America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 4 years ago by frankj1. 59 replies replies.
2 Pages12>
Emperor T.R.U.M.P. & his "GREAT AND UNMATCHED WISDOM"
Jump to Bottom | Previous Topic | Next Topic
Mr. Jones Offline
#1 Posted: Tue, Oct 8 2019, 7:07 AM EST
Joined: 06-12-2005
Posts: 19,421
Frying pan

El Duche' Donald is really side stepping all protocol in this TURKEY/ KURDISH MESS and USDA OFFICE DEBACLE..

THE KURDS have 10-15 thousand ISIS PRISONERS behind bars...which will all be released when turkey kicks their azzes...

And Trump moved the USDA & several UNDERLING federal agencies from WASHINGTON, D.C. TO KANSAS CITY
IN a 3 month span from announcing to moving...
SCIENTISTS ARE LEAVING IN DROVES, studies and reasearch are gutted, people are retiring instead of moving to Kansas City.
ZRX1200 Offline
#2 Posted: Tue, Oct 8 2019, 8:49 AM EST
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,589
You think the Kurds are just gonna leave them to be released?

The Kurds are HARD mofos and it’s shameful that we’re abandoning them.
dstieger Offline
#3 Posted: Tue, Oct 8 2019, 9:10 AM EST
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
Moving fed agencies out of DC is a Yang plank....hmmm

99% of BLM managed land is west of Mississippi....why should their HQ be in DC?

Haven't heard a convincing reason that USDA is better in DC than it would be in KC....except some whiny sounding things, like...Trump didn't ask us nicely....

What research are you talking about? Let 'em walk....hard to believe that any of them are indispensable....you're going to lose a few good ones....just hire a few good replacements

Even when agency HQ buildings are here....many of their almost employees never are.....remote and telework....doesn't matter if your employee is working from home 7 minutes away or 7 hours.
Krazeehorse Offline
#4 Posted: Tue, Oct 8 2019, 9:30 AM EST
Joined: 04-09-2010
Posts: 1,958
dstieger wrote:
Moving fed agencies out of DC is a Yang plank....hmmm

99% of BLM managed land is west of Mississippi....why should their HQ be in DC?

Haven't heard a convincing reason that USDA is better in DC than it would be in KC....except some whiny sounding things, like...Trump didn't ask us nicely....

What research are you talking about? Let 'em walk....hard to believe that any of them are indispensable....you're going to lose a few good ones....just hire a few good replacements

Even when agency HQ buildings are here....many of their almost employees never are.....remote and telework....doesn't matter if your employee is working from home 7 minutes away or 7 hours.



With internet capabilities I don't see much use for metropolitan areas any more. I understand there's manufacturing and shipping logistics to consider but you can tap on a keyboard anywhere.
victor809 Offline
#5 Posted: Tue, Oct 8 2019, 12:07 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
dstieger wrote:
Moving fed agencies out of DC is a Yang plank....hmmm

99% of BLM managed land is west of Mississippi....why should their HQ be in DC?

Haven't heard a convincing reason that USDA is better in DC than it would be in KC....except some whiny sounding things, like...Trump didn't ask us nicely....

What research are you talking about? Let 'em walk....hard to believe that any of them are indispensable....you're going to lose a few good ones....just hire a few good replacements

Even when agency HQ buildings are here....many of their almost employees never are.....remote and telework....doesn't matter if your employee is working from home 7 minutes away or 7 hours.



The argument that it doesn't belong in DC isn't a bad one.
But the sudden movement from DC to literally the middle of nowhere (like 2 hours from me) is not to put these agencies closer to the land they manage. It's partially to force a headcount reduction, because if you choose to live in DC, you're not likely to choose to move to Kansas City. I have a number of friends at the USDA who will be out of a job when it moves, as they will not follow the job to KC (some because it's KC, others because when you have 2 spouses working you can't just force the other to move because your job moved).

