Digest for rec.sport.golf@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 5 topics

Wednesday, July 12, 2017

Dene <gdstrue@aol.com>: Jul 12 10:26AM -0700

- show quoted text -
No indictments by when? By the end of the Trump admin, which will be
Jan 20, 2021? If so, then sure.
 
Indictments as a result of the Mueller investigation into collusion with the Russians.
"DumbedDownUSA" <dumb.america@gmail.com>: Jul 12 06:13PM

Moderate wrote:
 
 
> > Moderate has made this claim a dozen times and has been proven
> > wrong every time. He doesn't seem to care.
 
> Never. It is a mathematical certainty.
 
It's a fallacy, a lie.
 
It's like you don't mind sticking your hands in the air and saying:
 
"you can't trust me, I will lie to your face about anything and
everything. Even when we both know I am lying I will continue in that
lie".
"DumbedDownUSA" <dumb.america@gmail.com>: Jul 12 06:20PM

Moderate wrote:
 
 
> Since the recession ended in June of 2009 less that six months
> after Obama took office, by simple math the recovery began before
> he was elected.
 
I'm sure you have been told this before but the two quarters start in
June, you twat, that's when the recession ended and growth was first
positive again.
 
Q1 -5.3%
Q2 -0.5%
Q3 1.3%
Q4 3.9%
"John B." <johnb505@gmail.com>: Jul 12 11:46AM -0700

On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 1:26:28 PM UTC-4, Dene wrote:
> No indictments by when? By the end of the Trump admin, which will be
> Jan 20, 2021? If so, then sure.
 
> Indictments as a result of the Mueller investigation into collusion with the Russians.
 
OK.
-hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>: Jul 12 12:15PM -0700

On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 2:23:57 PM UTC-4, DumbedDownUSA wrote:
 
> > > And quite trivial to prove 'Moderate' wrong (again).
 
> > Why are you quoting articles about the stock market to
> > try and prove me wrong?
 
Because you (Moderate) are wrong.
 
 
> > It is universally accepted that two consecutive quarters of GDP
> > growth indicate the end of the recession.
 
And that definition is that at the **END** of two quarters of
said continuous growth, the recession is over.

> Q2 -0.5%
> Q3 1.3%
> Q4 3.9%
 
Where Moderate has confused himself is in using the "two quarters"
(consecutive growth) definition requirement to then try to
subtract two quarters (6 months) from the beginning (not end) of
the two quarter consecutive growth period to try to claim when
the beginning of the end of a recession occurred. The problem
with that interpretation is that it isn't supported by any
universally accepted and formal definition.
 
For example, looking at the quarterly values provided by DD,
the point at which Moderate is trying to claim as the turnaround
point was 1Q09, which was at -5.9%.
 
Extending the look:
 
1Q07: +0.2%
2Q07: +3.1%
3Q07: +2.7%
4Q07: +1.4% ..total for year: +1.8%
 
1Q08: -2.7%
2Q08: +2.0%
3Q08: -1.9%
4Q08: -8.2% ..total for year: -0.3%
 
And do keep in mind that the similarly universal definition
for a recession is also "two or more consecutive quarters",
which means that the recession didn't become official until
after 4Q08 numbers were reported.
 
Because the data ran through 12/31/08 and then needs to be
reported & compiled, there's always a reporting delay.
For example, even though 2QCY2017 ended 12 days ago, this
last quarter's GDP report still hasn't hit the newspapers
yet..its pretty much due "any day now".
 
 
-hh
BK@Onramp.net: Jul 12 02:43PM -0500

On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 18:13:36 -0000 (UTC), "DumbedDownUSA"
 
>"you can't trust me, I will lie to your face about anything and
>everything. Even when we both know I am lying I will continue in that
>lie".
 
His modus operandi
"DumbedDownUSA" <dumb.america@gmail.com>: Jul 12 09:04PM

Moderate wrote:
 
> The NBER said it was over in June 09. At the end of June Obama had
> been in office less than two quarters.
 
That's right, so the upturn happened during his second quarter...and
continued for several more quarters after which NBER announced it had
offically ended in June 2009 and any new downturn would be classified
as a different recession.
 
> Ergo the economy was on
> the way up before he took office.
 
No ergo, just wrong.
 
It ended in June 09 just like you conceded above; in June not six
months earlier. Why would you even think it ended six months earlier
than when they said it did. That makes no sense.
 
You are confusing what they said with when they announced it... which
was obviously many months later.
 
The end of a recession is denoted by successive quarters of growth.
That growth started in the June 2009 quarter.
 
http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/20/news/economy/recession_over/index.htm
 
"September 20, 2010: 4:00 PM ET"
 
"The National Bureau of Economic Research, an independent group of
economists, released a statement Monday saying economic data now
clearly point to the economy turning higher last summer. That makes the
18-month recession that started in December 2007 the longest and
deepest downturn for the U.S. economy since the Great Depression."
 
December 2007 + 18 months.
 
There's some simple math for you.
Carbon <nobrac@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>: Jul 12 06:47PM -0400

On 07/12/2017 12:30 PM, John B. wrote:
 
>> -hh
 
> Moderate has made this claim a dozen times and has been proven
> wrong every time. He doesn't seem to care.

He is too stupid to understand that he is wrong.
Carbon <nobrac@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>: Jul 12 06:53PM -0400

On 07/12/2017 02:46 PM, John B. wrote:
>> Jan 20, 2021? If so, then sure.
 
>> Indictments as a result of the Mueller investigation into collusion with the Russians.
 
> OK.

