No. No I don't. A blog entry is still a particular part of a blog. There is no difference really.
Well. progress of some kind.
Before it was no difference. Now it is no difference really.
The hyperlink will send you to information about that headline. What did you think happened on web pages. Never see a hyperlink there. But, you see, the hyperlink does not take you to a blog post, it takes you to information about that headline. Perhaps, me dear, the whole article.
The information about the headline is the blog post. The hyperlink takes you to a blog post. You are not fooling anyone.
Quote:
Now, here is a new term for you. It is called hosting. It is not unusual. And yes, me poor con, it does indeed have the same domain. That happens, you see, if you host the data. It is very, very common, by the way. Any other stupid questions???
I didn't ask a question. And it has the same domain name because it takes you to the same website. You claimed that his website and his blog are not the same, but they share the same domain name. So we can just add this to another one of your lies.
Jesus. Hopefully no one is reading what you are saying. Yes I did. Would you rather he had two web sites? Do you have some point??? Or are you simply trying to waste time??
Quote:
That would be highly possible. I did not check to see.
So you don't have a clue as to what you are talking about? Shocker...
See, that is the problem with talking to someone with no integrity like you. You change the meaning. What I said, me dishonest con, is that I did not check to see if there was a different domain. Because it makes no difference whether he hosts data on one domain or one thousand. Dipshit.
Quote:
Because, you see, it makes no difference. Same domain, different domain. They would both belong to the same owner, most likely. Did you have a point???
The point is you were lying when you said that his blog is not the same as his website. His website is his blog. Anyone with basic net surfing experience can tell that much. You really must think people are as dumb as you want them to be. You're trying very hard to blatantly lie about something so basic.
Right. You are full of shit, and wasting time for absolutely no reason.
Quote:
I would hope they would. I suspect that most know how to recognize a web site and how to recognize a blog. I think you are the first I have met that does not recognize the difference.
A website is just a set of related webpages with a single domain name. That is no different from a blog.
Jesus;
Quote:
Not poorly phrased at all. What it means is that if you are on a web site with a link to a blog, then by definition you are not on the blog.
The link links to the same website and the same domain. The website is a blog.
Yes, sure, and it would not be if there were two domains. Get your head out of your ass, PLEASE.
Quote:
Now, I have to admit I have never been to that blog. And obviously you have not either. So, you are criticizing something you know nothing about. Which is not unusual for you. But, on the other hand, having said you do not blog because it is a waste of time (or whatever) you do spend a WHOLE LOT OF TIME ON THIS DISCUSSION BOARD DOING THE SAME THING YOU JUST SAID SOMEONE WHO YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT DOES.
If by spending a whole lot of time, you mean my free time then you would be correct. This is limited to weekends and a few minutes when I am not doing anything else. You never see me online during the day or barely even at night. Why? Because I don't use this website often.
Take a look, dipshit, at what you just said. Then take a look at all of the drivel you have posted.
Of course, you've been here for a long time. You must not have anything better to do with your time.
Nice to know you are concerned. I am retired.
Quote:
Or, actually, you assume he does. Because, you see, dipshit, blogs frequently are set up for those who chose to use them, while the person who sets them up only administers them.
And? Doesn't change the fact that he is running a blog and you get your information from a blog.
What it does not change, me poor ignorant troll, is that he produces content that I find useful. Just as the st. Louis Fed produces content that you find useful. And he provides tools that are useful. dipshit.
Well, it could be worse. You could get your information from a network news channel.
Or, I could be like you and get my information from the bat shit crazy con web sites.
Quote:
Another malfunction of yours. I do not need to defend DaveManual.com.
And yet, here you are desperately trying to defend him.
Not desperate at all. Making you look like an idiot is kind of fun, though boring. Funny how that works. It's also interesting how you've had an entire day to respond to my other post of yours. But nope. Dave Manual is highest on your agenda. Perhaps this is for the best.
Economics, finance and history are certainly not your strong suits.
That would be your opinion. And again, you know how much I value your opinion.
Quote:
And that would make it, by your very definition, A SECONDARY SOURCE. And it also allows you to manipulate the data. So does Davemanual.com. I gues that is as close to you admitting a mistake as we will ever see. Funny.
No, you need to look up the definition of a Secondary Source.
Secondary Source:
Quote:
In scholarship, a secondary source is a document or recording that relates or discusses information originally presented elsewhere. A secondary source contrasts with a primary source, which is an original source of the information being discussed; a primary source can be a person with direct knowledge of a situation, or a document created by such a person.