As for "hiring good replacements".... eh... you can find quality people anywhere... but in a city like DC you will always have more well educated people to choose from than somewhere like KC. The agency will suffer.... and that as well appears intentional.
dstieger Offline
#6 Posted: Tue, Oct 8 2019, 12:22 PM EST
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
victor809 wrote:
It's partially to force a headcount reduction


And that's a bad thing?

Unions would be extraordinarily effective at blocking any other methods.

This seems to me to be one of those things that will get a knee jerk pissnmoan from anyone opposed to Trump. Doesn't matter whether they'd otherwise agree with sound reasoning backing
victor809 Offline
#7 Posted: Tue, Oct 8 2019, 12:31 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
dstieger wrote:
And that's a bad thing?

Unions would be extraordinarily effective at blocking any other methods.

This seems to me to be one of those things that will get a knee jerk pissnmoan from anyone opposed to Trump. Doesn't matter whether they'd otherwise agree with sound reasoning backing



Yes and no.

I generally don't have a problem with headcount reduction anyhwhere. It's quite telling that it's specific agencies that are targeted for this however... it just stacks on the other choices his administration has made which are generally seen as "anti-environment".

I'll admit, if another president who had a different track record with the environment made this choice, I'd say "meh". But he's made it pretty clear that he intends to gut environmental agencies.
Buckwheat Offline
#8 Posted: Tue, Oct 8 2019, 12:39 PM EST
Joined: 04-15-2004
Posts: 12,251
Krazeehorse wrote:
With internet capabilities I don't see much use for metropolitan areas any more. I understand there's manufacturing and shipping logistics to consider but you can tap on a keyboard anywhere.


Try getting an inexpensive, stable, secure and decent connection to the internet in BFE US. It definitely effects the bottom line of doing business. We have an office in Portland, Oregon and they get better "tech services" at half the price as our Kentucky office. fog
dstieger Offline
#9 Posted: Tue, Oct 8 2019, 12:44 PM EST
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
Buckwheat wrote:
Try getting an inexpensive, stable, secure and decent connection to the internet in BFE US. It definitely effects the bottom line of doing business. We have an office in Portland, Oregon and they get better "tech services" at half the price as our Kentucky office. fog


I imagine that those KY costs are more than offset by a whole wide range of other costs ---

But I agree -- first prerequisite to any distance work fast reliable connectivity --
USNGunner Offline
#10 Posted: Tue, Oct 8 2019, 12:52 PM EST
Joined: 05-17-2019
Posts: 4,402
victor809 wrote:
As for "hiring good replacements".... eh... you can find quality people anywhere... but in a city like DC you will always have more well educated people to choose from than somewhere like KC. The agency will suffer.... and that as well appears intentional.


You must be from KC making blanket statements like that. The ole anyone from the Midwest is an ignorant hillbilly assumption? d'oh!

What a tool.
victor809 Offline
#11 Posted: Tue, Oct 8 2019, 12:57 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
USNGunner wrote:
You must be from KC making blanket statements like that. The ole anyone from the Midwest is an ignorant hillbilly assumption? d'oh!

What a tool.


?
Dude.... You must be from the midwest you ignorant hillbilly.

My original statement had little to do with "midwest being ignorant". In fact I acknowledged that in KC they would be able to find quality people. But there will be more who meet their requirements in DC. The % of people with advanced degrees in cities like DC is much higher than cities like KC. Additionally, more people with advanced degrees will be willing to relocate to DC than to KC. More people who meet the requirements means more candidates to choose from.

Don't get your panties all twisted.
victor809 Offline
#12 Posted: Tue, Oct 8 2019, 1:01 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
In KC 4% of the population has achieved a Masters Degree.... 1% of the population has a Doctorate.
In DC 33% of the population has a Masters Degree.... 7% has a Doctorate.