What if Trump pulls a Nixon and bolts before the indictment lands?
 
He would actually be smart to cut-n-run now, because the Russia investigation is going to get much worse.
Dene <gdstrue@aol.com>: Jul 12 10:30AM -0700

- show quoted text -
Greg won't welsh and neither will I.
 
No truer words.
Offer not extended to the RAT until IT convinces me he is no longer a RAT.
"DumbedDownUSA" <dumb.america@gmail.com>: Jul 12 06:22PM

Moderate wrote:
 
> at a hearing with Obama's Russian ambassador?
 
> http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/07/well-lookie-russian-lawyer
> -veselnitskaya-pictured-obama-ambassador-russia-8-days-trump-jr-mtg/
 
She was a lobbyist against Russian sanctions; I guess it is
verification of her closeness to the Kremlin.
"DumbedDownUSA" <dumb.america@gmail.com>: Jul 12 06:37PM

Moderate wrote:
 
> at a hearing with Obama's Russian ambassador?
 
> http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/07/well-lookie-russian-lawyer
> -veselnitskaya-pictured-obama-ambassador-russia-8-days-trump-jr-mtg/
 
Perhaps you should look up the Magnitsky Act that DTJ admitted they
were discussing.
BK@Onramp.net: Jul 12 02:44PM -0500

On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 13:18:09 -0500 (CDT), Moderate
 
>> This morning, DTJ releases the emails and once again, it much ado about not much not. FNN should be ashamed of themselves. Beyond stupid!
 
>Why is it eight days later the same people who met with Don jr are
> at a hearing with Obama's Russian ambassador?
 
Obama wasn't running for POTUS dummy.
BK@Onramp.net: Jul 12 03:33PM -0500

On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 15:10:37 -0500 (CDT), Moderate
> Obama administration? She was banned from entering the country,
> get a special visa from the Obama administration and ends up with
> Don jr and the Ambassador a week apart?
 
What's your take?
"DumbedDownUSA" <dumb.america@gmail.com>: Jul 12 08:34PM

Moderate wrote:
 
> > > g/
 
> How does that explain Veselnitskaya's close connection with the
> Obama administration?
 
What and where is the evidence of a close relationship?
BK@Onramp.net: Jul 12 04:02PM -0500

On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 15:56:09 -0500 (CDT), Moderate
 
>> What's your take?
 
>>>That seems normal to you?
 
>Too early to say. It is certainly odd.
 
It seems to shoot down Velnitskaya's claim of separation from Russian
leaders.
"John B." <johnb505@gmail.com>: Jul 12 02:38PM -0700

> > Don jr and the Ambassador a week apart?
 
> What's your take?
 
> >That seems normal to you?
 
It seems irrelevant to me.
Moderate <nospam@noemail.com>: Jul 12 12:20PM -0500


> Moderate has made this claim a dozen times and has been proven
> wrong every time. He doesn't seem to care.
 
Never. It is a mathematical certainty.
--
Moderate <nospam@noemail.com>: Jul 12 01:18PM -0500

> Yesterday I had the misfortune of listening to 4 hours of CNN about DTJ. One hysteric assumption after another, including Portlandia's idiotic Dem Sen. Wyden.
 
> This morning, DTJ releases the emails and once again, it much ado about not much not. FNN should be ashamed of themselves. Beyond stupid!
 
Why is it eight days later the same people who met with Don jr are
at a hearing with Obama's Russian ambassador?
 
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/07/well-lookie-russian-lawyer
-veselnitskaya-pictured-obama-ambassador-russia-8-days-trump-jr-mtg/
 
--
Moderate <nospam@noemail.com>: Jul 12 03:10PM -0500


> Obama wasn't running for POTUS dummy.
 
>>http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/07/well-lookie-russian-lawyer
>>-veselnitskaya-pictured-obama-ambassador-russia-8-days-trump-jr-mtg/
 
How does that explain Veselnitskaya's close connection with the
Obama administration? She was banned from entering the country,
get a special visa from the Obama administration and ends up with
Don jr and the Ambassador a week apart?
 
That seems normal to you?
--
Moderate <nospam@noemail.com>: Jul 12 03:26PM -0500

>> > growth indicate the end of the recession.
 
> And that definition is that at the **END** of two quarters of
> said continuous growth, the recession is over.
 
Right, so wtf was all that BS in your previous post? Glad I could
educate you.
 
Your argument that the timing of the report had something to do
with the actual dates of the recession was absurd.
 
The NBER said it was over in June 09. At the end of June Obama had
been in office less than two quarters. Ergo the economy was on
the way up before he took office.
Moderate <nospam@noemail.com>: Jul 12 03:56PM -0500

>> Don jr and the Ambassador a week apart?
 
> What's your take?
 
>>That seems normal to you?
 
Too early to say. It is certainly odd.
--
Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org>: Jul 12 08:44PM

He is a disappointment.
 
A college dropout.
 
An Attention seeking troll.
 
A balding ugly loser.
 
But he is not a RAT, that is an insult to every rat. My son is lower than the rats that infest every sewer.
 
I am dead, but I win, I don't have to look at him anymore.
-hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>: Jul 12 12:50PM -0700

The beginning is nice, but the take-away starts at 3:45
 
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64mWOoj68qo>
 
 
-hh
BK@Onramp.net: Jul 12 03:02PM -0500

On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 12:50:15 -0700 (PDT), -hh
 
>The beginning is nice, but the take-away starts at 3:45
 
><https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64mWOoj68qo>
 
Even better!!
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3EY8aLutbg
You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to rec.sport.golf+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

0 comments:

Post a Comment