simply discussing the facts. A fact is not an accusation---a fact is just a fact.
It is obvious that periods of decline in worker participation rates have occurred when some previous presidents were in office, just as a steep decline in worker participation has just occurred under Obama. Thats what the graph shows, dude. Its a fact.
Do I have to explain every single thing about your own graph to you. Sheesh.
Cheers!

No need to get all upset and huffy. Just ask nicely and I'll explain your graph to you.