If you're an agency which needs to employ scientists... which location do you think is more likely to have the candidates you want?
fishinguitarman Offline
#13 Posted: Tue, Oct 8 2019, 1:40 PM EST
Joined: 07-29-2006
Posts: 69,148
Do they meet your criteria and kill their kids?
Krazeehorse Offline
#14 Posted: Tue, Oct 8 2019, 1:41 PM EST
Joined: 04-09-2010
Posts: 1,958
Yeah, nobody in their right mind would relocate to Kansas City. Bwaaaaahahahahahaha.
victor809 Offline
#15 Posted: Tue, Oct 8 2019, 1:45 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Krazeehorse wrote:
Yeah, nobody in their right mind would relocate to Kansas City. Bwaaaaahahahahahaha.


Fewer will than DC. That's all that matters.
tailgater Offline
#16 Posted: Tue, Oct 8 2019, 1:47 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
victor809 wrote:
In KC 4% of the population has achieved a Masters Degree.... 1% of the population has a Doctorate.
In DC 33% of the population has a Masters Degree.... 7% has a Doctorate.

If you're an agency which needs to employ scientists... which location do you think is more likely to have the candidates you want?


Dude.

33% of the population??

I think you're wrong.

It's likely only 33% of people who have a bachelor's or better.

Not a subtle difference.
victor809 Offline
#17 Posted: Tue, Oct 8 2019, 1:52 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
tailgater wrote:
Dude.

33% of the population??

I think you're wrong.

It's likely only 33% of people who have a bachelor's or better.

Not a subtle difference.



I looked it up. If I'm wrong then the source material is wrong (I'll admit, I grabbed the first one) but it's the same source site that gave me the KC data.

Remember, DC is a very small area which encompasses a lot of government. It's bordered by the NIH....

https://www.towncharts.com/District-of-Columbia/Education/Washington-city-DC-Education-data.html

Bachelors is 40% (I'm assuming they mean 40% only achieved a bachelors, and it isn't cumulative)
dstieger Offline
#18 Posted: Tue, Oct 8 2019, 2:13 PM EST
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
https://www.citylab.com/life/2019/08/education-talent-city-ranking-college-degree-us/596509/

Nothing to do with Trump, but this page does a pretty good job of distilling Census educational data geographically. (It has bar charts! :)
victor809 Offline
#19 Posted: Tue, Oct 8 2019, 2:19 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
dstieger wrote:
https://www.citylab.com/life/2019/08/education-talent-city-ranking-college-degree-us/596509/

Nothing to do with Trump, but this page does a pretty good job of distilling Census educational data geographically. (It has bar charts! :)


It fails to distill down to doctorate, but at least identifies graduate degrees. Regardless, DC is at the top of the list... KC isn't on it (on the up side, it isn't on the "lowest" list either)...

Like I said. They'll be able to find replacements....but they'll be hiring from a much smaller pool of qualified candidates, which means they have to make concessions (ie, hiring less compatible people)
tailgater Offline
#20 Posted: Tue, Oct 8 2019, 3:28 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
victor809 wrote:
I looked it up. If I'm wrong then the source material is wrong (I'll admit, I grabbed the first one) but it's the same source site that gave me the KC data.

Remember, DC is a very small area which encompasses a lot of government. It's bordered by the NIH....

https://www.towncharts.com/District-of-Columbia/Education/Washington-city-DC-Education-data.html

Bachelors is 40% (I'm assuming they mean 40% only achieved a bachelors, and it isn't cumulative)



It's easy to make these mistakes, but didn't it raise an alarm when you saw 33%?

How could 1 in 3 DC residents have a Masters?

1 in 3 on a college campus probably don't have a masters.

And DC is small, but outside the hallowed grounds of Capital Hill it is also very poor.

The only thing lacking in DC is common sense and the middle class.
victor809 Offline
#21 Posted: Tue, Oct 8 2019, 3:43 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
tailgater wrote:
It's easy to make these mistakes, but didn't it raise an alarm when you saw 33%?

