Economists Predict Consequences of Bush Tax Cuts - Republicans Learn Nothing

Obama agreed to extended the tax cuts for two years with a Republican gun to his head. Now do you also blame the robbery victim for spending everything in his wallet?

 

Waiting....

 

Let me see. I do not believe the word "finite" says that "the world population was infinite". BTW, unaltered post since Yesterday at 4:03 PM. Go check it out if you think you can.

I see you still have not figured out how many numbers there are between 99 and 100.

 

Well, we've all had a good laugh at your nonsense and your ever evolving points. Now we're just bored with your twists and dodges.

If I were as maniacal as you, I'd copy your nonsense posts and save them to throw back in your face in an unrelated topic. Thank God I'm not you. I also have a life.

 

Oh, so the the guy in the WH...the guy with control of 2/3 of Washington...the guy who got Obamacare passed without a single Rep vote...was forced, at gunpoint no less, to go along with a tax plan that he so deeply believed was the reason for our economic woes? Really?

 

Unless you're completely stupid, and I am certainly not going to rule that out, you should be able to remember the deal that was struck in Dec 2010 with regard to the Republicans holding unemployment benefits hostage in order to get the extension of the tax cuts. This isn't ancient history but then again we have to contend with your stupidity.

 

Whatever gets you through the night, I guess

 

So you are saying that I said "that the world population was infinite"? Show me!

If I had to apply my armchair psychological analysis of someone like you, I'd say that you're probably a control freak. You seem to never be able to admit making a simple mistake because it would indicate a loss of personal control. You must be a blast to have to live with. Ouch!

 

You've got fans Joe!



Or stalkers.

 

So you can't refute it as I've described it so you dodge. Typical.

 

Hell, the way he follows me around, I have my very own puppy dog. Ugly as hell but hangs on my every word.

 

Just to clarify...(I'm glad to see some of what I say has rubbed off on you)...Obama agreeing to extend the Jr. tax cuts means those tax-cuts are now his.

Ignoring the parts congress, economic experts and the American people had in the decision, that type of thinking, which is a plague the Republican party would love to spread, is like nailing a hammer into a chunk of wood.

There's always a kernel of truth in what you say, but you're making popcorn instead of the desired crop of corn. It's all fluff and no substance. You should get into the used-car business.

 

100th percentile is representative of positive infinity, therefore, you said the world population was infinite, as you claimed to have performed in the 100th percentile, which is impossible unless given an infinitely large sample, ie: not possible in real world circumstances. You're attempting to argue with basic mathematical principles, and typical of your party, you're totally WRONG.

Idiot. View attachment 1073

 

From that high-school mathematics link I sent you earlier:

About Percentile Ranks:
• percentile rank is a number between 0 and 100 indicating the percent of cases falling at or below that score.
• percentile ranks are usually written to the nearest whole percent: 74.5% = 75% = 75th percentile
• scores are divided into 100 equally sized groups
• scores are arranged in rank order from lowest to highest
• there is no 0 percentile rank - the lowest score is at the first percentile
• there is no 100th percentile - the highest score is at the 99th percentile.
• you cannot perform the same mathematical operations on percentiles that you can on raw scores. You cannot, for example, compute the mean of percentile scores, as the results may be misleading.

 

Even the other Repugnants here won't support him in this argument because he is totally wrong and they are totally inept.
View attachment 1075

 

OK! So you won't believe me, go argue with the Iowa testing (if they still exist) and the SAT because that is what they published.
BTW, by your rules (second line) above, I got 100th percentile in both. and rule #2 contradicts rule #3.

 

He just can't admit it. That is even sadder than making a simple mistake. To be such an arrogant A-hole that your entire self-worth depends on never admitting your mistakes. He's a sad dude for sure.

 

It is pointless to point out the mistake of an intractable, insecure, fool like you. You have been exposed as the idiot you are but refuse to admit your own error even when all the evidence here or anywhere you search on the internet says the same thing. You're a fool's fool.

 

No, you just don't understand mathematics. It says they are usually rounded up, not always, to the nearest percent. Obviously, since rule number 5 and 6 say there is no 100 or 0, it does not apply there, hence the USUALLY. The third line is referring to intervals, which are necessary to calculate percentiles in the first place, so you're just plain an idiot for not understanding that does not mean there is a 100th percentile. It OBVIOUSLY is referring to quartile division. Also, rule 2 does not contradict rule 3, take a pre-algebra course please.
View attachment 1076

 

A fool's fool?