Secondary sources involve generalization, analysis, synthesis, interpretation, or evaluation of the original information.
Secondary source - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
FRED falls into neither of these categories. It doesn't interpret data, nor provides any sort of analysis or evaluation. All it does is collect data from data originators around the world, which makes it convenient for doing research because I don't have to go to 5 different websites to collect them.
If you went to school, you at least understand what a secondary source is. Then agian, maybe you don't. There are plenty of college grads who are leaving school with no gather knowledge that when they were freshmen.
Look, me little money changer. What I use davemanual for are specific thing. Basically, historical unemployment and historical tax data. And that data is not from some other web site. It comes from gov agencies. Always. Same place as the St. Louis Fed. Now, as a very insignificant analyst, you have decided what is the only source that you should use. And now you spend your time attacking others. You really need to get a life. You look like a little toady.
Quote:
Well, you can stamp your feet, jump up and cry. Makes no difference. DaveManuel has a blog. But davemanual is a data delivery and data storage source with tools that allow many really intelligent people to quickly find the data that they want.
If you've looked through his website, you know that he does no such thing. He takes data from websites, analysis it and evaluates it on it's merit.
And he provides data from the BLS. And from other official sites. Now, me poor pittifull little money changer, you are trying hard to say what you can that is negative about the site. For an obvious reason. But you are being totally dishonest. Here is the thing, dipshit. I have never in my life spent half the time you have looking over the davemanual web site. I only use specific tools. And those tools allow me to provide ue data, for instance, quickly. And accurately.
Now, whether the other parts of his site are useful or not is of some import to you. Not me. What I know is that his tools for getting at specific gov numbers that I am looking for is quite useful. And in no case have I ever quoted numbers that he has picked up from some other non gov site. Lie all you want. Wiggle and squirm all you want. All you are doing is showing yourself to be a simple insignificant hack who totally lacks integrity.
Quote:
Now, it is not a data analysis source. You can choose the data, and you can export it to excel if you are so inclined. But it is a presentation product, and allows you to analyze the data. Same thing can be said of the St Louis Fed.
No you can't. You can't do a single thing on that blog which you can do on FRED. You're making things up.
Right. Re read what I said. I was talking about FRED. The issue, you see, is that you just admitted that you can manipulate the data. Export it to excel, or some other data manipulation product. And then produce it. Good deal. We can all look at your potentially modified data. Which is why I simply provide a link to the data. Old habit of not expecting people to believe what I am saying, and to want to easily check it out themselves.
Quote:
That is bs, me dear. All I have to do is take a look back at your multiple charts showing that there is a current demonstrable cost in employment resulting from the aca.
Those charts were employment statistics. No dollars were involved in the charts. Basic reading comprehension getting the best of you, again.
Jesus. Most people would be embarassed to have said what you just said. I fully understand what your chart showed. I fully understand that it was not shoing dollars. Your little bitty mind apparently thinks that cost only applies to dollars. What I said was that it showed no cost in employment. Now, that is a simple, and I mean really simple, economic statement that is the same as saying that unemployment did not increase. Dipshit. You are trying way to hard. And the statement, by the way, was exactly true.
Quote:
Get a grip on yourself. In most of your chart presentations, should I want to, I could take your arguments that you believe your charts prove apart.
And somehow, you never do. Funny how that works.
Not funny at all. You produce a chart that shows nothing and want me to educate you on why it is nonsense. Sorry. You already have wasted too much of my time.
Quote:
You are wasting my time. And I do not appreciate it.
I only respond to you for shits and giggles, in hopes you'll come up with something equally moronic to say. I'm wasting your time, but you've invested all of your time in responding to my post. Funny how that works.
OK. good. You admit you have nothing to say, and that you simply want to waste my time. Bye Bye, now.
Sorry, me dear. You actually have to study those disciplines to be rationally able to call yourself a believer of any of them You study nothing. You simply produce charts. And that is the cheap way to produce belief. Stupid. Because you are WAY short of resources. And your concepts are based on what you want to show. Funny. You voice complete confidence, but provide very, very, very little. There are sources, me dear. People and organizations that provide actual concept well spelled out and with every effort to consider all possibilities. And most have access to the resources you lack. Which is why you can not be taken seriously. And why you will never, ever be of any import.