How could 1 in 3 DC residents have a Masters?

1 in 3 on a college campus probably don't have a masters.

And DC is small, but outside the hallowed grounds of Capital Hill it is also very poor.

The only thing lacking in DC is common sense and the middle class.

Ummmm don't go jumping to any conclusions that it's a mistake. We haven't seen any evidence yet that it is. The data dsteig posted showed 33% graduate degree as well.

I don't think you realize just how many people around you are educated when you're in DC. Not to mention the tons of lawyers.
tailgater Offline
#22 Posted: Wed, Oct 9 2019, 9:58 AM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
victor809 wrote:
Ummmm don't go jumping to any conclusions that it's a mistake. We haven't seen any evidence yet that it is. The data dsteig posted showed 33% graduate degree as well.

I don't think you realize just how many people around you are educated when you're in DC. Not to mention the tons of lawyers.


Think about what you're saying.
Let's assume that 1/3 of the people are kids. That leaves 2/3 as adults. You're saying half of them have masters.
Which is a staggering percentage when you consider all the service people with no college education, all the stay at home moms, all the police/fire persons.

And I think it's probably more than 1/3 kids, I'm just doing simple math for the English Literature majors out there...


All this assumes the proper use of the term "population".
victor809 Offline
#23 Posted: Wed, Oct 9 2019, 10:12 AM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
tailgater wrote:
Think about what you're saying.
Let's assume that 1/3 of the people are kids. That leaves 2/3 as adults. You're saying half of them have masters.
Which is a staggering percentage when you consider all the service people with no college education, all the stay at home moms, all the police/fire persons.

And I think it's probably more than 1/3 kids, I'm just doing simple math for the English Literature majors out there...


All this assumes the proper use of the term "population".


The stat is of people aged 25+

Why would anyone create an "education" stat which includes children, some of whom haven't reached the age necessary to even get basic education? Your numbers would make comparisons useless, as a population with more children would completely screw up the comparison and make it valueless.

I love how you tried to make "simple math for the English Literature majors" but forgot the most basic statistics concepts.
teedubbya Offline
#24 Posted: Wed, Oct 9 2019, 10:19 AM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ACS_12_5YR_S1501&prodType=table


Age 25 and over (DC) (25 and over is the normal standard for this measure)

22.5% have bachelors degree
28.7% have graduate degree

Combined this makes DC probably the highest educated city in the nation. Some college no degree adds another 14% and associates degree another 2%.

Interestingly enough if you break it down by non-white and white there is an extreme gap which on the surface looks bad (I think only something like 10 or 12% of whites over 25 do not have a minimum of a bachelors degree). However if you isolate the non whites and compare them to their peers (like trump does with jobs data) the non-whites are also far more educated in DC which I think was the salient point.


So other than just arguing over easily obtainable statistics what is the point? Oh yea..... KC. Hint... its not on the charts for comparison. With a little work you can get the data but I'll help you out. The gap is YUGE. The move to KC was to get folks to quit. There was no option to keep their jobs and telework so that is irrelevant.

You can argue if causing them to quit is good or bad but it's hard to argue that wasn't the intent. Especially since there are efforts to do the same in reverse with KC employees.
teedubbya Offline
#25 Posted: Wed, Oct 9 2019, 10:28 AM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
I'm not going to edit it in the interest of transparency but I take back what I said about non-whites in DC. Looking a little closer at the data I'm not sure it can be said they are much better off than their peers in other cities. I'm not saying its wrong but I don't think I can say that so easily as I scratch at it a bit more.
fishinguitarman Offline
#26 Posted: Wed, Oct 9 2019, 11:35 AM EST
Joined: 07-29-2006
Posts: 69,148
So eloquently said mr victor809!👏
teedubbya Offline
#27 Posted: Wed, Oct 9 2019, 11:49 AM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
damn those fact things. dude you are obsessed.
tailgater Offline
#28 Posted: Wed, Oct 9 2019, 1:25 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
victor809 wrote:
The stat is of people aged 25+

Why would anyone create an "education" stat which includes children, some of whom haven't reached the age necessary to even get basic education? Your numbers would make comparisons useless, as a population with more children would completely screw up the comparison and make it valueless.

I love how you tried to make "simple math for the English Literature majors" but forgot the most basic statistics concepts.


Your original comment said "population".

Not sure why I should make my own qualifications outside the traditional definition of common words.

Next we'll hear that it's "adults who finished high school". Because it would be silly to include the ones who didn't.

In fact, my first response to this suggested the 33% was aimed at a smaller group than overall population and you said I was mistaken.

You're a strange fellow, mr. victor809.
tailgater Offline
#29 Posted: Wed, Oct 9 2019, 1:26 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Now there are two posts referring to victor as "mr victor809".
I gotta read all posts before responding. I hate being redundant.

And I hate being redundant.
victor809 Offline
#30 Posted: Wed, Oct 9 2019, 1:55 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
tailgater wrote:
Your original comment said "population".

Not sure why I should make my own qualifications outside the traditional definition of common words.

Next we'll hear that it's "adults who finished high school". Because it would be silly to include the ones who didn't.

In fact, my first response to this suggested the 33% was aimed at a smaller group than overall population and you said I was mistaken.

You're a strange fellow, mr. victor809.





You're quibbling over my use of "the population" when referring to a statistic which can only be represented by people in the age range of 22(ish) and up. While I was not being specific, the term "the population" in statistics, generally refers to the relevant population anyway. The USDA isn't going to hire 4 year olds, so they don't care about their educational levels.

More importantly, you're trying to pull at anything to distract from the point that you were wrong. DC is very educated, and KC is by comparison not.
teedubbya Offline
#31 Posted: Wed, Oct 9 2019, 2:07 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
25 and over is usually used. the categories are


Less than 9th grade
9th to 12th grade, no diploma
High school graduate (includes equivalency)
Some college, no degree
Associate's degree
Bachelor's degree
Graduate or professional degree


Still not sure what the argument is.
victor809 Offline
#32 Posted: Wed, Oct 9 2019, 2:09 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Someone was upset that I was calling the midwest less educated ....

....they left the argument once the statistics popped up.... and tail came in to try to argue against numbers. (and you said you thought he was smarter than that)
teedubbya Offline
#33 Posted: Wed, Oct 9 2019, 2:30 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
If it makes a difference, according to the Census (age 25 and older wish is the common standard)

Bachelors or higher degree(the denominator is population 25 and up):

DC 66.6%
Kansas 32.5%
Missouri 28.2%


Same metric 18-24 (the denominator is population in this age range)

DC 21.8%
Kansas 8.2%
Missouri 10.1%



It would take me awhile to break out KC from MO and KS but it can be done. The above are statewide. An argument could be made for actual numbers vs percentages but a cursory look at the county level says that is not the case either.

It's pretty safe to say the pool is much larger in DC. The employer competition may be worth looking at as well.
dstieger Offline
#34 Posted: Wed, Oct 9 2019, 2:35 PM EST
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
In the big scheme, I think that after just a few years in place, an MA in the swamp is probably no better than a BA in KC.....this place corrodes the soul and, IMO, it reflects in the quality of the output, if not the quantity
victor809 Offline
#35 Posted: Wed, Oct 9 2019, 2:39 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
teedubbya wrote:
If it makes a difference, according to the Census (age 25 and older wish is the common standard)

Bachelors or higher degree(the denominator is population 25 and up):

DC 66.6%
Kansas 32.5%
Missouri 28.2%


Same metric 18-24 (the denominator is population in this age range)

DC 21.8%
Kansas 8.2%
Missouri 10.1%



It would take me awhile to break out KC from MO and KS but it can be done. The above are statewide. An argument could be made for actual numbers vs percentages but a cursory look at the county level says that is not the case either.

It's pretty safe to say the pool is much larger in DC. The employer competition may be worth looking at as well.





True, more options for those educated people.

But then there's also the issue of the entire DC Metropolitan area... once you leave the city of DC you add in Bethesda/Gaithersburg where you have technology centers, arlington where you have a number of defense contractors (and the engineers that attracts)... plus you're within commuting distance of Baltimore (not the most educated city, but beats KC's next closest center of education.... Topeka...) .... and then on top of that, you add in the fact that people will willingly and easily relocate up and down the midatlantic coast... so you can effectively source educated people from Philadelphia/Baltimore/NJ etc.... those same people are much less likely to move to the midwest.
victor809 Offline
#36 Posted: Wed, Oct 9 2019, 2:42 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
dstieger wrote:
In the big scheme, I think that after just a few years in place, an MA in the swamp is probably no better than a BA in KC.....this place corrodes the soul and, IMO, it reflects in the quality of the output, if not the quantity


That's not how it works.... that's not how any of this works....
teedubbya Offline
#37 Posted: Wed, Oct 9 2019, 2:44 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
dstieger wrote:
In the big scheme, I think that after just a few years in place, an MA in the swamp is probably no better than a BA in KC.....this place corrodes the soul and, IMO, it reflects in the quality of the output, if not the quantity



If we were talking politicians I would agree. These are worker bees just doing their jobs. In these particular positions credentials matter. I know they are easy targets but they are not the problem.
izonfire Offline
#38 Posted: Wed, Oct 9 2019, 2:45 PM EST
Joined: 12-09-2013
Posts: 8,647
victor809 wrote:
That's not how it works.... that's not how any of this works....


Depends if you're searching to feed your ego, or searching for happiness...
fishinguitarman Offline
#39 Posted: Wed, Oct 9 2019, 3:22 PM EST
Joined: 07-29-2006
Posts: 69,148
You wear Depends?
izonfire Offline
#40 Posted: Wed, Oct 9 2019, 4:17 PM EST
Joined: 12-09-2013
Posts: 8,647
fishinguitarman wrote:
You wear Depends?


Saving stool samples for someone special...
frankj1 Offline
#41 Posted: Wed, Oct 9 2019, 9:41 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,221
no means no
teedubbya Offline
#42 Posted: Wed, Oct 9 2019, 9:49 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Unless it means yes.
tailgater Offline
#43 Posted: Thu, Oct 10 2019, 5:00 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
victor809 wrote:
You're quibbling over my use of "the population" when referring to a statistic which can only be represented by people in the age range of 22(ish) and up. While I was not being specific, the term "the population" in statistics, generally refers to the relevant population anyway. The USDA isn't going to hire 4 year olds, so they don't care about their educational levels.

More importantly, you're trying to pull at anything to distract from the point that you were wrong. DC is very educated, and KC is by comparison not.


100% of the population thinks victor809 is an azz.
tailgater Offline
#44 Posted: Thu, Oct 10 2019, 5:10 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
So using your logic, it MUST be 30% of people who have a bachelors or better.

Because, again using your logic, you can't count adults who don't have a bachelors since they're not relevant.

And besides, the numbers support my initial claim.

https://www.towncharts.com/District-of-Columbia/Education/Washington-city-DC-Education-data.html

May I refer you to figure 6.
tailgater Offline
#45 Posted: Thu, Oct 10 2019, 5:14 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
victor809 wrote:
Someone was upset that I was calling the midwest less educated ....

....they left the argument once the statistics popped up.... and tail came in to try to argue against numbers. (and you said you thought he was smarter than that)


You spelled "prove victor wrong" incorrectly.
victor809 Offline
#46 Posted: Thu, Oct 10 2019, 5:30 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
tailgater wrote:
So using your logic, it MUST be 30% of people who have a bachelors or better.

Because, again using your logic, you can't count adults who don't have a bachelors since they're not relevant.

And besides, the numbers support my initial claim.

https://www.towncharts.com/District-of-Columbia/Education/Washington-city-DC-Education-data.html

May I refer you to figure 6.


Ok... good catch. now what's your point?

If you look back at my original statement, I compared KC and DC. My misreading of that chart doesn't change the comparisons in any meaningful way....

Here are the NON - CUMULATIVE numbers
KC - Bachelors - 11%
Masters - 4%
Professional - 0.8%
Doctoral - 0.6%

DC - Bachelors - 55%
Masters - 20% (not 33% like I previously stated)
Professional - 8%
Doctorate - 4% (not 7% like I previously stated)

Honestly it doesn't change my statement in any way shape or form. They're moving an agency with a large number of jobs requiring an advanced degree from DC, where 32% of the population (over 25) has an advanced degree, to KC where 5% of the population has an advanced degree.

victor809 Offline
#47 Posted: Thu, Oct 10 2019, 5:31 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
tailgater wrote:
You spelled "prove victor wrong" incorrectly.


Your arguing against the numbers, while correct, had absolutely no impact on the actual discussion.

(and you conveniently neglect to remember that you came in completely wrong, assuming the numbers were of the total population)
Mr. Jones Offline
#48 Posted: Thu, Oct 10 2019, 6:57 PM EST
Joined: 06-12-2005
Posts: 19,421
I knew 3 gunsmiths at the C.I.A. in LANGLEY, VA....

ONE had a college degree...
One had a high school degree...
One...the best one...never graduated high school ...but he worked in his father's machine shop since he was
About 8 yrs old...sweeping floors and cleaning the machines...that bastid could machine anything you could put on paper...and then summmmmm...no computers needed...his favorite saying towards the end of his career was..."CAD... WHAT???... BWUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA"

Screeeewwww college...a trade is better and more satisfying
For many many PEEPLES...
tailgater Offline
#49 Posted: Fri, Oct 11 2019, 8:02 AM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
victor809 wrote:
Your arguing against the numbers, while correct, had absolutely no impact on the actual discussion.

(and you conveniently neglect to remember that you came in completely wrong, assuming the numbers were of the total population)


My what?



And no. I wasn't wrong by any definition of the term.

If you truly thought that your "population" was defined by age, then you'd have referenced that when I first interjected with my polite correction.

And it was polite.

You just hate being wrrrrr, wrrrrggg, wrgggrrr... incorrect.
victor809 Offline
#50 Posted: Fri, Oct 11 2019, 9:26 AM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
tailgater wrote:
My what?

"your arguing against the numbers" (not the cleanest sentence, but I'm not trying to say "you are", but rather your (possessive) desire to argue against the numbers... I would have rewritten if I had reread it but... meh... The idea that you think you caught me in a 'you're' 'your' error is funny.

someone who still hasn't added anything to the actual discussion above wrote:

And no. I wasn't wrong by any definition of the term.

You were wrong be the actual definition of wrong.
a wrong person wrote:

If you truly thought that your "population" was defined by age, then you'd have referenced that when I first interjected with my polite correction.

You now taking the stance that I have to know I'm correct for you to be wrong? I didn't think of taking out the "under 25" population until you complained about it. It took two seconds to realize they already had, and 1 more second to recognize the statistical implications if they had left it in. That doesn't make you less wrong in any way. Hell, I could have argued they needed to take out the "under 25" population because they are purple, and purple people count for 6 waffles.... and that would not have made you less incorrect.


a politely wrong person wrote:

And it was polite.

You just hate being wrrrrr, wrrrrggg, wrgggrrr... incorrect.

I admitted where I was wrong, and I corrected my data.

Contrast that to what you are doing where you were pointed out as being incorrect.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages12>
Back to Top